RJDaley,
I don't think you can compare a static work of art, which is only observed, to an interactive feature on a field of play.
A feature which is subject to alteration by the very nature of play upon that field.
I have no qualms with respect to restorations, be it to 1977,
1960, 1945 or any other prudently dedicated year.
Moving the bunker is another issue.
Casting a wider net to entrap balls is another related issue.
At times, work is done on a feature and no one knows about it, and the revised feature becomes the accepted feature.
I'd like to examine the bunker in the context of time.
How was it in 1900, 1924, 1946, 1960, 1977, 2002 and after this current change.
If this current change is a departure from anything that previously existed, one would have to be critical. But, if we come across a similar configuration at some point in the past, then you would seem to have to applaud the restoration.
But, I am curious with respect to the genesis of this idea, how it took hold, and who is supervising the project architecturally.