It must be.
I just truly have no idea what you want here, nor do I have any clue what you meant by that quote:
"Your tree county methodology suffers from America's stroke play obsession."
I have to be one of the least stroke-play obsessed golfers in the world.
So OK, with that in mind...
Both courses have lots of trees that come into play. I've never seen Augusta in person, so I really can't guess which are necessary and which are unnecessary - it's really hard to tell on TV.
I also don't know what you mean by "necessarily encroach on play." Does that mean they are meant to be there, and they are good things?
See, that's what I'd call the trees on 14 at CPC... they make for a very tough golf hole, and without them, you would add the intriguing angle coming from the right, but you'd also put the lives of countless tourists in jeopardy. I kinda LIKE the precision required on that tee shot... I also like how damn tough the approach is... I really believe that's one of the hardest "short" par 4's on the planet, and thus I like it just as it is. Take the trees out and there's no reason to ever go left... Straight at the hole would be all that's ever necessary, given the length.
So you see, Chip Oat please forgive me, but I don't think many trees are "stupid." Oh, I prefer links golf and courses without them, but I also think they work damn well in very many places.
So do you want me to assess which holes have trees that are bad and need to be removed, or which holes have trees that are good and make the hole better, or both, or what?
Told you I was clueless.
TH