I agree that the "tree after the bunker" scenario is much worse.
But even in the above picture, I understand the point of the hazard....yeah, you should avoid it, don't go over there.....but what is the point of the bunker here? Doesn't the tree alone serve the purpose of intimidation and penalty for making a bad shot? What kind of shot is even going to find that bunker? It seems to me only a badly struck shot (i.e. low running tee shot that goes under the tree) or someone who is already stuck under the tree after their tee shot, trying to keep it low and punch out and catches a lip of the bunker. I don't see many shots clearing the tree and dropping into the bunker.
This is all I'm really getting at with the double hazard here. I guess my frusteration is even compounded because I work in maintenance. At the other course I worked at that had the same situation, maintaining the bunker was a waste of time. The tree knocked down every shot headed that direction. It was the best looking bunker on the course because no one was ever in it! But we still had to edge it, rake it, blah blah blah......I would have loved to fill it in and just make it a grass bunker!
Just like overbunkering a course......is there really a point? Overbunkering might even been seen as aesthetically pleasing in some cases.....but this tree and bunker combo?