trees

[JESII]

Dan,

Agreed.

Tell me though, about #2 at WFW...would the hole be better if all the trees along the right of the fairway were removed so you could see the green from the tee...and possibly have your attention pulled in that direction...away from the ideal left side.

[Dan Boerger]

Michael - Absolutely. I do see more trees that should be removed than kept. Aronimink is a good example and the removal of so many of thier trees was/is a good thing, IMO.

JES - Agree as well. I never thought about it that way, but I think that's a great insight.

[mike_malone]

 I thought that the angle of the #2 green complex at WFW may have been one of the most interesting on the course compared to many of the others . Unfortunately, I was in the right rough and was not afforded a chance to play the hole as designed. I needed to just chip out to the fairway. Boy! was that fun! Take out those stupid trees!

[JESII]

Come on Mike, voice an opinion once in a while...you're so passive, especially with your feelings towards the wonderful West Course at Winged Foot.

[mike_malone]

 Dan,

   I think that we can hardly make a mistake taking a tree down compared to the much bigger problem of leaving the stupid ones there.


    The major playability use for trees is to create a dogleg. The occasional use of a single tree can also be fun.

   But, generally they are the weakest form of a hazard on the course.

     When they are gone people quickly forget they were ever there.

[mike_malone]

 Jim,

   I just said I love #2 at WFW. I firmly believe it should be uncovered. Isn't that positive?

[Peter Pallotta]

I don't know if tree-cutting is neccesarily the best way into a discussion about golf and the environment, but the discussion itself sure seems like a necessary one. Public perceptions may not be that important, except to the extent that they impact on and influence government officials and decision-makers. And if what I read here about the increase in environmental regulations and limitations applied to new courses is any indication, that impact/influence is very real...and will probably only increase in the years to come. Whether the talk will be about the dropping water tables in the south-west states as the resident populations there continue to grow, or about pesticide use and run-off as suburbs grow around golf courses in the north-east, I don't know; but those issues will be, increasingly I think, front and centre -- whether or not one thinks the science is sound or the criticisms fair.

Peter

[Dan Boerger]

Dan,

   I think that we can hardly make a mistake taking a tree down compared to the much bigger problem of leaving the stupid ones there.


Michael - Again, I agree, But the two aren't mutually exclusive, IMO.

[JESII]

Peter,

I tend to think that if mandated, companies will be able to produce organic "fertilizers", and the like, to replace what is used today. One significant downside to this (for the rest of you) will be the need to accept a slightly different color grass on the golf course...


Can't speak to the dropping water table in the SW, but agree it's a problem...won't the melting icecaps help that out...

[LBaker]

You have all made good points.  I just wanted some feed back about the take down or leaving a tree alone.  I have been in the business long enough to know when a tree hinders playing conditions or doesn't fit the hole any longer.  This past winter, we took down close to 35 trees.  80% were a liability and the others were pines, spruces, etc.  

I am going to throw a question out there.  Would aggressive prunning on one tree be an option for a couple of years instead of cutting it down right away?  Could this be a good Solution?

[Craig Sweet]

You don't prune just for the sake of pruning...you have to have a purpose....in my opinion people tend to over prune and it really isn't any different than suddenly lowering your cutting height with grass...bad things can result.

[ed_getka]

It it refreshing to see a thread where perspective and questions are more prevalent than dogmatism.

Lindsey,
    I don't know about the pruning part. What would be the objective, just to reduce the canopy and overhanging limbs that are affecting shots and turf?

[LBaker]

Ed,

Sure.  to thin and reduce the canopy would improve the turf quality and could encourage a different look on a golf course for strategy.  

Craig,
of course there would be a purpose or why prune?  If the tree is healthy and doesn't present any liability or illness, why not try to prune it.  In my opinion, you might find a new reason to keep the tree once you tend to the issues it causes.

[mike_malone]

 Lindsey,

   Some 25-30 years ago there was a serious pruning UP of our hardwoods. The result is more grass growth among the trees; more air and sun through the trees to the rough and fairways; and more chances to hit a shot. The trees seem to be doing well.

[C. Squier]

Lindsey, I think you're barking up the wrong tree

In a world where parking lots, shopping malls, condos, etc are popping up out of the woodwork, why is the issue w/ a golf course?  If by cutting down trees on a golf course, you're increasing the worth and value (by measure of playability...which theoretically would increase demand) I'd think that you're insuring yourself that the land WILL be used for a golf course longer.  The longer it stays a golf course, the longer it won't be a parking lot.  Especially in a time when for some clubs, times are tough.  

Does the argument hold for Oakmont?  Probably not, I'd guess they're in no danger of Al Czervick building condos on the hallowed fairways.  BUT, I'm guessing there are 100 other places that would be better time spent in the picket line.  

As for the Al Gore comment.  COMPLETELY uncalled for.  He has a swimming pool he needs to heat, no way he can spare any credits.

CPS

[JESII]

Lindsey,

I think pruning is fine if there is agronomic benefit, but not if strategic benefit is the goal...

[ed_getka]

JES,
   Why not for strategic reasons? On some holes you see overhanging branches that really pinch a hole in places, and pruning seems like it might work for something like that. Although the tree would probably look pretty weird with one side cut off.
   

[JESII]

I'd call it "cutting your nose off to spite your face" I guess.

Strategically, you are not going to play the hole differently if the branches were 10 feet from the ground and are now 20 feet from the ground. It may allow more, better recovery if you hit it behind that tree, but does that add to the strategic value of a hole? My thought is no.

[Kalen Braley]

Jes,

I think it can add to the strategic value of a hole.

If you consider a dogleg hole where a "pruned" tree resides on the corner.  One can now risk challenging the corner of the dogleg because the ball has a much higher chance of getting thru the tree on a mishit shot.  And even if the ball does end up under the tree, it may still well be worth the risk with a much shorter approach to the green.

[Adam Sherer]

Green Committee Member of Private Course says to "Architect":
 So you've had the chance to see our prized golf course by famed "golden era" architect________(fill in the blank). What can be done to our course that can make it more like it was 80 years ago when (said architect) designed it?


"Architect":  
Nothing.......except cut down about three thousand trees.

[W.H. Cosgrove]

If you would provide me with some license, I think I will try to provide some perspective.  

If we assume approximately 16000 golf courses in the country and assume that they average about 200 acres, the total property they fill is about 5000 square miles.  (3.2 million acres, 640 acres per square mile).  I am going to estimate that this is about the same square area as Los Angeles.  

Weigh that picture against all of the urban sprawl in the remainder of the US and we can see that a discussion about trees on a golf course in relation to global warming is nearing ludicrous.  

If you want to make a difference, we should plant trees in the medians of freeways, create parking areas of resistant turf grown in protective grids, create structures with roof gardens, do away with golf carts and the electricity they consume, and one hundred more ideas more effective than a few square miles of trees on golf courses.  

Get some perspective here.  

[Jim Nugent]

 

As for the Al Gore comment.  COMPLETELY uncalled for.  He has a swimming pool he needs to heat, no way he can spare any credits.

CPS

What???

You mean Al won't save the day???

[Sean Remington (SBR)]

Lindsey,

You started an interesting thread. I'll just give you my 2 cents on the topic in general.

1. I don't not think that a global warming trend is unique in the history of the earth. "Climate Change" can't be a bad thing can it?  The earth is always changing. In the 70's we were told that an ice age was upon us. We don't have a good track record for predicting these things.

2. I am not convinced CO2 is a pollutant. Ice core records prove that the CO2 levels have been three and four times higher than they are now thousands of years ago. CO2 levels go up and down, it's natural.

3. I don't trust a UN created issue when the stated objective is to negatively affect the standard of living in the USA. The UN study also ignores the "Mini-Iceage" that occured between the 1500 and 1800's.

4. I don't trust Al Gore when he is buying so called "carbon credits" from his own investment company. And you and I can't buy the same credits.

5. We may have made some mistakes but the air is cleaner now than it was in the 60's and 70's. The water is cleaner also. Heck you can actually catch and eat fish out of Lake Erie now. In the 70's Lake Erie was a joke on SNL.

6. Golf courses are good for the environment. Grow the grass, cut the trees.

[JESII]

Jes,

I think it can add to the strategic value of a hole.

If you consider a dogleg hole where a "pruned" tree resides on the corner.  One can now risk challenging the corner of the dogleg because the ball has a much higher chance of getting thru the tree on a mishit shot.  And even if the ball does end up under the tree, it may still well be worth the risk with a much shorter approach to the green.

Kalen,

Sorry for the delay.

In that example, there is a strategic factor, so I stand corrected. However, I would say there is a very fine line there as to how much pruning helps the hole strategically before the tree becomes an eyesore because you've pruned up too high.

In conclusion, I would say you are right, this scenario could effect a hole strategically (albeit a small amount) while keeping the tree, so long as it is one or maybe two trees at the most.

[Bradley Anderson]

One of the benefits of tree removal is it allows us to make room for planting native tree species, except this time around with more sensitivity to placement with respect to the golf hole corridor.

The first wave of tree plantings on golf courses was done with very little consideration for native tree species. Most trees were purchased because they were a good deal from a nursery close out sale, or a spring special etc. Some superintendents had their favorite species. It was errroneously thought that native hardwood trees were slow growers, and so they were rarely planted. Most nurseries didn't even grow native trees.

But wildlife would benefit so much more from the planting of native tree species. Birds of prey do not nest in Linden trees! I think the birds would vote for a little loss of CO2 for a while if twenty lollipop trees are going to be replaced with five native trees.

Many of us on this site extol the virtues of allowing the native topography of a golf property to influence the routing and strategy of golf holes. I would suggest that this philosophy be taken a step further towards limiting our plant materials on a golf course to what is native to the property. Even the planting scheme should be patterned after natures form. In the midwest this would involve planting trees along ridges, in groves, with open land in the low areas. The golf course will now engender that sense and feeling of harmony with it's place, if native trees, shrubs, and grasses are used in a natural pattern. And the natural pattern is often coincidently in the best interest of the game.

In my opinion, an eclectic mix of exotic trees can really mess up a golf course. It's like plaid on plaid when you see a willow tree next to a spruce tree, with a honey locust tree in the background.