Is the stagnation of nature unnatural?

[Rich Goodale]

Ted Kramer:

Nice post that reply #18. That could be one of the primary differences between golf in this country and the way golf is played or was played abroad in the linksland. Did you know that way back golf was essentially a winter game in Scotland simply because the grass did not grow and playing was more manageable for that reason! 

Tom

I think you'll find that golf was very much a year-round activity in Scotland.  They played the Open in the summer, did they not....?

Now, in England things were very different as the toffs had cricket to preoccupy themsleves in the summer, so there golf was very much a winter game--hence playing the President's Putter in Rye in January.

If you had a proper (i.e. 35-45 degree "heat") winter in Philadephia, you'd probably play the Crump Cup at that time too!

Cheers

Rich

[Jon Wiggett]

Rich,

I think you will find that Tom was refering to a time several hundred years ago before the Open and mowing machines. I had the same understanding as well.

[Kirk Gill]

Interesting topic. I had never thought of man's continual attempts to create permanence as "stagnation." Of course, stagnation often occurs in nature anyway, so it isn't inherently unnatural. Think of natural ponds that occur in a low-lying area from which there's no drainage. Stagnation. Natural.

But this makes me wonder why it is that we always look at the things that humans do as unnatural. Humans build stuff. We've always built stuff. So do some termites. So do beavers. Golf courses may be one of the most natural things we do build, but if it is in our nature to build golf courses or pyramids or country roads, why would the desire to maintain a certain playing surface for a game be considered unnatural? Perhaps it is in man's nature to play games as well.

[TEPaul]

"Tom
I think you'll find that golf was very much a year-round activity in Scotland.  They played the Open in the summer, did they not....?"


Richard:

What I was referring to is the era maybe 100-200 years before THE OPEN was even thought of! 


Some may not even wish to contemplate a time like this in golf because frankly it completely preceded the context of golf architecture and maintenance the way we think of it today but if we do not contemplate that really early era in golf we may never come to understand the remarkable combination of natural events The  Old Mother provided us in the linksland that all taken together is arguably responsible for golf existing at all!

It didn't just have to do with wonderful sand-dunny topography and atmosphere, it very much had to do with the remarkable natural occurence of two types of grasses in what were once referred to as "swards" (in those days what passed for our present billion dollar chemical and fertiziler industry were those cute little Scottish birds soaring and nesting and shitting in those swards). The fact is those two type of grasses (festuca and agrostis) are still with us today for golf even if we have submitted them (in some areas of this world) to what I refer to as "The Great Golf Agronomic Emergence Ward."

[Rich Goodale]

"Tom
I think you'll find that golf was very much a year-round activity in Scotland.  They played the Open in the summer, did they not....?"


Richard:

What I was referring to is the era maybe 100-200 years before THE OPEN was even thought of! 

My apologies, Tom (and Jon)

I'd forgotten that you were around then to have personal knowledge of such things.  Silly me for relying on the lack of written evidence for such drivel to assume that it might be untrue....

Mea cuipa and felice navidad.

Ricardo

[TEPaul]

Well, Ricardo, I could be wrong but I'm not aware of such a thing as a 16th or 17th century Toro or Jacobsen mower, but what do I know, since the Scots invented almost everything including the hula hoop and the skirt!

[John Kavanaugh]

At the core of this thread lies the fact that I have played the same parkland course on a continuous basis during each the last 5 decades.  I fully expect to continue to play this course each year for the remainder of my golfing life to add to the memories I have from the past 40 years.  Because of the parkland nature of the course it has been anything but stagnant during my golfing life which creates sub-sets of memories given the life and death of its vertical hazards over time.  I understand that on any given day trees may be a hindrance to the architecture of a course but feel that over a lifetime trees will bring the type of varied memories and shots that few other hazards can.  This is simply because they are never stagnant and continue to change in ways no other structure may.

[Jon Wiggett]

Well, Ricardo, I could be wrong but I'm not aware of such a thing as a 16th or 17th century Toro or Jacobsen mower, but what do I know, since the Scots invented almost everything including the hula hoop and the skirt!

Tom,

wasn't it a Scot who patented the 'MacScythe' precision cutting tool in 1435?

[Rich Goodale]

Jon (and Tom)

It was the Scots who first patented The Sheep, and most recently perfected that patent with "Dolly."

McRicardo

[Melvyn Morrow]

Richard is correct.

Let’s not forget that Scottish golf pre The Open consisted of a hand full of club and courses. Games have been played over the winter months but some courses had problems with parts of their courses being unplayable because they were waterlogged.

By the mid 19th Century there are reports of golfers playing through the light snow and as we move forward a few more years there are actual pictures of snow covered fairways. Move on yet a few more years and the match at TOC with Young Tom playing in the snow, to the point that the referee wanted to stop the match.   Young Tom was persuaded to continue and Old Tom had the Greens swept clear of snow with approx 2” of snow on the fairways. There are some water colour paintings around covering this match. Also W W Tulloch's book on The Life of Tom Morris mentions the November & December 1875 games - see the following pages from 133 years ago (within 100-200 years mentioned).




TOC had its problems and they were resolved over the years, from mods to the bunkers, constant adjustment with the whins until finally tackled. Let’s not forget the reclaimed land now called the Bruce Embankment. Change, everything changes in numerous subtle ways, but we do not always notice.

Having said that, Richard is correct (again) starting to prove that perhaps things may not actually change at all.
 

[Charlie Goerges]

John,

I’ll come at your question from a tree perspective. I dig your emphasis on trees when discussing the changeability and evolution of golf courses. As a hazard, trees are unique in their combination of cyclical (seasonal) change and linear (growth) change.

A digression: I think that trees have been maligned on this site. In this day and age, we are far removed from the time when trees provided for all human needs, and as a result they do not get their proper pride of place in our lives. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that our species’ precipitous rise to dominance on this planet was immediately preceded by the emergence of the modern hardwood tree (A plant which gives us a building material that pound for pound is stronger than steel, yet possesses a random and subtle beauty unmatched by any other material in my opinion).

None of this is to say that a golf course lined and covered with trees is the ideal. And I certainly am an ignoramus when it comes to the history of golf and golf course design. But I do think that, as hazards, trees deserve the level of nuanced thought and discussion that is often reserved only for bunkers or green contours. Discussion of this kind would probably lead to fewer, but better trees and tree hazards.

Charlie

[Cory Brown]

JK,

Your comment about Oakmont is, I'm assuming, referring to the tree removal.  Wouldn't you also say that adding the trees 40 years ago was an unnatural addition, since they were not there to begin with?  Perhaps nature never intended them to be there.  Something to think about.

[Jon Wiggett]

Jon (and Tom)

It was the Scots who first patented The Sheep, and most recently perfected that patent with "Dolly."

McRicardo

ha ha Rich, got me again. I of course over looked the fully automated, four leg drive McSheep (fairways and aprons), the larger McHorse & McCattle (Fairway & Rough) and the smaller versatile McRabbit (Greens).

Was it a Scott who patented the revolutionary aeration toll the McWorm?

[John Kavanaugh]

John,

I’ll come at your question from a tree perspective. I dig your emphasis on trees when discussing the changeability and evolution of golf courses. As a hazard, trees are unique in their combination of cyclical (seasonal) change and linear (growth) change.

A digression: I think that trees have been maligned on this site. In this day and age, we are far removed from the time when trees provided for all human needs, and as a result they do not get their proper pride of place in our lives. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that our species’ precipitous rise to dominance on this planet was immediately preceded by the emergence of the modern hardwood tree (A plant which gives us a building material that pound for pound is stronger than steel, yet possesses a random and subtle beauty unmatched by any other material in my opinion).

None of this is to say that a golf course lined and covered with trees is the ideal. And I certainly am an ignoramus when it comes to the history of golf and golf course design. But I do think that, as hazards, trees deserve the level of nuanced thought and discussion that is often reserved only for bunkers or green contours. Discussion of this kind would probably lead to fewer, but better trees and tree hazards.

Charlie

Charlie,

Amazing insight to the greatness of trees.  As far as Oakmont is concerned, I would like to know if the land where the course sits was ever treed.  I am under the impression that many classic courses were built on land previously cleared for agricultural uses.

A historical question.  Are our lumber resources unusual in a world context?

[Charlie Goerges]

John,

According to this map on forest resources the original extent of forest is shown in maroon:



by this account and a couple of other sources I checked out, the area of Pennsylvania occupied by Pittsburgh was covered in forest before settlement. "History of Pittsburgh and Environs" By George Thornton Fleming (on google books) described Pittsburgh as a "forest primeval".

As to our forest resources, North America is not terribly unusual. About 30% of the world is forested and NA is covered by a bit more than 30%, so we're above average. South America has much more than 30%.

Historically we are down by 200-300 million acres of forest from a high of about a billion acres (US only). 150 years ago we were worse off than we are now. So I don't think we're doing too bad. For wildlife, the segmentation of the forest is probably worse than the loss of acreage from what I've read and seen.