I bought a house with a Quercus Alba (white oak) growing in the back, which is a wooded area. It is about 30 feet from the house. I called a tree service to come and look at it, and they said it was about 150 years old. The house is about 100 years old so they have been together a long time. This tree is massive. The trunk is probably 4 feet across. It is easily over 100 feet high, and probably 100 feet or more wide at the crown. It towers over the house. It is a beautiful old tree. There are no obvious issues looking at the tree (i.e. dead branches, visible fungus,) except one dead branch in the back that has no chance of falling anywhere dangerous, and the tree service said it is a healthy tree and there is virtually no chance of any branches falling on the house, unless there was a catastrophic incident like a major hurricane. He said it could have a bit of pruning, but as it was in the back with no lift access someone would have to climb and it wasn't really worth the expense. It does lean slightly towards the house and most of the crown is in that direction, as that is the south facing side where the sun is. This tree has several huge branches extending over the house. It makes me very nervous. Do you think it is worth it to get some extra pruning to try and make the branches that have any chance of falling on the house, or would that just cause unnecessary injury to the tree that would make it less healthy? It is very important the tree remain healthy! I don't really have thousands of dollars to spend pruning a tree either, unless it is really necessary. The dead branch in the back could probably be easily cut off. Your thoughts on how to best care for this tree are appreciated. There is another one up further in the back, that is somewhat smaller but still pretty big.

Alabama hugger: I can be such a jerk! I have thought about sending you a report many times, but for reasons I can't explain, or think of an excuse for, I never did. Sorry. You were so nice to send them. OK, I planted them in three groups of three each and gave them hardware cloth protection from critters. One of the sites had a deer kick away the protection, so voles or something got them. All the other six grew. The first year we had an extreme drought--according to the US Drought Monitor site--so I had to water and water them. The next year they started to grow and put out three flushes of growth. This year, for some reason they are sputtering a bit. They are 30 to 45 inches tall. I transplanted one from one of the groups of three to a new spot, and it is surviving fine with regular watering. Still too early to tell how they will ultimately do--we are so hot and dry here. Poaky: Yes, open grown chestnut oaks will often divide into several large ascending branches. Q. alba can do this also. But both usually have a good balanced structure and are resistant to storm damage. But white oak may have a somewhat better growth form than chestnut oak, at least some of the time. With young white oaks the trunk may seem to be developing more than one leader, but then after three or four years, one will assert dominance, and the others can grow into nicely high arching branches. It is good not to try to prune to "shape-up" white oaks too hastily. I have less experience with, and fewer observations of chestnut oaks growing in the open. They are virtually never planted as ornamental trees--a shame. Oh, something to remember about white oak--there is considerable genetic variation in all kinds of characteristics, including growth form. Here near where I live in Northern VA, there is a famous one on the grounds of Carter Hall--it has a spread of about 150 feet, and is only 75 feet tall. It has several very large low branches that just grow out and out and out. It is well over 5 feet in diameter. Amazing! Then right across the street, in front of an old stone Episcopal church is another very large old white oak. It is more or less in the open also, but is growing very erect and tall with its branches arching upwards. Anyone looking at these trees from a distance would never think they are both of the same species. But they are--trust me--both pure white oak, no hybridizing. Tom: Here is what I would say about Northern red oak: Chief of all the red oak group, and an outstanding tree. Next might be the Shummard, but northern red oaks are especially fine. And they produce the best wood for furniture of all the red oak group--a nicer and "cleaner" grain. And as for the cherry bark oak--I think one has been recorded as the tallest growing oak in the US. I can't remember right now, but something like 170 feet. --spruce

I don't think any of my trees show any orange color in fall. The Dawn redwood I have is supposed to, but hasn't matched what I've seen in books showing how it is supposed to be. I have alot of baby trees that may show orange color eventually. It would be a bonus, but if they look good all summer, that's great. I hope I can grow some Sassafrass trees from seed, that way if my oaks aren't too great in fall the Sassafrass can add some interest along the edges of the weedy property line.

No. Q.virginiana is in the white oak group, Q.shumardii in the red/black oak group. Different sections of the same genus. They will not hybridize. Hybrids exist between various species of the white oak group. Hybrids exist between various species of the red/black oak group. But... none between the two sections.