I hear you guys on trees being bad on a golf course. But I'm not 100% opposed to them all the time.
Like 7 at Augusta National, 7 at Pasatiempo is a short par 4 lined with trees. I didn't find Pasa, as a golf course, overly treed. So, I thought the 7th was a decent change of pace. Short enough to demand accuracy and not need distance off the tee...and the challenge around the green with the contours and bunker complexes made for a very entertaining hole...per my taste in golf.
I think 7 at Augusta has a very similar feel to it.
I like both holes. And given the golf course(s) as a whole, I'm not overly put off by the trees on those specific holes.
Also, the trees at both holes are not overly dense as to preclude recovery shots.
Due to the holes length, driver is not mandated off the tee. It can be hit to try to get a closer pitch shot into the green, but due to the shortness of both holes (from member tees) a much lesser club could be hit as well...if the tightness of the fairway is an issue for someone's specific game. Despite the tightness, the tee shot has options due to the length of the holes.
But if your point/argument is that trees are bad...PERIOD. Okay. You won't like either hole. I get it.
As I said in a different thread, I do like the option of having the hole be drivable for the pros playing in The Masters. The chance for an eagle would be cool and a neat way for someone to try to make up strokes...or give some back to the field if they mess up. Options/choices/decisions/tactics/strategy.