Chip:
Don't be disappointed in what I've said previously about the use of trees to create doglegs. The only reason I mention things like that is to attempt to show evidence of the thinking of some of the great old architects and how occasionally their thinking really wasn't exactly as we now suppose it was! At least, certainly not in all cases.
And so I'll give you a rather lengthy quotation to prove what I'm talking about.
And, by the way, this thinking on trees is not mine, necessrily, just evidence of what some of the old guys felt and thought. And, again, just more evidence of the diversity of their thought which I do find interesting and also very valid.
"In a moment I shall discuss the simple twisting of the fairways of comparatively straight holes, but at this time let us consider the extreme types where the fairways snake around dog-legs and elbows."
"As a rule the two terms are used indiscriminately, but I always have made this distinction. A Dog-leg hole provides some pronounced obstruction, which forms a corner in a twisted fairway from either side. If it be impossible to carry over the obstruction (trees), but at the same time necessary to get beyond it in order to open up the next shot, we have a Dog-leg."
"If a similar obstruction may be carried by a courageous shot, which is rewarded by a very distinct advantage, we have an Elbow."
"There is still a third variation, where a corner is formed close by the green itself, usually by the encroachment of a hillside of sandy waste (or water), and this type is known as a Cape hole."
"The inclusion of these very twisted types lends variety to any course, and in a great measure they may eliminate the old evil of paralleling which is encountered so frequently on courses of common pattern. Then, too, these types require less bunkering than the straight-aways (holes), for usually the projecting areas are provided by nature. In laying out courses inland where wooded sections are numerous, the planning of the Dog-leg is quite simple. The trees are permitted to remain along the side for such a distance as may be considered proper for a well-hit shot to exceed."
All of the above quotation is from A.W. Tillinghast!
It does prove to me just how interchangeable various features were to them, whether that be trees or numerous other things (golf features) to basically accomplish the same purpose. All this I do view as an offering in variety (as did Tillinghast).
But when it comes to trees on golf courses and for golf, my feeling is the only wrong thing to do in architecture is to have a "one size fits all mentality" which would mean trees could NEVER be used in architecture.
I don't think all sites and courses should be treed and I don't think all sites and courses should be completely without trees either. Either way would be a "one size fits all" mentality to me, and I don't think I like that any better than Tillinghast appeared to.
Definitely we should all have dinner again and this time on me. You both can certainly try to educate me, I'll keep an open mind, but you do the same because the reality is it will be me educating you! (just kidding because I once again forgot how to include the smiley face).
Always remember; Diversity, variety, interchangeable features of every interesting type and kind! Never fall into the trap of the boring "one size fits all" MENTALITY in the glorious world of golf course architecture!