Point of clarification: organic matter doesn't really retain the nutrients but acts as the slowly mineralized pool of nutrients associated with soil quality.

The way you describe it is similar to how a sponge works rather than a storehouse.

You are right, though, in that you don't need to fertilize trees for the most part. Forest soils are hilariously low in nutrients: TOC is around 1% and N is next to non existent (N is highly labile), while P and K are moderate to high. As a result, forests veg is most competitive in nutrient poor conditions. If you fertilize a disturbed area, you get a pile of weeds and grass that can set back your revegetation timeline because your desirable woody spp now have to out-compete them. This process still happens if you don't fertilize, but it's generally less pronounced and allows some woody plants to gain the foothold they need

Oh that's so cool, thankyou for sharing!

I don't have my books handy, but while they take a lot back this varies by species and the fallen leaves can have a lot of N and P in some cases.

Though I've always seen them shredded and used for making compost anyway rather than leaving them on the ground. Too easy to get rot that way. And you really want to spread them around the rest of the garden if you've planted trees that do drop N in the leaves

That's why I went for a twin blade mower. It turns everything into powder.

But yeah, we are “wasting” a lot of nutrients by trashing leaves like we do.

I was raised to compost those fuckers, more people should be doing that

when you need to manage mold/fungal growth and too much cover killing grass

"Need to" or " need to " ...

The grass will be fine.

Yeeahh!

Kill Your Lawn, NYT