Rolling Green's #12

[Craig Disher]

Rolling Green obviously is serious about tree removal. As good as #12 appears in this view from a year ago,



a little tree cutting can always help.

[mike_malone]

 Craig
   It is important to know that all of the tree removal on #12 was for agronomic reasons-----except for the dark green evergreen on the right.People approached me saying"You must be happy now!!We took down all those trees on #12."
   "No, i said.It saddens me that we need to take down beautiful hardwoods that are out of play.But it is either grass or trees.Which do you want?"(there were many evergreens removed as well)

     We need to address the trees planted after the 60's that have changed the original design so dramatically.When i saw those trees out in the back and right side,i saw the chance to recover that fabulous hazard Flynn designed into that hole----miss to the right on approach to the green and you are dead.

   After much discussion,we removed one strategy hampering tree and moved the creek out to the fairway.I thank those in charge for this BEGINNING.Now complete the job by taking down 2 useless trees.

[Marty Bonnar]

IMHO the trees on the left are doing some good in blanking the view of that obtrusive maintenance(?) building. (It's probably someone's $5million home!!!)

FBD.

[mike_malone]

 This would a good place to put some of our evergreens that are in the wrong place.


  Is it practical to move mature trees within a property?

[John Gosselin]

I can't think of any evergreens at RG that are of any use other than the ones that screen the course from houses or the maitenace facility. Yes, I would remove the row of mature pines between #9 and #12 and any other that may seem contraversial. RG is to scenic to cover up not to mention some of the intresting shots that are not being played now because of the mind-set around making the course tougher with trees.

On #12 there are still two old black pines that are on the green surrounds that should be removed. Personally I would remove enough of the right tree line so you could see the entire hole from the tee.

[wsmorrison]

John,

Great to have you on board!  I'm the guy that hired Pearse away from the club to work in capital markets and now they won't take him back!  Seriously, he's doing very well in a difficult market and he's a great guy to know.  He speaks so well of you, I'm sorry we haven't had a chance to meet.  

I wrote about some of my view of the goings on at RGGC on the par 5 thread.  I agree with you about evergreens...they're fine for the periphery of the course and near the maintenance facility (now exposed from 12 fairway).  In your mind, where do you think Flynn used trees for strategic purposes (RGGC or elsewhere)?

You were a hard act to follow, but Warren is doing a great job and the tree removal work although in early stages is on the right track.  I am a bit worried by all the small trees that have been planted over the years, especially in straight rows as on the left past the bunker between 11 and 9 and behind some greens (11 and others).

Looking forward to seeing more of your posts here and finally meeting you.

Regards,
Wayne Morrison

[mike_malone]

 John
    I am pleased to see your post.Let's hold off on those #9-11-12 trees until we get the secondary line out.Of course i agree.Look at past thread on trees on parallel holes.


  Do you think it is at all practical to move evergreens from within the course to the property lines?

[DPL11]

jgosselin,

Good to see you on GCA, your input on this site will be invaluable.

John is a friend of mine, and one of the finest superintendents that I have ever had the pleasure to brain pick.

Doug Larson