Terry:
Its a pretty good thread, but unfortunately the participants were missing one essential piece of the puzzle.
May 1931 Golf Illustrated -
Any conversation about trees at Oakmont and the intentions of the Fownes should take into account the unintended loss of the trees that were left on site when construction began. You can make a pretty strong case that they liked the resulting open look of the place, as tree planting appears to have been severally limited over the first 40+ years of the course's existence (and even that is debatable as the photos at the bottom of this post indicate). But I've read nothing that suggests that this was part of any initial plans or ongoing vision for their creation. It may have been, but it may also be the case that they preferred to direct their resources elsewhere, specifically to the nearly 35 year attempt to evolve and perfect the bunkering scheme and alterations to the greens themselves.
I happen to prefer today's version as opposed to the prior iteration. Perhaps the Fownes would have as well. But stating that it is a return to their intentions is unsupported speculation.
As an aside, the proposed changes from RTJ in the 70's that can be found buried in that thread are worth bringing back into the light:
"Mr. Jones had also suggested adding a pond in front of #5....changing the par 3 16th into a par 5 and making #17 into a par 3. The green chair at the time, Mr. Stewart, was quoted by Mr. Brand that "no major changes would be made to Mr. Fownes' masterpiece under my watch", and these major proposals never materialized."1919 Amateur-
April 1919 Golfers Magazine -
Aug. 1925 Golf Illustrated -
May 1931 Golf Illustrated -
1927 Aerial -
