What's missing in this photograph? Why?

[Jim_Kennedy]

One of the photos I posted was by Michael Dugger, the 'mash up' was by Michael Whitaker.

Thanks Bill.

[TEPaul]

"About the bunker on 10, dad said Eb told him that it came about because of wear and tear.  Evidently, balls would roll off the green and come to rest in that spot. Due to repeated pitch shot and foot taffic on/off the green, the turf wore out and was hard to re-establish.  Eventually they gave in and allowed it to become a bunker."

Tim:

I have always heard from the club the DA did sort of begin to evolve in some way and eventually they just sort of formalized it. No one ever actually mentioned who said that. If Eb Steineger told your Dad what you mentioned above then that is the closest thing to a direct oral history of the feature I've heard.

I had an interview lined up with Eb through John Ott but unfortunately Eb died within two weeks and I never got to meet him and speak with him. The primary purpose for talking to him at the time was to get more of his details about why the right alternate fairway on #17 slowly went out of play.

About the trees on the site before Crump bought it----there were many of them but they were certainly not of full maturity leading me to believe that there may've been a pretty massive forest fire in that area perhaps 20 years before Crump found it.

In Crump's searching for hole corridors it has been reported he had between 40-52,000 trees cut down. And it is true that between 1927 to about 1932 3-5 thousand seedingly trees were planted per year in what the club referred to as the "stabilization program" or "Holding the Course Together."

I am very happy to say there is now a very dedicated on the ground new researcher on the very early years of Pine Valley. He has been running down the deed transfers at the county seat from basically Sumner Ireland to Crump. He reports they seem a bit confusing due to the seller names on some deeds one of which is apparently a sand mining company (apparently owned by Ireland or perhaps his wife or relation of the same name---eg Ireland). So this could mean that PV or parts of it previous to Crump's purchasing could have been a sand mining operation.

In my opinion, this could be a very significant revelation beacuse it could mean certain parts of the topography of the site were the way they were not because of nature but due to sand mining operations. I don't know much of anything about the history of sand mining but Bradley Anderson tells me it was a primary component of the burgeoning concrete industry. And of course we know that long before Crump bought PV there was a rail line right next to the property from which sand could be tranported. To even begin to try to track where sand mining operations took place on that property my first thought would be to track the dirt roadways that existed before Crump bought the place and I believe I know where some of them were.

[TEPaul]

"neatly mowed roughs,....."

For all practical purposes there really is no rough at Pine Valley and there never has been. The only rough areas there today are on the sides of fairways and aren't much more than a few yards wide. The purpose of them is to turn mowers.

My thought has been that if PV decided to go to that old fashioned up and back fairway cut that so many restorations are now using that they wouldn't even need those rough collars at the sides of fairways to turn mowers on.

[TEPaul]

If someone has some early photos of the fronts of #2 and #18 greens you can see how those two holes presented the same problems of lack of stability of upswept sand faces that #10 did. I have the photos I just can't post them on here.

I have also seen a photo of the original 17th hole on here before Alison's redesign. The original 9th green does have one old photo but its pretty distant and not very clear. As far as I know there are no photos of Crump's original 6th and 11th greens both of which were deemed to be problematic in play as was #9 and #17. Of course some good photos exist of his original 8th green which I guess must have been deemed somewhat problematic in play too.

Crump was actually in the process of transitioning all his greens to the so-called "Taylor Method" but Taylor died in 1915 and only six were done before Crump died and no more were done.

Somebody on here mentioned the 10th hole was a Colt design and I think it was. At one point Crump had a green planned perhaps 30-40 yards to the right of the 10th green but it was slated to be the 6th hole. As for Colt holes there is no question that most of #5 is (the tee is in the same place Crump had it before Colt first arrived). #9 is definitely Colt and is about the closest to his hole plan of any hole at PV (even the bunker schemes are the same as his drawing). Crump had no hole planned in the same place and in the same direction as #9. There are others which are not so clear.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Wasn't the concept of "isolation" an alien concept in golf and American golf circa 1918 ?

How would Crump have conceived of that concept based on his exposure to courses in America and any information gleened from courses in the U.K. ?

Why, with those grand vistas of the holes at Pine Valley, would he want to choke them off and eliminate them ?

Why create a barrier, impeding the wind and its effect on play, especially when Macdonald had decreed that wind was the finest asset in golf ?

Is there anything in Crump's hand that indicates that was Crump's intent, or did others, subsequent to Crump's death cloak the tree planting project in the specter of Crump and Crump's vision in order to give it added credibility ?

In addition, I'm not so sure that pine trees provide the greatest stabilization of the soil.  The same can be said of fir trees

Last question on this reply:  Were the photos in Finegan's "Pine Valley Golf Club" touched up or enhanced ?
Something about the picture of the 10th hole doesn't right.

[TEPaul]

Pat:

On the tree isolation of the holes of PV there is nothing I know of in Crump's hand about that (Crump apparently did not keep a diary about what he wanted to do with the course even though at least one and perhaps two of his closest friends there did to some extent when Crump was still alive---eg they are that document I call "The Remembrances."

So it's hard to know when and from whom that idea first emanated.

However, one thing is pretty clear and that is Crump hated the idea of "parallelism" of a routing and he did dedicatedly have the course routed to prevent that. By that time in some circles "parallelism" had become a very bad tining in golf design. Given the routing mechanism to prevent "parallelism" which can probably be loosely defined as "triangulation" (a term that did gain currency in golf design terminology) there are obviously going to be some plentiful triangulated space between holes and the trees in most of those triangulated areas and extensive areas between holes were always treed.

Also, as I have told you for years now (apparently to no avail) is certain areas of the site were cleared by Crump just to look at them for possible hole corridors but they were never actually used for holes. Those areas were retreed.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul, et. al.

I don't believe for one second that the right side grassed bank had any stabilization problems.

Nor do I believe that one small segment wore out to such a degree that it evolved into the DA.



To much of what happens to golf courses become myths, absent factual information.

The photos of Pine Valley circa 1926-1928 and even into the late 30's are spectacular.

Someone, subsequent to that time, either overplanted or through benign neglect allowed the trees to become excessive and invasive.

I maintain that Crump's intent was never to confine his holes to tubular corridors through dense forests
The aerials from the 20's, 30's and 40's confirm that.

[TEPaul]

"Wasn't the concept of "isolation" an alien concept in golf and American golf circa 1918 ?"


Perhaps among some such as Macdonald but I think it can be pretty well documented that Harry Colt had already begun to use or experiment with the use of trees as a design element on inalnd sites.

I think the practical element was that if a site was heavily treed it wasn't very cost effective to remove them all and so practical architects began to just use them in various ways in design.

This so-called linksland refrain of "Nae links, nae golf" that also happened to lap over into the idea that since the linksland never did have trees that trees did not belong on golf courses was just not enduring with some of the best architects on inland sites that had trees.

In the late 1920s Flynn wrote an article about that which was pretty funny about those linksman and their aversion to trees on golf courses.

[Kalen Braley]

Patrick,

Perhaps the apocolypse is upon us....but gulp...I agree with every last word in your last post!!   

[JMorgan]

A rather detailed article published in the Philadelphia Inquirer on January 4, 1914 specifically mentions the tree planting in order to "shield the fairways." 

[Patrick_Mucci]

"Wasn't the concept of "isolation" an alien concept in golf and American golf circa 1918 ?"

Perhaps among some such as Macdonald but I think it can be pretty well documented that Harry Colt had already began to use or experiment with the use of trees as a design element on inalnd sites.

There's a huge difference between experimenting and planting 5,000 trees.

I think the practical element was that if a site was heavily treed it wasn't very cost effective to remove them all and so practical architects began to just use them in various ways in design.

But, we know that Pine Valley had to clear trees to create the golf course.
Early photos reveal the cleared areas, subsequent photos in the 20's, 30's and 40's still reveal open expanses of sand.
It's only in the last few decades that the course has been allowed to be choked off.

Do you not remember the thread on the 12th hole and the timeline photos Jamie Slonis posted, clearly showing how that hole has suffered by intentional planting or neglect.

If someone could pull that thread back up, the time lapse aerials are quite revealing and prove my point with respect to the unencombered invasion of trees at PV

This so-called linksland refrain of "Nae links, nae golf" that also happened to lap over into the idea that since the linksland never did have trees and so trees did not belong on golf courses was just not enduring with some of the best architects on inland sites that had trees.

I don't believe that that was the case in 1914 - 1922

In the late 1920s Flynn wrote an article about that which was pretty funny about those linksman and their aversion to trees on golf courses.

As golf moved inland, where forests abounded, the nature of the surrounds changed.
But, many golf courses had their earlier roots as farmlands, void of trees.

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Regarding your post #31, I don't really care what you believe and I very much doubt Pine Valley does either. It is your opinion and you are welcome to it but frankly it is not very well based in a good deal of the history of Pine Valley. Trees were beginning to be replanted when Crump was alive but in limited numbers around tees and such. Within about ten years thousands of trees were planted for a practical purpose. Now whether that was done on some old written dictate of Crump or was simply done as a practicality for course stabilization is unclear.

My hope is that the club will get into a program of clearing trees out of all the old bunkers and their sight and shot lines but if you think they are ever going to clear trees to return to some of those photos before the stabilzation program I can guarantee you that is never going to happen and shouldn't.

The other issue with the look of the trees at PV is in those old photos the existing trees were probably less than half the height of full maturity. Of course after over 80 years all of them are probably two to three times higher and fuller than any of them on that site were back then.

[JMorgan]

And when Ben Sayers, who was the pro at North Berwick at the time, visited in May 1914, he supposedly exclaimed, "It's Colt and Sunningdale" without knowing about Colt's involvement.

[TEPaul]

"A rather detailed article published in the Philadelphia Inquirer on January 4, 1914 specifically mentions the tree planting in order to "shield the fairways." 


JMorgan:

True indeed but as you can see there're a few pig headed or block headed contributors on here who just discount or completely avoid considering things like that as it doesn't seem to support their historically uninformed points and perspectives.

[TEPaul]

"And when Ben Sayers, who was the pro at North Berwick at the time, visited in May 1914, he supposedly exclaimed, "It's Colt and Sunningdale" without knowing about Colt's involvement."


JMorgan:

That is another good example that the likes of Pat Mucci will invariably fail to understand the connection and the point of and just continue to rationalize it away. 

[TEPaul]

"But, many golf courses had their earlier roots as farmlands, void of trees."


True, but Pine Valley was not a farmland site. Merion was but Pine Valley was the farthest from that kind of site. PV was heavily treed albeit unusually small trees when Crump bought it. And now we are finding that the site may've had some sand mining operations before Crump.

[Tim Nugent]

Tim,

Who's the author of the book and what's the date of publication ?

Thanks

Patrick, it appears that this is a privately produced book for members and guests.  The book does not have a title page w/author or publisher, just the title.  It does have a 1st left page preceeding the title page (on right) that has a couple paragraphs written by Ernest L. Ransome III , President of Pine Valey Golf CLub. 

"This expanded and profusely illustrated history of the Pine Valley Golf Club and its courseis theresult of a decision it should be recorded and that Warner Shelly prepare and write it.  Warner seemed best qualified because of his long history at Pine Valley.  He played his first game on the course in 1925, was sponsored for membership in 1928, and was elected to the club in 1929.  He has the longest continous membership in the club of present memebers, and has been on its board of directors for over forty years.  He has also served the Borough of Pine Valley, first as a commissioner and currently its Mayor.

       The members and friends of Pine Valley are greatly indebted to Warner for his outstanding contribution to the club with the completion of this most wonderful history."

In the back is a Credits page that lists many who worked on the book  including Don Barr of Sports Illustated w/ editing of SI's writer Mark Mulvoy. Other advice of Warren Owens, of Chilton Book Company, and amost able and dedicated book designer William Lickfield. the co-operation of S.D.Warren dic=vision of Scott Parer Company, as well as the help of Babe Nydam and Milt Walberg of Federated Lithographers and Printers But most of allto Pine Valley member Richard Hirsh who quarterbacked the whole job in its many stages, and finally produced this book.

[JSlonis]

Pat,

Here you go.  This is a link to Historic Aerials.  You can zoom around the one of Pine Valley and choose views from different years.  The best way to see the differences of years is to zoom the image to 1:2,400 then use the Compare Tools tab at the top and click on "Swipe".  It allows you to drag the image back and forth from different years.

http://www.historicaerials.com/default.aspx?poi=3850

Have fun!

[Tim Nugent]

Tom Paul, the photos (I wish i knew how to upload) of the early days, show what looks to be stands of mature but spindly pine.  As I summized early, it looks like sections were logged because the remaining trees have little in the way of lower branches.  Plus there were mentions of hunting small game and that is more suited to open ground.  It is possible that there were so many stumps that had to be removed because they were left after the logging.  Plus, there would have been a lot of slash left on the ground, which would have helped in the establishment of a new generation of vegatation.  Also, the book says initially 200-250 shares at $100 would give them $20k plus 18 men were to put up $1,000 ea and each build a hole.  Eventually the final cost far exceeded that.  So, I doubt heavy clearing was initially though of or the price/hole would have been higher.
Just think, for $1,000, you could have been a founding member! If they only knew then....

[TEPaul]

"Who's the author of the book and what's the date of publication?"




Pine Valley has three club history books:

1. a short 36 page book printed in 1963 by John Arthur Brown (Short History of Pine Valley)
2. a 106 page book by Warner Shelley printed in 1982 (Pine Valley Golf Club--A Chronicle)
3. a 234 page book by James Finegan printed in 2000 (Pine Valley Golf Club--A Unique Haven of the Game)

[Kyle Harris]

TEPaul, et. al.

I don't believe for one second that the right side grassed bank had any stabilization problems.

Nor do I believe that one small segment wore out to such a degree that it evolved into the DA.



To much of what happens to golf courses become myths, absent factual information.

The photos of Pine Valley circa 1926-1928 and even into the late 30's are spectacular.

Someone, subsequent to that time, either overplanted or through benign neglect allowed the trees to become excessive and invasive.

I maintain that Crump's intent was never to confine his holes to tubular corridors through dense forests
The aerials from the 20's, 30's and 40's confirm that.

It sure would have some stabilization issues when that high traffic area got compacted enough so that no turf could grow on it.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Just think, for $1,000, you could have been a founding member!

A few others. (simple inflation for today would be 11 times these numbers)

LA area:
Flintridge club, 1920,  $250
Hillcrest club, 1920,  $750,
Wilshire club, 1920, $250
California club, 1921, $150
Los Angeles Country club, 1920 $500, ($5000 by 1925)
Brentwood club, 1915, $60
Virginia Country club, 1921, $100

...and
Winged Foot, 1922, $600

Sheesh!     

[JMEvensky]

Just think, for $1,000, you could have been a founding member!

A few others. (simple inflation for today would be 11 times these numbers)

LA area:
Flintridge club, 1920,  $250
Hillcrest club, 1920,  $750,
Wilshire club, 1920, $250
California club, 1921, $150
Los Angeles Country club, 1920 $500, ($5000 by 1925)
Brentwood club, 1915, $60
Virginia Country club, 1921, $100

...and
Winged Foot, 1922, $600

Sheesh!     

Interesting that Hillcrest was 50% higher than LACC.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat:

Regarding your post #31, I don't really care what you believe and I very much doubt Pine Valley does either. It is your opinion and you are welcome to it but frankly it is not very well based in a good deal of the history of Pine Valley. Trees were beginning to be replanted when Crump was alive but in limited numbers around tees and such. Within about ten years thousands of trees were planted for a practical purpose. Now whether that was done on some old written dictate of Crump or was simply done as a practicality for course stabilization is unclear.

Old aerials don't seem to confirm your position

My hope is that the club will get into a program of clearing trees out of all the old bunkers and their sight and shot lines but if you think they are ever going to clear trees to return to some of those photos before the stabilzation program I can guarantee you that is never going to happen and shouldn't.

That's interesting.
Years ago, when I proposed clearing out the trees in bunkers and on the sight lines you opposed my suggestion.
As to your caveat, "before the stabilization program", I never suggested that.
I suggested returning the golf course to its configuration circa 1925-1928, or even 1938
To see what the golf course looked like at that time, just turn to pages 53, 63 and 64 in Geoff Shackelford's book,
"The Golden Age of Golf Design" 

The other issue with the look of the trees at PV is in those old photos the existing trees were probably less than half the height of full maturity. Of course after over 80 years all of them are probably two to three times higher and fuller than any of them on that site were back then.
I'm capable of projecting what tree growth will present in future years, and the "maturity" issue is NOT the issue, it's the over planting issue, benign neglect and the invasive issue.

Jamie Slonis's chronological aerials of # 12 proved that to all but those in denial, such as yourself.
I played PV when there were NO trees in the right side elbow on # 1, along with many other areas now under canopy.

If you have Finegan's book, just look at the pictures, especially the one of # 10 and then tell me that the course wasn't over planted and/or allowed to suffer from benign neglect.

[Patrick_Mucci]

"A rather detailed article published in the Philadelphia Inquirer on January 4, 1914 specifically mentions the tree planting in order to "shield the fairways." 

JMorgan:

True indeed but as you can see there're a few pig headed or block headed contributors on here who just discount or completely avoid considering things like that as it doesn't seem to support their historically uninformed points and perspectives.

JMorgan,

If we've learned one thing from GCA.com, it's how UNreliable newspaper accounts are.

As to Ben Sayer's alleged comment, how can you even post that he "supposedly said".
It's pure third party or more, hearsay.

TEPaul & JMorgan,

Crump and Pine Valley must have been a century ahead of Northrop with stealth technology.
How is it that those trees are invisible in the aerials of 1922, 1925, 1928 and 1938 ?   ?   ?

Please look at the 1925 photos of Pine Valley that appear in Geoff Shackelford's book on pages 53 and 66, along with the others

Where are the trees that were allegedly planted to "shield" the fairways ?

Where are the trees that currently choke off air circulation, are invasive to bunkers, lines of sight and lines of play ?

To refresh your memories, which are clearly empty, please look at the aerial chrono's of the 12th hole as contributed by Jamie Slonis.
It will show you how the trees became invasive and it wasn't vis a vis some tree planting program categorized as "stabilizing.

Since when does perfectly level ground need stabilization ?

Can someone post the two 1925 photos that appear on page 53 and 66 in Geoff's book.

TEPaul wants you to believe his theories versus your own eyes.