1. Stopping grass from growing.

How about overhanging a greenside bunker to the point that a backswing taken to remove yourself from the pit meets with hard wood.

...happened to me a few years ago at Cog Hill's Dubsdread course.

1. Stopping grass from growing.

From growing completely or just from growing well?  I could see every tree being killed under your rule.  When did air space become discounted to the point that it should be free of all obstructions?

Quote from: Mike Sweeney on September 21, 2007, 08:14:59 AM

1. Stopping grass from growing.

From growing completely or just from growing well?  I could see every tree being killed under your rule.  When did air space become discounted to the point that it should be free of all obstructions?

All of these types of questions are situational, which is why you need a good Super and Architect to make the right decisions. When you set up strict rules, everything becomes the same and thus boring.

Supers and architects are simply transitory paid visitors to a club.  I'm not convinced they should have the final say on a tree that may have been a vital part of the local environment for 40 years.  My concern is that trees can be destroyed for such simple issues as sight lines or other obtuse single issues.  

Am I seeing that correctly?  Is the tree just in front of a nice Raynor bunker?  And the one on the right somewhat overhanging into that second bunker up that side?  

I'd suggest, leave the FW wide, chop both trees, leave the gun, take the cannoli...  

As is often the case, the question seeks a simple answer to a more complex problem.  Those who suggest the answer is invariably "remove the tree" are as inflexible and doctrinaire as the tree huggers who would save every tree.  Questions to consider;
1.  Where is the tree located?  Does it limit strategic choices or add to them?
2.  Is the tree healthy?  Is it a specimen tree?  Is it adversely impacting on turf growth in areas where the turf is important e.g. greens, fairways?
3. Does it add or detract from the aesthetic of the hole/course?  Block vista vs. add perspective/backdrop?
4. Does it present maintenance problems e.g. "dirty trees near greens or does it help maintenace issues e.g. trees that do well in wet areas?

Just as an example in response to a prior "rule", some trees are used to require players to either favor one side of a fairway or alternatively to be able to work the ball if they miss.  Thus balls on the wrong side of a fairway may be blocked in whole or in part by trees (for those of you have played my home course Briarwood, #17 comes to mind).  While I might not favor this strategy on every hole, it is legitimate and tests a player's ability to hit shots while offering alternative ways to play a hole.

As in most issues pertaining to GCA there is no hard and fast rule.  Careful analysis with regard to each situation is required.

However I must say that I can't remember an instance where trees planted directly between a bunker and a green in close proximity to the bunker have made any sense.  Either the trees or the bunker should go.

I like trees beyond bunkers between the bunker and the green so the long hitter that flys the bunker does not get a free pass.

All "controversial trees" ought to be summarily axed. I've yet to find one of these that wasn't totally insipid and out of place.

Brad,

What defines a "controversial tree"?  

Phil,

With respect to the 17th at Ozaukee I agree with you.  I don't think the architect intended balls in the middle left of the fairway to blocked from pins on the far left.  

That's not controversial. Everybody at the club loves that one. I think it's the best 150-yard marker in the state.