I recently was out west visiting various National Parks(yes John K pictures
) and spent 3 days skiing at Brian Head, Utah.
Over the last 20 years they have suffered a Pine Beetle infestation and lost nearly 90% of their trees, which has caused some issues with blowing snow cover, loss of snow from excessive sunlight, more frequent lift closures due to more wind exposure,erosion and avalanche risk, and a perceived loss of natural beauty.
Many new smaller trees have been planted but are a long way from maturity.
Those are the (supposed) negatives.
What I found was a fascinating landscape which at least tripled the skiable area, and allowed traffic to spread out, pick their own line and explore the varied terrain, while skiing with partners of varying ability.
I am a big fan of glade skiing, but found even with many trees now gone, there was almost no part of the mountain that couldn't be skiied, taking a different line nearly every time, while skiing around the rocks, steep drops , existing mature trees, and immature saplings.
I find many resorts frustrating that have inpenetrable trees that are either out of bounds or so little space between trees/undergrowth that tree trails are very limited, forcing one onto a predetermined, often groomed ,boring and often crowded path.
In other words, ironically, their loss of trees made skiing the remaining trees MORE attractive and possible, and opened up play on the entire mountain, not rigidly defined corridors.
I'm curious if there are course that allow many different lines/approaches enabling alternate play around hazards without losing a ball.
What courses share this design philosophy?
TOC, Gweedore, and parts of Sebonack come to mind all for different reasons.
Assuming cost is a limiting factor of maintaining all areas at fairway height, what ground covers or maintenance practices can produce this effect?
Gweedore and Mulranny have this due to grazing-are their others this way by either circumstance or design?
What are a few ways to add alternate interesting routes safely, cost efficiently, and effectively?
I suspect many Golden Age courses enjoyed this luxury, depending on height of cut (if any) between fairways, and a lack of irrigation
Of course many boring parallel fairway courses accidentally share this by accident
Is there a difference?
i.e. how do we open up the field of play for more options,playability, forgiveness,strategy, and interest, at a reasonable cost, without issuing helmets?
Comments?