another novice inquiry ....

So i have these three dogwoods, and last year, i mounded mulch around them, right up to the wood.

Today, i took on a project of removing some yard debris (grass clippings and sticks and stuff) that i'd piled around a dying tree. When i shoveled all that material away, the dying tree looked really yucky where the debris was hugging the bark. This made me realize that it's probably not a good idea to have material of any kind right up against the wood of a tree, so i pulled the mulch away from the wood of my three dogwoods (tiny little hair roots had grown into it, so i tried to be gentle).

Here's what's puzzling me: When i watered them, water still collected and sunk in right up against the wood. So i'm not entirely certain what difference it made to pull the mulch away, save that regular soil perhaps "breaths" better, and won't keep a constant dampness against the wood.

What do you folks all do? Am i missing something here?

Nope. you are right that putting mulch up against the trunk is a bad idea. And , right again, this is because it hold moisture against the tree trunk rather than letting it drain down to the root area. Causes a problem every time. Likewise there are some trees that resent having too much mulch piled up on top of their root zone. Rhododendrons are like this because they have fine, hairlike feeder roots that work close to the surface of the soil. a light mulching each year, away from the trunk, is all they need.

You don't say what your dogwood is dying from, but I hope it is not Dogwood anthracnose, a fungus that is easily spread from one tree to the next. If the tree is dying, I suggest you consider getting it out of there unless you know it's not dying of something that will attack your other trees.

Thank you, Pixydish! I do have rhododendrons, so i'll pull the mulch away from those as well.

The dying tree isn't one of the dogwoods. It's a really huge tree to the rear of the property which for some unfathomable reason wasn't cleared along with everything else when the developers rolled in. They left five such trees, massive, ugly, half-dead trees (although i'm sure they were once glorious when surrounded and protected by all the pine), three of which we've already removed because they were a house hazard. The two in back we've been procrastinating over, but i want to get started on beds back there now so they're coming down!

You can see one of the poor dogwoods i was suffocating in this picture, along with the horrible half-dead trees. They've snapped down quite a bit during the winter storms (not the dogwood, it's fine!).

Estreya,

You have a wonderful yard. I don't know Ridgefields' rules, but those trees probably fulfilled the city's requirements that the developer leave a certain number or percent of trees on the lot. Down here, that's monitored closely, but attractiveness or health doesn't seem to be part of it, which makes no sense to me.

If you want a new big tree, I've got a baby big leaf maple that really needs a "forever" home. It popped up as a weed in my yard but was too cute to just throw out so I put it in a pot and it's doing well and growing like crazy, but I definitely do not have room for it in my little yard! :)

Susybell! You've just solved the mystery for me! I'm sure you're right about the trees being left to satisfy the city requirement. And as you say, they seem to have chosen the worst ones to leave. Maybe cause they couldn't get as much money for them? (Gads, i've gotten skeptical in my old age ... )

Thank you for your nice words as well. It's not all my yard in the picture, and that's the neighbors beautiful home. But i do feel very blessed.

As for your big leaf maple, thank you so much for your offer, but i've got a few of those shoots as well! They do grow like weeds around here huh. Maybe the birds poop them out. I'm going to pot two or three up and use them as a patio plant till they get big. Do you have plant room on a patio? :)

Nah, they were far enough apart to drive the big equipment between AND they couldn't sell 'em off as lumber, lol! Developers have to be practical about these things, y'know.

There's an area near me where I think the owner of the lots (and erstwhile developer, he's definitely small-time, not one of the larger, more responsible companies) deliberately dug a trench to kill off 5 trees the city was telling him he had to keep-until they all died, that is.... arrgh!

My maple is currently happily sitting on the edge of my deck, and I swear he's grown a couple of inches since yesterday. I guess I'd better get him into a bigger pot and turn him into an official decoration while I search for a permanent home that can handle him. :)

That tree is very fortunate to have you looking after him (not her?). Some folks would have just mowed him down.

As for that tree-killing trench ... you're right. ARRRGH!!

I hope Laurie1 doesn't read this thread. It will arouse her ire no end.

yep, "him", not her. Many of my plants are "her", but somehow this one is very masculine, even though he's only about 2 ft tall....go figure :)

I don't think anyone could have mowed him down-he was too small. When I found him he was just a tiny baby who was about 6" tall and had the cutest tiny perfect little maple leaves-four of them!

grrrrrrgrumblerugghhhrughhh. developers - pah. I do think they are stupid. don't they know they will get far more for trees left in a site, then sold on - pah.

Now that done

When you say dogwood, are we talking Cornus of some kind? which raises the question in my mind, a lot of cornus are shrubs (or treated as shrubs) - which means that you can grow them from cuttings - so mulching up to their trunks shouldn't bother them - as you found they just set lots of new roots just like they would if they were cuttings shoved in the ground. I suspect, if Dogwood to you is cornus to me, that long term mulching up to the trunk would actually eventually give you multi-stem trunks. But could be very wrong on this one.

And, oh my, what beautiful beautiful rolling land. Gorgeous view.

Hi Laurie,

Don't even get me started on developers! The latest thing here in the city is 4000sq ft lots. They're putting 9 houses to an acre-all with two-car garages and two-car wide driveways. It's truly hideous. The lots and houses are arranged simply to maximize the houses for the developers, not for the future homeowners or pleasant environs. AAAGH! I'd better just close my mouth and calm down...

Yes, these dogwoods are from the Cornus family. We have several that really are trees. Cornus florida, which is Eastern Dogwood, Pacific Dogwood, which is native to PNW, is Cornus nuttali, I think. There's also Cornus Kousa, which is Korean or Asian. All will sucker from the trunk given an opportunity. They all bloom beautifully in the spring, either white or pink. They're also a little disease prone and their trunks need to be protected. There's a nasty canker (starts with a "p", I can't spell it) that can fatally infect them, usually from a break or damage to the bark right at the soil line, along with anthracnose.

Oh my. There's a few of those kinds of places in Ridgefield too, and they seem to pop up overnight! Comfortable living "for the newly wed or nearly dead."

Did i mention i was getting skeptical in my old age?

:)

The biggest problem is the fact that people keep buying these homes - so the developers will just keep on killing trees.

It's pretty hard not to get skeptical these days.

Estreya, your home and your land is wonderful - gorgeous!

And she is planting and caring for trees.

Thank you, guys! One day, i hope to have MUCH less grass and far more trees. One root at a time, eh? :)

Indeed.