Take a bite out of Rustic Canyon.

[DMoriarty]

Earlier this month the storms took a substantial chunk out of the 11th hole at Rustic Canyon.  As we are wont to do, a few of the regulars were arguing about what, if anything, should be done to repair or restore the damage.  I thought it might be interesting to hear some of your thoughts . . . .

Should they . . . .
 . . . Restore the hole to its previous condition . . .
 . . . Leave the hole as is . . .
 . . . Leave as is and mark off as environmental hazard (play as 26-2, without option of recovering ball or entering and hitting) . . .
 . . . Leave as is, but turn the washed out area into bunkers and waste area . . .
 . . .  Use the damage as an opportunity to build a pond, with fountain.

For those that arent familiar with the hole, it measures about 455 yards from the back marker . . . plays slightly uphill . . . is the most difficult hole in the winter wind, sometimes playing as a three shot hole for even the longer hitters.   The green is bisected by a spine running from front to back (approx. added in the second photo.)


The hole before fire and flood damage:


An approximation of the hole after the damage:


A photo taken before debris cleaned up:
 The washed out area extends to about 125 yards from the green.

[paul cowley]

...looks good to me.

[Brian Noser]

I think do not add a pond but a huge waterfall cascading down the entire left side. that would be nice.

Dave you going out there this weekend? I am playing sunday with ryan simper at 9:00 my lkast time at rustic. dissapointed that is has to be only 14 holes but better than none at all.

oh I think it should be left alone makes you think even more about the tee shot.

[Lou_Duran]

. . Leave the hole as is- let the whispy natives take over, but keep it thin and lean (no irrigation after the initial plantings or fertilizer).

Come to think ouf it, a nice pond with plastic swans and an elaborate water cannon would be pretty cool and so SoCal!

[Steve Lang]

 

Humor me.. why is the 'big" drainage allowed to run across the fairway in the first place and hasn't this happened several times already?

[peter_p]

Can you use rip-rap to stabilize the left side of the hole? It seems that the water is being diverted towards the hole. Somehow, it needs to be channeled or directed away from 11th. Don't waste money. Move the cart path more to the right for bailouts.

[TEPaul]

All I can say is you can't believe how much nuancy concept thought GeoffShac put into that hole (#11), particularly a natural contour or whatever that existed on the inside left in the LZ and how that little subtelty might play out in how the green was arranged. Of course that was before construction so I don't know if that got done as he envisioned it then. I suggest you get in touch with GeoffShac about this--if he's still willing to talk about it!

[Mark_Fine]

Not to worry.  Construction on the course should be finished by mid-March (with good weather) and the full course re-opened hopefully by June 1st.  I'm sure it will look fantastic!
Mark

[John_Cullum]

Should they . . . .
 . . .
 . . . Leave as is and mark off as environmental hazard (play as 26-2, without option of recovering ball or entering and hitting) . . .

That is not an option. Under the rules of golf, only a governmental agency can declare an area environmentally sensitive. For God's sake, don't even think about asking a governmental agency to look at anything on your property.

[paul cowley]

All the areas I have seen marked 'environmental hazards' seem foolish to me.

[Brent Hutto]

When I encounter an environmentally sensitive area a little Gold Bond powder usually does the trick.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dave Moriarty,

Isn't that decision somewhat dictated by the clause that may trigger the payment of insurance proceeds ?

Off the top of my head, and as a totally unqualified observer, if the debri field wasn't excavated, where would the excess debris go if another event occured ?

It would seem prudent to direct debris to a collection area that could be easily excavated, rather then have additional debris spill over to create further damage.

[ed_getka]

#11 is one of my favorite holes at Rustic. If left as is now, the hole would be virtually unplayable into the wind. It would be almost impossible to run a ball into the green with that thin neck. I would try to get back to where it was.
Tom Paul,
   I would imagine that the hole turned out as Geoff had envisioned it originally. A challenging driving hole, that if you bailed out right left you with a long difficult approach. A great daring drive left you a mid-iron, but it was still challenging to be on the proper side of the spine in the green. Even when you were on the green there were few automatic 2 putts. A great hole.

[Joe Perches]

Should they . . . .
 . . . Restore the hole to its previous condition . . .
 . . . Leave as is, but turn the washed out area into bunkers and waste area .

Making it a waste area would make it a very, very difficult hole for most players (ie: me).  I think that that area could be narrowed, but some restoration is required.  I normally play a running straight 3 to a full but still running 6 iron into the green.  I would not be able to do that for a normal play as is.  There is now nearly no landing area.  Without some restoration of the fairway, only big right hand draws are reasonable plays into what would be a very difficult green, especially in the back left position.

RC is supposed to open tomorrow.  I hope to play.  If I do, I'll give a report.

[David Kelly]

The second picture is larger than the first so that skews the perspective of how much room there is still available on the right side.

In my opinion if they leave it the way it is now then the only option would be to make it a waste area and allow golfers to play their ball from there.  In that case they would have to stabilize and lower the wall that was caused by the erosion to allow access to the area and to prevent further erosion.  However, if it is a playable waste area what will protect it from the rushing water from the next hard rains?

If it is marked off as an environmental hazard then much of the design intent of the hole will be lost - the left side waste bunkers, the option of running a ball into the green, being able to bust a drive and flirt with the left side when the conditions allow it, and having an area available to lay up to in heavy winds.

[rjsimper]

I think leave it...it makes it more challenging if the wind is down or blowing up-canyon, and it just makes it a beast if its blowing down canyon - I can deal with a beast every now and then.

[Mike_Sweeney]

Great fun question. My instict without ever seeing RC is to leave it as is, and make a final decision ina year after you see how it plays.

[RJ_Daley]

Do what you need to do to shine the wash up, making it a waste-sand wash.  But, don't allow it to become one of those enviro-areas where you can't go play your ball.  Don't put too many rocks in as rip rap because I think it would draw snakes.  

It should be playable waste catching top shot tee balls.  It looks like the rest of the fairway is in tact, and that the basic bite-off challenge is still there with enough rough semi- rough bail out right.

[Allan Long]

David,

Being that number 11 was one of my favorite holes at Rustic, my first thought is to restore the hole to its previous condition. However, the one thing that I really liked about the hole is the tee shot. In its current state it looks like the tee shot is not effected as much as say a second shot. If that's the case I wouldn't be crushed if they let the hole play as it
is. But ultimately, all things considered (and I am not footing the bill so it is easy for me to say) I would prefer to see it restored.

[Brian_Gracely]

These are from Ran's profile.  I need to see if I can find the pictures that Carlyle took from KPIII.  The second picture probably gives the most similar angle to David's (bottom)








#11 was my favorite hole at RC, so I'd probably vote to restore iit back.  The orientation of the tee-box set you up to hit a draw and flirt with the ravine, but your mind told you to consider the bail-out right..especially into the wind.  Having the chunk missing might be too large a visual obstacle to encourage the plan down the left side.

[DMoriarty]

Interesting comments . . . When I posted I was thinking in terms of a discussion of the architectural merits from a playability perspective as opposed to an erosion damage perspective, but I guess the latter topic is inevitable.   First things first . . .

I agree with David Kelly  that the modified photo above (2nd pic) is a little misleading.  I don't think the washout extends quite so far toward the green.  Probably something more like it is now, above.

After looking at it a few times, my sense is that there is still room to bounce the ball short of the green and run it up, but that the shot would now be much more intimidating.   Time will tell I guess.  

If I had been asked whether to make the changes before the rains, I'd definitely said "No.  Why screw up a perfectly good hole?"   But now I am not sure they should put it back, for the same reason.    In my mind the key to the success of the course is that the designers had the sense to leave well enough alone, without extensive tinkering.   Now that the fairway has changed, I hope they at least leave it to see how it works-- with the addition of some waste bunkers like the ones that were already on that side.  

As for the ramifications of the new area on the tee ball, right now the new area is not visible from the tee.  Maybe it will be if they put in some waste bunkers, I don't know.   It is debatable whether the new trouble is drivable from the back tee (which hadnt been built when you played.)   I suppose with a helpful wind a big hitter could rip a drive well over 300 on an aggressive angle and get there,  but as the hole plays around 455 up hill I dont think there will be too many drives in there.   It is easy to forget how much width there is at Rustic . . . even with the new trouble a big hitter still has probably 20-30 yds fairway on the right.  Besides, as I am not one, I really dont mind giving the big hitter a little more to think about off the tee.

As a few point out, the real issue with the trouble will be second shots, especially into the wind.   Instead of just bombing away and hoping to get the the green, many players will now forced to lay up short or right of the trouble.   While this might have been there best play even before, I doubt many of them will like the change.  

Even with this downfall, I'd like them to leave it (as a waste area) and see how it works.  If it proves to be too difficult and/or plugs up play, then consider putting it back.  

Brian the second photgraph you is from pretty close to the same spot I was standing when I took my photo above.  My distances are skewed because I used a wider angle lense to get the whole washout.  

[DMoriarty]

As for the other issues, I think the hole was properly placed and properly built.  

This is by no means a low spot on the course.  In fact it sits around 175-200 feet higher elevation than the lowest point on the course.  And while the area that washed out was slightly lower than the rest of the fairway, the entire fairway was well above the old wash, especially the main channel of the wash (which is on the other side. closer to 14.)  The erosion occurred when the water busted over and out of the main channel and created a new secondary channel toward the 11 fairway.  

Perhaps one has to actually see the land in person to understand the volume and force of water to cause this.  To give you an idea of the dimensions of the wash, here is a photo taken from No. 11 ( a little past the tee) toward the 14th green (again with a wider angle so the distance is off, but you get the idea):


The small black rectangle visible just just left of the wall cut into the opposite fairway was the bridge which was next to the 14th tee.   The main channel of the wash was and is on that side.  

The channel by No. 11 looks like it was formed when the main channel overflowed and was virtually non-existant before the fires and flash floods.  

Steve Lang,  I am not sure what you mean by the "'big' drainage" being allowed to run across the fairway.   The drainage ran parallel to the fairway, not across it.    No. 11 has not washed away before.  There was damage last spring from a flash flood (mostly on the lower part of the course) and a little damage this year before this storm.  Both those events occured after the fires.  

Before the fires, I dont think that this happened before, for at least a very long time.  
-No one remembers anything like it.  
-I am told that the county classified this as a 200 year flood.
-I am not a biologist, but before the fires and flash floods I am pretty sure that was wash was full of mature chaparral, which takes over 20 years to reach maturity.  So there has not been an event of this magnitude in at least 20 years.  
_____

Peter,  I agree that the water needs to be diverted away from this hole.  This shouldnt be too difficult because the split between the main channel and this overflow channel is not far above this hole.
_____________

Patrick,  Not sure what you mean by the debris area?  There was a large collection area at the end of the course.  It quickly filled with silt and helped cause the damage to the lower part of the course.  

_____
Shivas.   On the left is the wash, and on the other side of that is the 14th through the 17th holes.   I know it is hard to believe, but this is pretty high ground we are looking at.   The water was roaring and it was high.   For example water poured out of the wash and onto the 14th tee, which sat at least 10 feet above the edge of the wash, and probably 11-15 feet above the main channel.  

There isnt much that will stop a 6 to 8 foot wall of water moving at a rapid speed.  

[ed_getka]

David,
  Are you sure that #11 is 175-200 feet above the lowest point on the course? If so, how high is #16 tee above the lowest point?

[DMoriarty]

Ed, what I have always been told is that the 13th green is just short of 260 feet higher than the 4th green, with the half the rise coming on the front.  These numbers check out on elevation maps.  I think the 16th tee is around 300 feet above, or maybe just less.  My estimates might be a tad conservative for this portion of No. 11.

[Brian Noser]

dave the closest I have been to the green on 11 was about 75 yards at an agreesive line. from the old back tee. I am guessing from the new back tee it will be very tough although posiable to get it to it if it starts about 125 yards from the green. I am playing sunday so I will see how hard I have to hit it to get it to if possiable.