Another picture

As can be seen in Ken's pictures 'Cupressina' is far too big of a tree for that planting position - one in Seattle (USDA 8) was 60' tall in 2005.

Thank you for the responses. We paid $525 for this tree. Yes that is correct $525! He also planted on the hottest day of the year. We also had three river birch’s planted the same day in a berm and all are brown and the leaves are falling off. The trees were dropped off in the morning and sat rolling around our backyard in the wind and 114 heat index until hey were planted around 6pm. I feel like I am completely being ripped off. Everything looks terrible. We also had 4 maples planted and their leaves started turning already. I am not sure if that is normal. The Columnar Norway Spruce looks ridiculous though.

No, just no. You are correct. Spruce trees grow from the top out and from the outside more "out." It will not grow back where it has been damaged, particularly if its genes are telling it to grow up like a column, not out like a watermelon! What could happen, over time, is the lower and upper branches could grow out enough to cover up the damage. That tree, damaged like that, is not worth $525. And it's a darn shame because it WAS a gorgeous tree!

Large trees are expensive, and they often undergo "transplant shock" and can take a year or two to recover. Sometimes they don't, and sometimes they do fine. Although large trees make your landscape look more "filled in" sooner, they come with significant cost and risks. Why add more? You are much better off going with smaller trees. They will FAST outpace the larger trees and are often healthier to boot. Not saying a big tree, properly transported (it dried out on the truck ride over too) and properly planted and cared for can't bounce back and be wonderful, but there are notable times when that is not the case.

My Aunt died in summer 2014. That fall I planted two "Charlie Brown" trees in honor of her and they looked pathetic. Both cost under $100. They are now tall and robust and beautiful, while another couple of larger, more expensive trees I planted at around the same time, haven't changed a bit. As for the river birch though, it could bounce back. I had a gorgeous specimen get completely knocked to the ground when another larger tree fell on it. I figured it was dead and cut it down to the stump and planted a replacement next to it. The goner tree bounced back from the roots and is now almost as big as its replacement. I'd be a bit more skeptical of the columnar Norway spruce, although the species tree is quite hardy. A young tree might bounce back since it has a ways more to grow. Your tree is not young, that's a problem.

In hot summer climates July is a terrible time to be planting.

'Cupressina' isn't columnar, the crown of the Seattle example for instance is yards across down near the bottom. (The crown shape is another thing that can be seen in Ken's pictures, in addition to the kind of height that starts to develop over time).

Ours is a “columnar Norway Spruce”. We were told it would get 30-40 ft high and about 5-6 ft width.

It can be told from your pictures it's 'Cupressina'. Over the years it's going to overwhelm the house and the rest of the immediate vicinity, if left where it is now.

So the tag says “Picea Abius Cupressina” grows 20 ft tall and 5-6 ft wide in 10 years and up to 30 ft with time. Well that is if the thing survives. We needed something linear on the corner of that yard. The tree itself just looks horrible.

Eventually yes, but it needs to be planted in a MUCH bigger space. In Ohio a spruce can reach 16’ wide in less than ten years.

My photo and description of Norway spruce mature dimensions just disappeared (from a tree farm website). Sounds like a columnar Norway spruce is different.

Aaaaaaand it’s back. And evidentially different tree. Nvm.

can you update about your tree? unfortubately , norway spruce is not deer resistant and they will create more gaps.