Ah, what a question! A good one for those who may be worried after the recent discussion of your shummard oak in Texas. First let me say that you should not be too worried about narrow branch angles. Yes they split sometimes, but I suggest that you go around for a few hours and observe as many mature trees as you can of different species and see what you find. I think you will find lots and lots of narrow angled branches on these trees that have not broken for years and years and they are good parts of the crowns of beautiful trees. Why? Well, trees have evolved with growth tendencies that work and help the tree survive. If you see a lot of these branches and they result from the natural growth tendencies of trees that have evolved successfully over many millions of years, they can't be that bad. Next, different branch angles are OK for one species and not for another. For example, one of the most wonderful trees in the world, unfortunately devestated by an imported disease, is the American elm. The most beautiful of these is the kind of typical form that once was common along streets in towns throughout New England. The best of these had a high arching form created by some very narrow angled branches. But these work well with American elms because to the kind of grain the wood has. OK there are species differences in what angle branches might take and still be strong. There are also individual factors within a species of tree that will make one branch at a 25% angle strong, and another weak. One of the specific things that happens, and I don't know why it happens, is that occasionally a branch will get bark pinched in the crotch where the branch joins the tree. This is called "included" bark. This results in a very weak joining with the trunk. Sometimes without included bark the grain of the wood suppoting a branch will be weak, and to be honest, I have no idea why. Another factor, and probably one of the most important, is the size of the branch--smaller branches with a narrow crotch angle do not catch so much wind, or ice, or whatever, and are less likely to split. Another factor is the structure of the joint--if there is a kind of rounded "bridge" of wood between the branch and the trunk, even if the angle is accute, the branch will be less likely to split. If the branch is joined to the trunk with a narrow "V" angle that seems almost to extend down into the wood itself, it will be weaker. Also branches of some kinds of trees sometimes form ridges on either side of the "V" joint with the trunk. Sometimes these can add strength if they are formed so they are rounded and do not protrude much. But if these ridges seem exaggerated and tend to flare out significantly--for example I sometimes see this with Northern red oak, it can be a sign of weakness. If these "flares" are larger than usual, it shows that the tree is struggling with some stress in this particular joint that could well split the branch off. Well, I think you get the idea--I could go on and on about this. The one thing that I would almost always worry about, unless I had some specific reason not to worry, is a narrow angled fork in the main trunk or leader of a tree (those with a "U" shape are not so bad). With the exception of elm trees, and a red pine, among some others I have not observed or have forgotten about, these spell disaster. And the reason is not only the weakness of the fork, but because of how the tree sways in the wind--the whole trunk can sway, and then each half of the fork can also sway. When these swayings work against each other the force tearing the tree apart can be absolutely terrific. I think the Shummard oak that we have discussed may have had some inherent weakness in the branch joint, but to some degree this swaying effect could have affected the splitting of this branch, if it was large enough. Well, I hope this helps. It would be nice if there were a neat rule, but there isn't. I think most of us who have been working with trees all our lives have a kind of sense when there is a weak fork developing, but even those of us with the most experience observing and trying to analyze the risk of a branch spliting off, will be right only some of the time. --Spruce

zone 6 covers a wide swath. It's helpful if you put something in your line, or at least the post, to let us know where you are located. Are these 'growing wild', or are they 'specimen' trees? could be Turkey oak, Q.cerris, if they're landscape trees, and not just 'wild natives'.

Fascinating, lucky_p! I'm so glad you posted that because at a distance I thought the plaques looked 'shaggy', but it turned out that they were just heavily fissured. Now I can see where it would possibly go in that direction. ken_adrian, don't know exact age of this oak (it's on the property of my new veterinarian's office) but by the trunk size/height/canopy I'm assuming it's in the 50 year range give or take. Probably on the lesser side, but it's a good-size. If I have my directions down and from what's around it I'd also say it gets good strong sunlight for over half the day, but I'm not terribly sure. The Sweetgum next to it is columnar enough not to block too terribly much on that one side and the other side is clear. Ging

For that small area next to the house I would do a JM or fringetree. The emperor 1 as mentioned is probably too big Fireglow might even be too big. Pagoda Dogwood is definitely too big. I'd also suggest putting something evergreen in the corner closest to the driveway. For the side yard I would plant something like a Green Giant or your regionally popular screening tree and some bowhall red maples or crimson spire oak or something to give you some screening. That looks like a pretty nice view there of the countryside but make it so when you sit outside in your backyard or look out your windows that you don't see any other homes. Thus I wouldn't suggest any of the plants on your list for the sideyard. Something tall growing to give you shade and screening and some privacy. And something long lived and problem free. You also will problably want some clearance there in case you need to access the back yard with some heavy equipment for some reason. As for the back yard it's hard to judge from that photo what I'm looking at and where the property line ends. To me it looks like you've got room for one of each of those on your list. Out of all of those, the yellowwood and horschestnut are what interest me the most. I think you need some oaks in there and some maples and beeches. Maybe a tricolor beech.