I would leave the mulched area and maybe even enlarge it to just beyond the drip line--the tree will grow faster if it isn't competing with grass.

And you certainly don't want to damage the trunk with mower or string trimmer.

"I‘ve seen it stated here on more than one occasion recommending or promoting letting turf grow up to the tree (sans mulch)."

I would find that recommendation really odd. Advice to pull it away from the trunk a bit is valid but keeping the grass removed and the tree mulched is optimum for several reasons.

The design people don't like "tree rings" scattered around a lawn and would rather see the tree incorporated into a larger bed but as far as the tree health goes leave it.

It’s the mulch volcano you want to avoid

I'd keep wire around the trunks for another five years or so to prevent buck rubs (my area has a high deer population). Mulch around/under the wire makes maintenance much easier.

I wouldn't worry about an established tree competing with something as shallow rooted as lawn grass. It has been mentioned on this forum many times that the biggest advantage in mulch rings around trees occurs during the first few years after transplanting.

It may make some difference in growth overall but I don't feel I'm in a competition where I must squeeze every inch of growth I can out of my trees each year. Once they're free range, why worry?

That said, there may be a few water loving trees you plan on supplimental watering. That's biggest disadvantage, you end up with circles of tall green grass around the tree that need to be mowed more frequently.

I can see maintaining a smaller sized grass-less area, maybe a 6-12" radius around the trunk just for maintenance purposes and for any planned varmint protection..

maybe you have seen this in the landscape design forum.. but i have never seen it in the tree forum ...

that said ... mulch is part of proper watering ... especially at planting/transplanting .... but once fully established ... say 2 or 3 years after planting.. that job is done ... so there would be no watering issue ... and therefore no need for the mulch ...

then all you are left with.. is keeping the mower and weedwhip away from the trunk of a young tree .. when its bark isnt bulletproof ... e.g. i mow at speed with my rider .. and a 3 or 4 foot circle of mulch.. gives me a lot of leeway ... on missing the tree ... lol ...

imo ... once the tree is free range in regard to watering .... its a personal choice ...

all that said.. if i buy a one foot tree ... that ring might stay there.. until the thing is 5 feet tall .. its a matter of seeing it at speed on the mower ... the alternative is a 5 foot heavy metal stake painted international orange .... lol ...

i see grasshopper is in agreement ... lol ..

ken

Well, I'm hoping Embothrium will chime in and explain this thought process. His point has been -- and I'm in agreement -- that once a tree reaches sufficient size it is visually more appealing to remove the mulch. [Here's[(https://www.houzz.com/discussions/hello-everyone-liking-conifers-dsvw-vd~5345457?n=44) a thread where he makes this point (scroll just under half-way down).

The tree pictured has morning shade, afternoon shade and a full canopy for mid day protection from the suns drying properties. The lateral roots by now are at least 12" deep and out past the mulch ring by several feet. But like ken (Mastersahn... lol) mentioned, a personal choice, it's time I'll save that can be spent doing other things, being more efficient if you will.

This is entirely a personal opinion!! And some hold very strongly to their own personal opinions :-)

Once the tree is well-established and of reasonable size, the mulch ring is no longer a major requirement as the root system will outcompete the turf grass for soil moisture and nutrients. What one is left with is aesthetic considerations only.....and those will vary widely as to the individual.

As a practicing landscape designer, I dislike both the concept of 'tree rings' and turf grasses (lawns) going right up to the base. The latter may be appropriate to large parks or cemeteries but looks completely unnatural in a residential landscape, unless one of considerable acreage. I would much prefer to see trees planted in an intended context with shrubs or groundcovers/perennials and other lower growing plants rather than as lollipops sprinkled around an expanse of lawn.

But there is no scientific basis for this.....only a personal choice :-)

No matter who is looking big trees with patches of dirt around the base do not create the same visual impression as ones with the lawn coming right up to the trunk*. Also mini-beds around trees can repeatedly sprout weeds, even when mulched. Including nuisance climbers that may have to be cut and pulled off of the tree. When there is consistent mowing right up to the tree there is much less potential for this.

*Shared or universal perceptions is how it is possible for there to be design techniques employed in any area of endeavor. If how different people saw things was instead completely all over the place, with no commonality at all there would be no architects, no landscape architects - and no garden designers - attempting to create any works other than strictly utilitarian ones

Maack, its all dependent on soil type, tree species and zone as well. So its not just aesthetics.

Native burr oak....ditch the tree ring. Tulip Tree...I'm going to expand that mulch ring and perhaps create a bed with other plantings.

Are you showing off a Maackia by the way?

I think the mulch ring around the tree has a lot to do with maintenance considerations. Very destructive to a young tree is string trimming, as it can blast the bark completely off and harm or kill the tree. The mulch ring simplifies maintenance by eliminating the need to mow close. Even an older tree can be harmed if the trimming is frequent enough. But once the mulch ring grows proportionately larger than what is necessary to accomplish the goal of keeping the string trimmer at a safe distance, it begins to look ugly in itself. Mulch needs periodic freshening that must be kept up with. And the mulch "volcano," as mentioned, is not pretty.

Plants, including grass, growing right up to the trunk looks fine. Consider that as a tree grows and produces more shade, there comes a point where grass doesn't grow well. Then, a groundcover can be the plant that grows in the island beneath a tree. I would make the decision now if what's below the tree in the future will be grass or groundcover. If the latter, install some now and over time keep increasing the size of the island, proportionate to the tree. If it will be grass only, then shrink the mulch to only what is needed to keep the string trimmer at bay. Or hand trim the old fashioned way if grass comes right to the trunk.

These tree roots are well into and under the lawn so there is no need to be concerned about a mulch island for them.

Yes, it's going to be a long time before the specimen asked about is big enough to be growing only in grass.

FWIW: I probably will keep the mulch around some of my trees. More than likely my Hemlock and Birch because chances are, I'll be watering them for a while during dry spells. The Bur Oak, Red maples, Red Oaks, White spruce, Red pine, Ash and other native trees I have here will be on their own as soon as possible.

Embo, I could be wrong but I'm almost certain you were the one that said mulch rings are the most beneficial for the first few years in a transplants life, until they are established. Or are their exceptions when certain trees are involved?