Do my trees have to die so my yard can live?

Scott - You might need some better soil, but I dont agree your trees must go. Be careful about replacing too much soil too close to the root of the trees, and also be cautious about building up the new soil too high over the roots. Other than that, just use good soil, use a shade-tolerant grass seed, and regularly fertilize. If you want to get rid of some trees, get rid of the more acidic ones first (pines and oaks). Maples and such are very lawn friendly.

One more thing to note is that houses hate trees. Trees trap moisture near homes, and can shed debris on the roof and clog gutters. I would be more cognizant of how your home is responding to the trees than your lawn.

Why do you want a lawn? Do you like to mow? There are many, many alternatives to traditional lawns. And with clever pruning to let in some light, you have a wider range of low-maintenance perennials that can make your yard very attractive. Add some useful hardscape and you can have a stunning and distinctive yard. I think you may need a more imaginative landscaper.

OTOH, if many of the trees you have are "junk" trees or have invasive and distructive root systems, some of them may be better gone.

I think you can have a fairly safe compromise, get rid of some trees, get some better soil and plant some shade and drought tolerant grass. While I can understand your want to save the trees a previous poster makes a very good point about trees and their effects on your house. We just had a bunch of trees pruned and some removed within our condo complex because they were so close that they were causing a potential for damage to the buildings specifically the roofs. Are all of your trees healthy? Is some are showing signs of disease etc then that should help you make your decision to get rid of some easier.

Your thoughts about your house being cooler because of the shading from the trees is valid. However you can also gain back some of that shading by having quality blinds and curtains and just get in the habit of closing them during the day when no one is home to block sunlight and its heating affects. Growing up we did this all the time, in the AM my Mom had all the windows open and then around 7 AM she started shutting some and definately closing the blinds if not closing the window as well. I do it the same thing in my townhouse as well and notice a difference. In our next house I am having my husband set everything up on a timer so it is done automatically, my sister has this in her house and I am very jealous.

Yes, I agree you can probably compromise between less trees and more grass. But, also I would suggest getting a second opinion from a professional landscaper rather than the guy who does it on the side.

You need a new landscape designer.

Second opinion for sure. Presumably, removing trees costs more than not removing trees and working harder to get the grass going and prune/remove any decaying old tree/new unruly tree or bush that actually has problems... not just the problem of making it harder for grass to get started. I think it's easier to get grass growing then to get new trees to replace ones that got thrown away.

Go with your instinct: to feel like keeping a yard ringed with trees is preferable to the hot, treeless expanses people end up with when they aren't thinking ahead. Who the heck wants a beautiful lawn full of grass baking in the sun? Your kids will thank you for it one day.

Ditch the 'weed' trees like Norway maples whcih is likely what you have and replace them with some flowering pears. Pyrus Calleriana 'Redspire' - a 15 footer/4 inch caliper will be about $300 and they add about 2 feet a year , grow upright and make a nice screen. Plus the leaves hang on late into the year.

Check with Josh at Thayer Nursery in Milton.

For a fast growing evergreen privacy screen check out Leyland Cypress - Cupressocyparis leylandii 'Naylors blue' - - a 10 footer will run you about $900, but they grow 3ft plus per year.

Scott -- Find an actual landscape architect to advise you. Spend the money on a good plan focusing on getting rid of the "weed trees" and water conservation. Since you're in Natick, I suggest heading down Route 135 to Weston Nurseries, in Hopkinton near the Ashland line. They are one of the top garden centers in the country, and you can see the wide variety of trees, shrubs and various plant materials on display.

Rethinking how we landscape to reduce the "green deserts" is an increasingly important environmental issue as we face the challenges of climate change. A small-ish lawn is easier to maintain (less mowing!) and will save water bills -- an important consideration as our local climate warms up and the typical summertime drought may get longer and deeper. There are terrific groundcovers and low-growing shrubs which can replace lawn.

As for what trees to get rid of -- focus on getting rid of what's weedy or invasive. Norway maples fall into both categories. Flowering pear is now considered invasive by many experts. Weston Nurseries can help you identify trees native to the northeast which will flourish in YOUR yard.

There are some good comments here but I love how I have seen a few references to "ground covers" vrs lawn. Personally most ground covers look like someone isn't taking care of their yard to me. And who wants to play in "ground cover"? Certainly my first point is purely a personal taste thing, the second is also personal but really I am saddened to see the promotion of "ground cover". There are grasses that are more tolerant of drought so you don't have to water quite as much. And as a person that wants kids I would think that since you do have kids you want a lawn for them to play in and on.

I think WES is the first commenter to bring up "ground covers." While they certainly can help in some situations (particularly under trees like maples where very little else will grow), I don't think anyone was suggesting them as a solution. Perhaps he is extrapolating what was written to mean that the posters were suggesting ground covers? I think most people were suggesting that the solution to raze the trees and plant a lawn may need rethinking. A talented and imaginative landscape designer, conscious of native plants and growing conditions, can probably provide a solution that will give Scott some of the shade he prizes and an attractive yard. Whether that includes a lawn of any sort is just one of the details.

Personally, absent a compelling reason to have a lawn (kids), I prefer a perennial garden and some useful hardscape over an expanse of lawn. But that's my taste.

Surprised to hear Norway Maple is a "weed" tree- what's the issue, that it spreads & grows too easily so other things lose out? I know nothing about this stuff, but I do know it's rather beautiful in the autumn to have those bright golden-yellow leaves...

A weed is anything that grows where you don't want it.

Norway Maples can be invasive in forests because they are very tolerant of shade. Otherwise, they are beautiful trees.

I am surprised at the suggestion of flowering pears. Pears - especially fast growing ones - are brittle and often come down after heavy snowfall. They do not work in the Midwest for that reason.

And, being from the Midwest, I can vouch that trees and lawns with trees are plentiful. In fact, much more plentiful than here. However, forests and other wooded areas . . . not so much.

Lastly, there is no reason why you can't have grass and trees/shady lot. Either your part-time landscaper can't/won't do it or it is too expensive - and it can be PRICEY.

Well, I have a similar situation at my house. Our yard has one giant Maple tree in the middle of it, which pretty much prevents any sunlight from getting in, and the roots are sucking whatever water and nutrients out of the soil that is available.

When we moved in, there was just a giant mud patch in the back yard because of this. In addition, we have three large dogs. We just knew that grass wasn't going to do well back there. So, we decided to lay down fake grass. It looks great, is zero maintanence, and has held up beautifully for the past three years. Best decision I've ever made, I think.