I agree about the conifers. Need to go!
Tim, did you find the fairways to be artificially narrowed by mowing? When I last played there (several years ago) the fairways were maintained very narrow which made the course play difficult off the tee. It seemed to me that they were being maintained that way to protect their "resistance to scoring" numbers in an effort to maintain some ranking. Did you feel the fairways were sufficiently wide for average amateur play? They seem overly narrow in some of your pixs.
Michael--
Granted, I wasn't driving the ball too well that day, but the fairways seemed quite narrow. The rough was pretty healthy, so recovery from it was pretty tough. I don't object to that, but I think that a big defense for the Cascades on a lot of holes is sidehill lies. Wider fairways would better expose that strength of the golf course, I believe.
~
RBoyce--
I liked 2, 4, and 5, but I found 3 to be the most disappointing hole on the course. There's really no gain to be had from trying for the green with a driver, and on a 285 yard hole, I always find that to be a little bit of a flaw. It's an exacting wedge shot, though, for sure.
~
As for the tree issue, it would be nice to see things thinned out. But trees serve as essential barriers between some holes at the Cascades. The site itself is funny-shaped and pretty cramped, but you never feel like you're on top of a hole other than the one you're playing. If someone more or less denuded the site, I personally believe it would be to the detriment of the course.