Mike — The most dramatic portion is the series along the creek. I realize that trees have been a part of the setting for some time, but obviously new trees and much more mature trees have "taken over" some of the strategy. That is a shame, especially with the newfound "friends" of the Park who will argue against any attempt to remove trees, even though it is clearly needed for true restoration of some areas.
I am looking forward to a more in-depth comparison of the existing course with the original. It seems obvious that a lot of interpretation will be required in certain areas, and good balance between what was — and what will fly in this Century.
The hillside holes are charming with their often blind putting surfaces and lone bunkers.
Previous management seems to have taken its toll on the course — trees left to grow wild, no security during the winter (a four-wheeler had recently messed up a few fairways), poor maintenance protocol, ill-planned priorities, etc. A sad situation, especially now that no one seems to have any money. The current No. 6 green work should ideally be overseen by someone who can bridge the gap between golf architecture, maintenance, engineering and history. While I am not 100% certain, it looks to me as if it simply is being winged in-house. Usually, that is a crap shoot.