Its a short term answer that makes them sure you'll have to call back.

Did they suggest thinning the herd as you could afford it?

Topping a conifer is never a great solution. And the fact they are planted/growing in such close proximity to each other with canopies blending together reduces the "sail" aspect significantly. I agree that some selective thinning or culling of damaged or vulnerable specimens may be appropriate, especially those that might cause property damage if they fall. Otherwise, I'd leave them be.

They did not suggest thinning as that just leaves individuals standing more alone and more vulnerable. None appear to be damaged or vulnerable, but then again neither did the one that landed on my neighbor's garage. They did discuss which ones might be slowed as they fell by the existence of other trees. These trees are enormous - our town has lots of forest of this age and size. More and more we see these trees coming down in microburst type events. @Toronado3800 are you suggesting the 15' they take off the top will grow back so rapidly they expect to get the business to re-top them? We've owned this property 40 years and it doesn't seem like these trees put on 15' that quickly... Maybe I misunderstand you? Thanks.

" are you suggesting the 15' they take off the top will grow back so rapidly they expect to get the business to re-top them? "

Nope!! Conifers (other than yews) do not regrow in that manner and that removed 15' is not gonna be replaced. But what the removal will accomplish is that it will disrupt the tree's natural growth pattern and can lead to various issues such as decay, disease, and structural instability, requiring repeat visits from these so-called tree specialists. And of course eventual removal once the tree succumbs to whatever issue topping created. No self-respecting certified arborist would ever suggest this methodology to reduce or control size with a large conifer.....it simply doesn't work.

If you have concerns, a full removal is preferred over any sort of topping.

Find another tree company!

White pines can survive "topping" as long as enough green foliage/branches are left. That's the key. I'm not a expert of course, but I see very tall wild white pines around me get wind-broken, and seems if more than half the green branches are gone, the tree dies. Otherwise, they can survive. Just my opinion, but the topping of all of them THE PROPER AMOUNT is a pretty good idea since their tight proximity still protects them somewhat. I personally would not want to remove more than 1/3 of the green branches (that doesn't mean 1/3 of their height because much of the trunk is branchless). That would still significantly reduce the wind loading on them. One near me down low enough on the slope that it is staying intact -- a bit more than 100 ft tall.

Here's another near me at neighbor's house higher up which I've recommended to him to top since it's exposed and already leaning alittle from the winds! 15-20 ft taken off the top would help alot.

PS I don't normally recommend topping, but in certain cases, it can be a reasonable choice if it's not overdone.

It is difficult to assess the situation looking at only one picture from one angle, but I would venture to say that any large/huge tree that's close enough to the house, so if it falls, could cause severe damage to the house would be considered too close and should be removed.

Any home located near woods needs a buffer zone, not only to protect from tree falls but the danger of wildfire should be considered too.

Big trees are beautiful to see, and I can understand not wanting to give that up a view like that near my house but remember, trees are inanimate, unthinking objects, and they have no choice or control over what happens to them as they age.

I would remove the largest of the trees that are closest to your home first.

The peace of mind alone would be worth it.

" GG in the PNW, do people thin douglas firs for this reason? Maybe they do, maybe they don't. The Greater Seattle area is actually well-known for it generally low wind speeds, but there are stormier parts of the PNW. "

It probably is done from time to time but it is not at all common. Doug firs are omnipresent in the vast majority of PNW gardens and there are just too many to deal with. Expensive as well. And they tend not to be the blow down or falling issue in the same manner as western red cedars (Thuja plicata) with their very flat, pancake-like but widespread root systems.

Doug firs do tend to self limb or lose their lower branches, often having a clear trunk for a good 50-60 feet. So the 'sail effect' - if any - should be an issue but it is not.

We also get some pretty decent winds here - bomb cyclones are not uncommon during the stormy winter months. One last week produced winds in excess of 45mph and various windfall trees were the result.

All this talk about the PNW. Isn't the OP out east somewhere and has Eastern white pine?

Pinus Strobus is much more prone to wind damage. They get old and brittle and will break off about a third of the way up the trunk.

Here's an older white pine at the Lost Forty. Everyone marveled at the size of this ~400 yo tree until one day, in an instant, 75 feet off it is laying on the ground.

Sorry, GG, I deleted because I wasn't really sure of that post, and I hate to post if I'm not sure of what I'm saying. 🤣

BLUF of this thread is what Toronado said...there's no easy fix here. Pines are largely seral - although this species is something of an exception and may be more of a climax species in certain areas - either way they just aren't going to last forever.

I hope who ever owned that car with the tree on it wasn't inside it at the time.

:-o

The discussion was expanded to include the PNW because the ill-advised topping of conifers is not limited to white pines but pertains to just about any tall grow conifers. And the PNW is likely more tall conifer heavy than anywhere else in the country.

'Thanks GG but I was referring to the fact that PNW trees are unlikely to need the same attention as white pines do in both trunk breakage and windfall. But then what do I know about the PNW. ;-)

There was talk of the probability of the tree breaking in a storm, but they can break and fall within a 365 degree area around the tree. This lessening the probability they will fall in any one directions. So you must also consider the probability of which direction they will fall, What is the direction of the wind in the storms in your area. If the wind generally comes from your house to the trees, the odds are they will fall away from the house, visa versa, will increase the probability the the tree will hit your house.

Another factor is the topography in your area. Is you house on the highest ground in the area. If so it is more likely you will loss a tree, than if you is a low low area. Our house is in a bowl. The winds we get are turbulent winds not straight line winds. Winds goes up as it comes up the hill. As it comes over the top there is turbulence under the main wind stream. In the bowl we get this less strong turbulent winds with no straight line winds.

The eye of Hurricane Fran passed over our house when we lived in Wilmington. Yes there were many trees that came down. We lost over 30 of varying sizes on a half acre lot. But because the winds came down the street parallel to the street and the houses. there was only a couple of houses that were damaged, as the trees fell parallel to the walls of the house. Those house that were damaged were "L" shaped house, and the tree came down on the arm of the "L".

My entire town is filled with these trees. We can't be topping them all nor taking them down. Nature will largely run it's course. We are going to remove several that are within "catastrophic range" of the house. Others are less likely to kill us or shatter the house, especially considering that one that falls from the base has generally lost a bit of velocity before it actually lets go all the way. I understand that leaving a good percentage of the foliage branches is important to the health of the tree, the suggestion here was to take off just enough to bring the "front row" down a level in canopy. Plan to live here 15 more years, but the storms are getting more severe. Simply can't afford to take them all down nevermind the other considerations. Wish insurance would pay proactively :)

just an added suggestion Sebago,

There are wood companies around my state that will come and remove trees at no charge that are valuable for making forest products (lumber for one) and pay a certain amount for the stumpage. You could call your extension service and I'm sure someone could direct you to one of these industries.

Bill, I was so close to making a joke about "too bad the British Empire doesn't still need ship masts!"

Because that is what white pine was first exported for by English settlers.

haha! Yeah, I knew that bit of history and thought about that too.

It's surprising how much good timber is worth. Most people in the logging business will cater to land/homeowners who have prime trees to sell. Most will go out of their way, so they don't rut up the yard or leave a mess by chipping the branches and hauling that away.

eta: Your local forestry or DNR will know people to contact.

White pines were more prevalent in my local spot (than now) when it was logged around 1900-1910. Neighbor/farmer's ancestors built a huge barn out of sawed white pine logs. Barn blew down in 2015? (Sandy storm), but the logs were intact & in good condition. Somebody came by and bought the fallen logs and took 'em.

Pine makes excellent lumber.

There are many, many buildings out in the country (including my old house) built with Jack pine (p. banksiana) that was sawed by local mills that dot the countryside.

As long as it stays dry, it becomes an almost petrified state, very strong and hard and you can drive as many nails into it as you want without splitting at the ends.

"I hope who ever owned that car with the tree on it wasn't inside it at the time."

It looks like the car was driving down a main road, so....