[Duncan Cheslett]

Sorry about resorting to a Facebook link. I can't get the images up any other way.


https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10210488437067359&set=a.10200118360381923.1073741827.1237857982&type=3&theater


Our greenkeeper and greens chairman want to take out these trees - among many others.


A sizeable proportion of our membership is up in arms about it, and we have an emergency general meeting next week to thrash it out.


I'd be interested in some non-partisan knowledgeable opinion.


Am I in the right place? 

[Matt Dawson]

Pictures not viewable Duncan, for me at least.


Photobucket?

[Duncan Cheslett]

Shit.


They come up okay for me, so I assumed that all was well.


I'll try to sort it.

[Thomas Dai]

Duncan,

Nice post on another thread from Rick Lane -

"Good tip for anyone working on a golf committee or looking at tree removal that I got from a USGA agronomist one day.
We were looking at a pair of 80 year old trees that (IMHO), were not in a good spot, in front of both greenside bunkers on a par 3, blocking them, and limiting tee to green options.
The question he taught me to ask:  "If they were not there, would you plant them there now?" Boom, lightbulb." 

"If they were not there, would you plant them now?"

atb

[Carl Johnson]

Duncan, the link wouldn't open for me, either.  However, I'd ask:  What does each side say, that is, what are the expressed pros and cons for removing these trees?

[Jason Topp]

Looks much better with them out. 


Interesting comment from the non-golfer on Facebook.

[Terry Lavin]

The members’ opinions shouldn’t count because they will be emotion-based, riddled with sentimentality and full of stupid words like “framing”.  The superintendent should get consulting opinions from an architect and maybe an agronomist and the three of them should be empowered to make the correct removal decisions. A group of members will squeal like pigs and next year they’ll realize the course looks better and still plays just as tough.

[Ian Mackenzie]

The members’ opinions shouldn’t count because they will be emotion-based, riddled with sentimentality and full of stupid words like “framing”.  The superintendent should get consulting opinions from an architect and maybe an agronomist and the three of them should be empowered to make the correct removal decisions. A group of members will squeal like pigs and next year they’ll realize the course looks better and still plays just as tough.

100% spot on.

[Jon Wiggett]

Duncan,


better without them in my opinion.


Jon

[Mark_Fine]

I can't bring up the photos but I wouldn't make a recommendation based on photos anyway.  Bad move. 


Hire a qualified architect, someone who is willing to take some time to study and get to know your golf course and get their recommendation. 

[Duncan Cheslett]

I can't bring up the photos but I wouldn't make a recommendation based on photos anyway.  Bad move. 


Hire a qualified architect, someone who is willing to take some time to study and get to know your golf course and get their recommendation.

I couldn't agree more.


We have just engaged Ken Moodie of Creative Golf Design to do a detailed report on all aspects of the course and give his recommendations. Ken has been responsible for the renovations at several prominent MacKenzie courses, including Alwoodley, Moortown, Lindrick, and Hadley Wood.


Ken has recently moved to our area and has also joined the club.


Unfortunately he is arriving just as a major controversy over tree removal is reaching a climax. If he stepped in at this stage and advocated the chainsaw he would find it difficult if not impossible to gain the trust of the tree huggers


There is a long game and a short game at play here.

[Mark_Fine]

Duncan,
Sounds like you made a good choice with your hire.  I wish him and you good luck.  Of all aspects of course renovation work, trees tend to be the most controversial thing I have to deal with.
Mark

[Ian Mackenzie]

Duncan -


We went through this in 2012/13.
I'm sure you have all the jargon assembled to discuss the value of tree removal for strategic/golf reasons.


However, we used a few other complimentary approaches with the "tree huggers".


1. We referred to it NOT as "tree remediation or deletion" but rather as "trophy/specimen tree preservation". (Removal of understory or "sucker" trees.)


2. When confronted by emotional members, we in turn asked them:


"Mrs. "Smith", do you have a garden at home?"


- why, yes, I do.


"Do you ever weed your garden?"


-Of course I do.


"Why?"


-Because weeds are ugly and they rob nutrients from my flowers.


"Did you plant the weeds on purpose?


- Lord heavens, NO! They fall from other trees and just take root.


You get the picture. It worked.

[V_Halyard]

Sorry about resorting to a Facebook link. I can't get the images up any other way.


https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10210488437067359&set=a.10200118360381923.1073741827.1237857982&type=3&theater


Our greenkeeper and greens chairman want to take out these trees - among many others.


A sizeable proportion of our membership is up in arms about it, and we have an emergency general meeting next week to thrash it out.


I'd be interested in some non-partisan knowledgeable opinion.


Am I in the right place? 

You are in the right place. There are many here that have gone through this.
As a tree war and a restoration survivor, I offer these two suggestions that were priceless to our effort. 
1:Enage the USGA Turf advisory asap as a 3rd party
2: Engage an arborist as a 3rd party who may surprise you and your membership with enlightenment regarding the effects of poor tree management. It can harm both the health of their investment (Greens, Turf, lines of play) as well as harm healthy trees worth featuring.
There are so many other things to consider but those proved to be a good place to start for us.

[Ian Mackenzie]

Sorry about resorting to a Facebook link. I can't get the images up any other way.


https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10210488437067359&set=a.10200118360381923.1073741827.1237857982&type=3&theater


Our greenkeeper and greens chairman want to take out these trees - among many others.


A sizeable proportion of our membership is up in arms about it, and we have an emergency general meeting next week to thrash it out.


I'd be interested in some non-partisan knowledgeable opinion.


Am I in the right place? 

You are in the right place. There are many here that have gone through this.
As a tree war and a restoration survivor, I offer these two suggestions that were priceless to our effort. 
1:Enage the USGA Turf advisory asap as a 3rd party
2: Engage an arborist as a 3rd party who may surprise you and your membership with enlightenment regarding the effects of poor tree management. It can harm both the health of their investment (Greens, Turf, lines of play) as well as harm healthy trees worth featuring.
There are so many other things to consider but those proved to be a good place to start for us.

100% spot-on!!


If you present to the membership with background data and info from:


1. USGA regional turf rep
2. Local arborist
3. Retained GCA
4. Superintendent


....it pretty much neuters 95% of the emotion and takes member agendas out of play.


Good luck!!

[Marty Bonnar]

Except it’ll be the STRI local guy you’ll need...


 
F.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()