Yes, I have seen that trend. I have even been called back to about six of my own 1990's era courses to remove bunkers while maintaining strategy. Other courses simply remove them, so its nice of the courses to ask me back.
The idea is usually cost driven. In addition to removing lesser used bunkers other bunkers are flattened, reduced in size, etc. to minimize maintenance costs in this cost driven golf economy. In the 1990's my courses often had 85-100K sf of bunkers. My last two designs are half that - 45-50,000 SF, more through size and scale reduction (a smaller bunker takes a little less time to rake, esp. if hand raking is required via a bunker liner in use) and somewhat through using other hazards - choclate drop mounds, grass bunkers, fw bumps, etc. in their place.
Re the latter, I find that the designs really don't lack anything. In fact, I think they may prove more interesting in the long term with a greater variety of recovery shots than "bunker left, bunker right" might offer.
I don't see it as any different than the bunker removals advocated by Tillie in the 1930's or those that took place gradually in the 1970's when gas prices soared similarly to now.
Add in the desire for "perfect bunkers" now and the costs of bunker maintenance are too high, in the view of course managers for their return. In actual fact, they find that few golfers desert their courses after bunker removal. Now, if they removed the greens for easier maintenance, they would probably find a few more defectors!