News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Charles Lund

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: KPMG Women's PGA 2016
« Reply #25 on: June 13, 2016, 02:31:15 PM »
I grew up in the Seattle area and played Fircrest in the early 60s when very tall old growth fir trees lined the fairways and smaller fir trees had been planted to separate adjacent fairways.   In the mid 60s, I played at Inglewood a few times when tall old growth fir trees lined fairways.  Seattle G.C., Everett G.C., and Tacoma G.C. were established clubs in the area at the time.

Sahalee was built in the early 70s and formed by a group of members who left Inglewood.  The spirit of the times and regional clubs provided a model for a quality club and golf course with a residential development.It should come as little surprise that preserving old growth fir, cedar, and hemlock was integral to the course and consistent with ideas about what would be a first rate course at the time.  I played Sahalee, Inglewood, Seattle, and Fircrest a lot in the late 70s and early 80s.  In the mid 70s, Port Ludlow G.C. was built, along with Canterwood GC in the 90s.  All of them were considered at various times as among the best the State of Washington has to offer.   

More recently, Tumble Creek, Wine Valley, Palouse Ridge, Gamble Sands, and Chambers Bay entered the ranks of the State's best of the best.  These modern courses were built on sites with limited trees and have a markedly different character and quality.

With respect to the older woodland style courses, tree removal is a complicated process.  I can recall when Inglewood removed a large number of old, closely growing trees.  Wind storms in the next couple of years caused substantial blowdown, as trees previously sheltered by wind were exposed and had not developed a root system which would stabilize them in wind.  Their removal and restoration of areas becomes an additional expense.  Tree removal has benefits in terms of better ventilation and light.  Many NW courses remove trees over time to allow more light exposure for greens.

Sahalee had large numbers of trees removed before and again after the PGA was held.Typical of many NW courses is the lone tree standing inside a tree line.  This can serve to frame a hole or define a smaller landing area for a good line of play to a green.  Given the way the modern game has evolved, some are more or less relevant, depending on tee boxes. I have been reading a thread on Oakmont which talks a lot about narrow landing areas and use of ditches, bunkering and penal rough to require precision on each shot.  I have a hard time with complaints about lone trees doing the same thing.  Or ditto for a lone and very penal bunker on a links course.

Another point to remember about Sahalee is that it is a club played by men, women, and families.  A nearby club which opened 15 years ago serves mostly individual members and their guests.  It was built on some forested acreage and farmland.  It has individual trees serving similar functions to those at Sahalee and the other classic NW courses. I have not played Gozzer Ranch in Idaho, but Pine forests and rock outcroppings are part of the terrain.  I would suspect stately trees were retained there and function similarly.

So I think it is important to consider Sahalee in a broader context.  No one would complain about the absence of trees on links courses in Ireland or Scotland.  The site defines and constrains what would work for design. Sahalee has consistently ranked in the top three in our state. The terrain, forestation, vegetation, and climate make for a variety of courses unlike those in other areas of the country.  The Eastern side is very different from the Western side.So it would offer many opportunities to see and play in environments unlike those in other parts of the country.

Charles Lund

Matthew Essig

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: KPMG Women's PGA 2016
« Reply #26 on: June 13, 2016, 02:54:24 PM »
I grew up in the Seattle area and played Fircrest in the early 60s when very tall old growth fir trees lined the fairways and smaller fir trees had been planted to separate adjacent fairways.   In the mid 60s, I played at Inglewood a few times when tall old growth fir trees lined fairways.  Seattle G.C., Everett G.C., and Tacoma G.C. were established clubs in the area at the time.

Sahalee was built in the early 70s and formed by a group of members who left Inglewood.  The spirit of the times and regional clubs provided a model for a quality club and golf course with a residential development.It should come as little surprise that preserving old growth fir, cedar, and hemlock was integral to the course and consistent with ideas about what would be a first rate course at the time.  I played Sahalee, Inglewood, Seattle, and Fircrest a lot in the late 70s and early 80s.  In the mid 70s, Port Ludlow G.C. was built, along with Canterwood GC in the 90s.  All of them were considered at various times as among the best the State of Washington has to offer.   

More recently, Tumble Creek, Wine Valley, Palouse Ridge, Gamble Sands, and Chambers Bay entered the ranks of the State's best of the best.  These modern courses were built on sites with limited trees and have a markedly different character and quality.

With respect to the older woodland style courses, tree removal is a complicated process.  I can recall when Inglewood removed a large number of old, closely growing trees.  Wind storms in the next couple of years caused substantial blowdown, as trees previously sheltered by wind were exposed and had not developed a root system which would stabilize them in wind.  Their removal and restoration of areas becomes an additional expense.  Tree removal has benefits in terms of better ventilation and light.  Many NW courses remove trees over time to allow more light exposure for greens.

Sahalee had large numbers of trees removed before and again after the PGA was held.Typical of many NW courses is the lone tree standing inside a tree line.  This can serve to frame a hole or define a smaller landing area for a good line of play to a green.  Given the way the modern game has evolved, some are more or less relevant, depending on tee boxes. I have been reading a thread on Oakmont which talks a lot about narrow landing areas and use of ditches, bunkering and penal rough to require precision on each shot.  I have a hard time with complaints about lone trees doing the same thing.  Or ditto for a lone and very penal bunker on a links course.

Another point to remember about Sahalee is that it is a club played by men, women, and families.  A nearby club which opened 15 years ago serves mostly individual members and their guests.  It was built on some forested acreage and farmland.  It has individual trees serving similar functions to those at Sahalee and the other classic NW courses. I have not played Gozzer Ranch in Idaho, but Pine forests and rock outcroppings are part of the terrain.  I would suspect stately trees were retained there and function similarly.

So I think it is important to consider Sahalee in a broader context.  No one would complain about the absence of trees on links courses in Ireland or Scotland.  The site defines and constrains what would work for design. Sahalee has consistently ranked in the top three in our state. The terrain, forestation, vegetation, and climate make for a variety of courses unlike those in other areas of the country.  The Eastern side is very different from the Western side.So it would offer many opportunities to see and play in environments unlike those in other parts of the country.

Charles Lund


Thank you for your well-written thoughts, Charles!
"Good GCA should offer an interesting golfing challenge to the golfer not a difficult golfing challenge." Jon Wiggett

Sean Leary

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: KPMG Women's PGA 2016
« Reply #27 on: June 13, 2016, 03:14:43 PM »
There are about a dozen trees there that are flat out stupid in my opinion and the removal of those would much improve the playability of the course for the people that actually play the course on a regular basis (rather than for tour players every 3-4 years) without really impacting their identify.  If they want to keep the other 7,988 go for it.  Sean made some very good points in his earlier post about Sahalee's identity being this forest of 8,000 trees and I'm confident the club will never do anything to change that because of all the sucking up that took place this week on the broadcast, etc..  But again, would the identity really change that much if 5-10% of the right trees were removed?  In the end if Sahalee is the "one off" that has thousands and thousands of trees and a dozen of them that block shots that have found 30 yard wide fairways, so be it.  It was an exciting finish which I don't think would have been less exciting with a few less trees. 

The bigger issue for me personally  is the example it sets for other clubs and their respective members in the area.  We are trying to improve the agronomy, playability, and classic feel of our nearly 100 year old course, as are several other courses in the area (not to mention courses all over the country).  I can already hear the next few discussions at my club about tree removal and every uneducated, tree hugging member will site Sahalee in defense of tree removal (their course is in great shape, you should have trees to shape shots around, they frame the holes, they separate the holes, etc.).  This is by no means Sahalee's problem but it will create more arguments than already exist and make the job that much harder. 

One a side not, it's not exactly the same as ANGC in terms of setting unrealistic expectations for club members but it is similar. 

One last thing, their Superintendent Tom Huesgen deserves a raise and some sort of award.  His ability to grow grass in the dark might be second to none!


+1. Agree with all of this. There are some really stupid trees out there and it would be an improvement if removed, for sure. Not sure if you have played it recently but the limbing up has helped.

Sean Leary

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: KPMG Women's PGA 2016
« Reply #28 on: June 13, 2016, 03:22:55 PM »
I played Sahalee about ten years ago. Part of the claustrophobic feeling is the size of the trees. They are easily the biggest trees on a golf course I ever have played. They have become part of the lore of the course. I'm not sure what I would do with them except keep them the way they are.

the main part of the claustrophobia at Sahalee is that the 3 nines there are narrowly/tightly routed through planned residential development   :o :o

one of the purposes of the trees is privacy

those who haven't played it, should check it out...Seattle is a great place to visit...plus you can play other courses such as CB


Gray,


Don't non-golf related arborists come to study the trees at Eugene due to the size, variety etc[/size][size=78%]? [/size]

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: KPMG Women's PGA 2016
« Reply #29 on: June 13, 2016, 03:40:13 PM »
Brooke H., Lydia K. and Ariya J. did not make a bogey between them in their final rounds. That is rather impressive. ;)

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2016/6/13/kpmg-brooke-lydia-ariya-combine-for-0-final-round-bogeys-1.html
 

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: KPMG Women's PGA 2016
« Reply #30 on: June 13, 2016, 03:40:58 PM »
I'm not sure if they have much pine out there, but if they do....then  lookout for this guy.  Its become an epidemic of sorts in parts of the west.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_pine_beetle

Brad Treadwell

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: KPMG Women's PGA 2016
« Reply #31 on: June 13, 2016, 04:03:49 PM »
There are about a dozen trees there that are flat out stupid in my opinion and the removal of those would much improve the playability of the course for the people that actually play the course on a regular basis (rather than for tour players every 3-4 years) without really impacting their identify.  If they want to keep the other 7,988 go for it.  Sean made some very good points in his earlier post about Sahalee's identity being this forest of 8,000 trees and I'm confident the club will never do anything to change that because of all the sucking up that took place this week on the broadcast, etc..  But again, would the identity really change that much if 5-10% of the right trees were removed?  In the end if Sahalee is the "one off" that has thousands and thousands of trees and a dozen of them that block shots that have found 30 yard wide fairways, so be it.  It was an exciting finish which I don't think would have been less exciting with a few less trees. 

The bigger issue for me personally  is the example it sets for other clubs and their respective members in the area.  We are trying to improve the agronomy, playability, and classic feel of our nearly 100 year old course, as are several other courses in the area (not to mention courses all over the country).  I can already hear the next few discussions at my club about tree removal and every uneducated, tree hugging member will site Sahalee in defense of tree removal (their course is in great shape, you should have trees to shape shots around, they frame the holes, they separate the holes, etc.).  This is by no means Sahalee's problem but it will create more arguments than already exist and make the job that much harder. 

One a side not, it's not exactly the same as ANGC in terms of setting unrealistic expectations for club members but it is similar. 

One last thing, their Superintendent Tom Huesgen deserves a raise and some sort of award.  His ability to grow grass in the dark might be second to none!


+1. Agree with all of this. There are some really stupid trees out there and it would be an improvement if removed, for sure. Not sure if you have played it recently but the limbing up has helped.
I played it about a year ago.  The limbing up has helped.  You can now find your ball and hit it somewhere.  Not sure how much additional light is getting thru but certainly the airflow must be improved. 

BTW, the limbing up is an admission that trees greatly impact their agronomy.  These trees grow 22" in height a year.  Regardless if you like them or not, someday they will have to further address the situation.  I know for a fact they struggle with disease every winter and I'll give everyone one guess why...

Brad Treadwell

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: KPMG Women's PGA 2016
« Reply #32 on: June 13, 2016, 04:13:08 PM »
I grew up in the Seattle area and played Fircrest in the early 60s when very tall old growth fir trees lined the fairways and smaller fir trees had been planted to separate adjacent fairways.   In the mid 60s, I played at Inglewood a few times when tall old growth fir trees lined fairways.  Seattle G.C., Everett G.C., and Tacoma G.C. were established clubs in the area at the time.

Sahalee was built in the early 70s and formed by a group of members who left Inglewood.  The spirit of the times and regional clubs provided a model for a quality club and golf course with a residential development.It should come as little surprise that preserving old growth fir, cedar, and hemlock was integral to the course and consistent with ideas about what would be a first rate course at the time.  I played Sahalee, Inglewood, Seattle, and Fircrest a lot in the late 70s and early 80s.  In the mid 70s, Port Ludlow G.C. was built, along with Canterwood GC in the 90s.  All of them were considered at various times as among the best the State of Washington has to offer.   

More recently, Tumble Creek, Wine Valley, Palouse Ridge, Gamble Sands, and Chambers Bay entered the ranks of the State's best of the best.  These modern courses were built on sites with limited trees and have a markedly different character and quality.

With respect to the older woodland style courses, tree removal is a complicated process.  I can recall when Inglewood removed a large number of old, closely growing trees.  Wind storms in the next couple of years caused substantial blowdown, as trees previously sheltered by wind were exposed and had not developed a root system which would stabilize them in wind.  Their removal and restoration of areas becomes an additional expense.  Tree removal has benefits in terms of better ventilation and light.  Many NW courses remove trees over time to allow more light exposure for greens.

Sahalee had large numbers of trees removed before and again after the PGA was held.Typical of many NW courses is the lone tree standing inside a tree line.  This can serve to frame a hole or define a smaller landing area for a good line of play to a green.  Given the way the modern game has evolved, some are more or less relevant, depending on tee boxes. I have been reading a thread on Oakmont which talks a lot about narrow landing areas and use of ditches, bunkering and penal rough to require precision on each shot.  I have a hard time with complaints about lone trees doing the same thing.  Or ditto for a lone and very penal bunker on a links course.

Another point to remember about Sahalee is that it is a club played by men, women, and families.  A nearby club which opened 15 years ago serves mostly individual members and their guests.  It was built on some forested acreage and farmland.  It has individual trees serving similar functions to those at Sahalee and the other classic NW courses. I have not played Gozzer Ranch in Idaho, but Pine forests and rock outcroppings are part of the terrain.  I would suspect stately trees were retained there and function similarly.

So I think it is important to consider Sahalee in a broader context.  No one would complain about the absence of trees on links courses in Ireland or Scotland.  The site defines and constrains what would work for design. Sahalee has consistently ranked in the top three in our state. The terrain, forestation, vegetation, and climate make for a variety of courses unlike those in other areas of the country.  The Eastern side is very different from the Western side.So it would offer many opportunities to see and play in environments unlike those in other parts of the country.

Charles Lund
Very well written Charles.  In direct response to Inglewood, the course was laid out and constructed on a logged site with very few trees.  It wasn't until the 30's that the membership overplanted the property with 2500+ Doug Firs.  Supplemental tree plantings took place up until about 10 years ago.  Point being Inglewood's original identity and design was far different than Sahalee's which was carved thru a forest.  Reversing the trend at a place like Inglewood is a bit of a slog but we've made initial progress.  Not suggesting any of the NW courses go full Oakmont, just keep the good ones and lose the unnessesary ones.  (See Waverley, Cal Club (not NW but AV Macan origins), etc.  1000-1500 trees can do the same aesthetically as 3000-3500, while doing the agronomy and playability a huge solid.

Charles Lund

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: KPMG Women's PGA 2016
« Reply #33 on: June 13, 2016, 05:30:46 PM »
I stand corrected.  Perhaps it was the size of the fir trees on the drive in or some very large ones taken down in the late 70s and my memory the size of uprooted trees from a winter storm that led me to conclude the site originally had a lot of trees.

I was told that the small mounds on the seventh fairway long ago were from underground portions of tree stumps (and roots) that were still decomposing and created low spots.  I once asked why they didn't fill the low spots and someone told me with that process they would be lower again in a couole of years.

I saw a photo of Fircrest from 1930 or so that showed the 16th or 17th green with Mount Rainier in the background so probably the seemingly large firs on part of the course I recall from the early 60s were younger and transplanted.

I went to the Inglewood website and there is a good history.

You are familar with the course so I would suspect you had a relative who was a member I might have been acquainted with.

In any event, I think to understand Sahalee, you have to think of predecessors in the area and ideas that shaped founding members ideas of what would make a first rate course at that time.

Charles Lund



Sean Leary

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: KPMG Women's PGA 2016
« Reply #34 on: June 13, 2016, 05:46:04 PM »
Charles,


The other nearby club to Sahalee you mentioned before has embarked on a tree removal project in the recent past as well. Many of the  trees that were planted at time of build and subsequently added  after the original design opened are being removed as well. 




Charles Lund

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: KPMG Women's PGA 2016
« Reply #35 on: June 13, 2016, 06:38:18 PM »
Are you soeaking of the Fazio course?

I was aware of some tree removal near 5th green.  Can think of an annoying tree which interferes with third shot on third hole from right side of fairway.

But I thnk tree lines generally tend to be set back far enough to Interfere only with most errant of shots. Exceptions might be narrow portion of fairway closer to green on 4th hole and lone  fir on left of number 8 which stymies direct shot to green from left of fairway.

Tacoma G&CC has many trees enctoaching on play from wrong side of fairway.  They had marked a lot of trees for removal but not these culprits.

Think trees are part of NW golf on western side of mountains.

Charles Lund


Ronald Montesano

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: KPMG Women's PGA 2016
« Reply #36 on: June 13, 2016, 08:02:49 PM »
... I don't see Brooke placing top-five on Sunday, ...


Good call Ronmon!
 ;D


No sooth from this sayer. Great job on her part!!
Coming in 2024
~Elmira Country Club
~Soaring Eagles
~Bonavista
~Indian Hills
~Maybe some more!!

Brad Treadwell

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: KPMG Women's PGA 2016
« Reply #37 on: June 13, 2016, 09:20:17 PM »
Charles -
The Inglewood site was logged prior to it becoming land for a golf course....so those mounds you refer to were caused originally from trees being on the property, so you are correct there. 

Tacoma took out over 100 this off season and Joel has done a good job sorting out a lot of trees around greens over the last decade.  Sounds like more to come, including a few you mentioned.

Trees will never leave the landscape in the NW, but courses have finally started to address the issue this decade, including Fircrest as well.  I can at least say for Inglewood, Fircrest, Glendale, and Tacoma have all removed several hundreds. 

Tim Leahy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: KPMG Women's PGA 2016
« Reply #38 on: June 13, 2016, 10:50:54 PM »
... I don't see Brooke placing top-five on Sunday, ...
Ron, who do you think has no chance in the Open this week? We could all make some cash betting them to win. LOL.

Good call Ronmon!
 ;D


No sooth from this sayer. Great job on her part!!
I love golf, the fightin irish, and beautiful women depending on the season and availability.

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: KPMG Women's PGA 2016
« Reply #39 on: June 14, 2016, 11:48:27 AM »
My opinion is this, disagree if you like. No two clubs in the NW identify more with their trees than Sahalee and Eugene. The amount of tree removal it would take make this crowd happy is never going to happen.  ...


I choose to disagree. Eugene has been removing trees, and from our experience at KP, it sounds like they will be removing more.
Furthermore, you will find members at almost all heavily treed golf courses in the PNW that identify the trees as the most important aspect of the course. An example quote from a member of my course. "The total value of the golf course is in the trees." Another told me Sunday the a golf course should be an obstacle course made up of trees.

"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: KPMG Women's PGA 2016
« Reply #40 on: June 14, 2016, 12:00:54 PM »
To each his own I guess....I too don't see the appeal of hit it straight or else on hole after hole after hole.  At least Eugene CC looks like recovery is possible in most places.

P.S.  I'm partially surprised the US Open went to CB instead of here.  Seems a perfect venue for them with the trees and all.  Just carnoustize the fairways to 20-25 wide and it'd be Far Hills heaven!!

Sean Leary

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: KPMG Women's PGA 2016
« Reply #41 on: June 14, 2016, 04:27:18 PM »
My opinion is this, disagree if you like. No two clubs in the NW identify more with their trees than Sahalee and Eugene. The amount of tree removal it would take make this crowd happy is never going to happen.  ...


I choose to disagree. Eugene has been removing trees, and from our experience at KP, it sounds like they will be removing more.
Furthermore, you will find members at almost all heavily treed golf courses in the PNW that identify the trees as the most important aspect of the course. An example quote from a member of my course. "The total value of the golf course is in the trees." Another told me Sunday the a golf course should be an obstacle course made up of trees.




Yes, all NW tree lined courses members think that the trees are important in keeping their courses difficult enough (which is really what it is all about to them). The two that have the most regional "importance" are Sahalee and Eugene, IMO. They care more about how they are perceived regionally/ nationally than the others. And those courses are very different  from each other in terms of their trees in terms of variety and the housing aspect.  Both can be and have been improved by tree removal. But I don't see either having the type of tree removal to significantly affect the tight feel both have. That is all I am saying.


One positive side for high handicappers for courses like this is that it is often harder to lose golf balls. The big miss hits the trees and comes down. On a wider course with no trees those can be lost balls...