Pine Valley and Topos

[Mike Cirba]

Here, in the Pinelands, we can see that the gigantic, 40-plus foot, "all-Pine" trees and thick underbrush completely obscure anything one can possibly see in the distance from ground level.  

One could never have possibly seen any of the sandy terrain or undulating landscape or distant features from a passing train during the winter, so I guess the point is made.

Have a nice weekend!  



Here's a larger version..please use the blue bar below to scroll further to the right to see the entire setting.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

So, you are contending that the entire 4,000 foot stretch of track was impenetrably lined with pine trees that were on average 94 feet tall. 
Bryan,

Didn't you look at the photo from 1917 ?
Did you see the dense forest on the north side of the tracks or are you choosing to ignore it.
Do you see any gaps in the forest ?
I don't.

I didn't state that the trees averaged 94 feet in height, I gave you the height those trees grow to.
And, in the 1917 photo, right in front of the tee, you can see pines well above 40 feet in height.
Why are you ignoring the photographic evidence

And, that there were no gaps in that wall of trees. 

Do you see any gaps next to the RR tracks ?
I don't.  I see a thick wall of a dense forest.

That there were no deciduous trees in that line of pines. 

I didn't say that there were "no" deciduous trees, but, even your 2010 photo shows the tracks lined with pines, not deciduous trees.
I'm just using the photo you supplied. Why are you refuting your own evidence ?

I assume that you are not claiming that the jungle-like undergrowth was also 94 feet high. 

Would you cite where I've made that claim.

BTW, how does undergrowth grow in a dense pine forests in NJ?

Shouldn't you be asking that question of Simon Carr
You know it's amazing, you're so quick to accept a vague phantom account, yet you reject contemporaneous eye witness accounts and contemporaneous photos.  Objective you're not.

And that the PV site had not been logged or subject to fire for 100 years before 1910 so that the trees could get to their average height?
Are you blind ?
Look at the 1917 photo, those are tall dense trees, not sparse scorched earth.
No fire or logging took place, based on those photos, yet, you're willing to accept TEPaul's reference to a vague, unsure undated and undefined recollection of an event from someone who wasn't there contemporaneously.  I used to think you were highly intelligent, but, now, I'm starting to have my doubts.  Tell me you're not serious.

With regard to the picture below, how high is the hill on the left relative to the tracks?  To the base of the pines in the foreground? 

How high is the embankment leading from the pond to the tracks?

What was the setback of the tree line from the tracks in 1910?

Do the pictures that you mentioned in your initial post show the pre-construction lay of the land?  Have you been able to get a picture of them or scan them yet so we could post them.  They would be helpful in persuading me and others.

I'll let you figure those things out.

I have no desire to persuade you and others as I would be attempting to persuade you against your will, and after production of the data, you'd be unpersuaded still

[Patrick_Mucci]

Here, in the Pinelands, we can see that the gigantic, "all-Pine" trees and thick underbrush completely obscure anything one can possibly see in the distance from ground level.  

One could never have possibly seen any of the sandy terrain or undulating landscape or distant features from a passing train during the winter, so I guess the point is made.

Have a nice weekend!  

Mike, it's become apparent that you just can't tell the truth, choosing once again to misrepresent the facts/conditions.

The photo you posted was taken AFTER the land was cleared and the golf course built, and the photo was taken from a point high up on the ridge where the 2nd green and 3rd tee sit.

The house in the photo also sits up on a ridge.

Your offering is a gross misrepresentation of the facts/conditions.
But, that's seems to be your modus operandi lately..

[Mike Cirba]

Patrick,

Are you actually claiming that Crump cleared land that wasn't used for the golf course?

The third hole was planned by early 1913 and has always been that way.  The 4th hole was also planned by Crump at this time and flowed in the opposite direction.

Why in the world would he clear trees on land that was never part of the golf course and never planned to be part of the golf course?

We can see with our own eyes what land has been cleared of trees, and it's not the land behind and above the green.

Are you actually claiming that you wouldn't be able to see the house, the sand, or the undulations...even if standing right on the third green?

Did the trees in this section somehow end up stunted due to some strange agronomic phenomenon?   Perhaps a targeted blight??   Perhaps a deceptive lie on Crump and Tillinghast's part to prove you and MacWood are both agenda-driven and ignorant of the facts when it comes to this stuff?

[Mike Cirba]

Jim Sullivan, Jamie, Bryan, Jeff, Paul Turner, and anyone in this thread who is reasonably objective and simply looking for the truth,

I hope this picture answers any remaining questions you might have, and I very much trust it does.

Have a great weekend.

[Tom MacWood]

Mike
When you logically consider the facts, like the fact Crump wasn't playing golf in 1910, and understand what sites Crump was considering prior to the current site, the train window story makes little sense, but then again there are a lot of legends in Philadelphia that make little sense, but if you are emotionally attached to the old train story, feel free...I see no harm.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

A few things in response to your latest diatribe...

First, I rode on the train I pictured a few weeks back.   Not only was it possible to view the topology of surrounding wooded areas, it would have been impossible to miss.   All that is required is a decent setback of the foliage a dozen or so yards from the tracks...which is the case at Pine Valley as well.

No, it's not the case at PV, just look at the 1917 photo.

Second, I don't know how much you actually read versus just typing argumentative nonsense, but Crump was abroad playing the best courses for 3 months at the end of 1910, prior to purchasing the property of Pine Valley.    Your continued use of the term "novice" does not change that fact, or the fact that Crump was a top amateur golfer for years and well versed with the best courses and minds in the game.

Crump was a novice as a golf course architect by any definition, except perhaps yours.
I know a zillion top amateur golfers and quite a number of world class PGA Tour Pros, does that make them accomplished golf course architects ?

Third, I have no idea what your overall point is, but it sounds like you're still contending that Bill Coore routed Hidden Creek by simply walking around.   I was at the same event that you were and like Jim Sullivan, I think you misunderstood him.

First, you're lying AGAIN.  I never contended that Bill Coore routed HC solely by walking the property.
I spent a considerable amount of time with Bill Coore, time you didn't.
And, when it comes to the practice of recollection, mine remains reasonably sharp.

Coore was uncertain whether the pretty flat property where Hidden Creek is located was suitable to build a really good course.  He described how he walked around for a while just looking for little things...a slight rise, a dip, etc  "that looked like golf", and which he might be able to utilize as a feature upon which to build a golf hole.   It sounded to me like he spent a lot of time doing this before actually saying "Yes" to taking on the job.   Essentially, he was trying to determine if the site could produce something he'd be proud of.   Because the site was so flat he spent a great deal of time upfront doing his own due diligence.

The site isn't flat, so you're wrong on that count to start with.
Second, I was the one who asked him the question about routing and hole design, not you and not Jim.
I remember the conversations I had with him, conversations which neither you nor Jim were privy to.
He used the phrase, "felt like golf" not "looked like golf"  and there's a huge distinction between the two that relates to inate talent and feel for terrain.

Yet, I'd bet dollars to donuts that once he said yes the first thing he did was get a topo map to help him.

I'm fairly sure that he saw topos before rendering any opinion.


This contrasts markedly from the Pine Valley site, which has over 100 feet of elevation change on the property.   The fact is THAT elevation change and THAT sandy soil was obvious from Crump's train ride, and interested him enough to take a closer look.

That's your opinion, one heavily biased by your desire to perpetuate a myth.
And, That's not what Simon Carr stated.
Tell me, how do you see sandy soil on property covered with thick underbrush, underbrush so thick it was like a jungle, as Simon Carr described it.

How do you see those elevation changes through the dense forest ?
Just look at the 1917 photo.
Now tell me what you can see north of the Railroad tracks in a passing train ?
Take your time.  Study the photo carefully.   Then tell us, with your X-Ray vision how you can see any soil or elevation changes

We know that it's recorded he took multiple trips out there after his initial discovery (probably some of them involving hunting, as well), and then brought some select friends like Tillinghast to see if they saw the same potential.

When they did, and concurred with his initial positive impressions, he bought the property and THEN had the property surveyed, cleared, and topo maps created from which he worked to route and design the golf course.

Mike, you're fabricating things again.
You would have us believe that the prior owner, the owner of a commercial enterprise, never had the land surveyed ?
Please stop making things up to suit your perpetuation of the myth.

I don't know many people who buy property and then have it surveyed, do you ?

CB Macdonald did much the same thing at NGLA, although you deny the historical facts and contemporaneous accounts there, as well.

So you think that CBM saw NGLA from the passing train ?
You're the one in denial, CBM stated that he found the holes during his initial visit, not years later.

So I really don't understand your overall point at all, and what you're trying to compare and contrast, but essentially they are the same story and same set of processes, with the only difference is that due to the flatness of the site of Hidden Creek, Coore probably had a tougher time being certain of the wisdom of pursuing the site in question than Crump did.

You don't know what you're talking about regarding Hidden Creek and the same thing is true for your understanding at PV.

[Mike Cirba]

Tom,

Sorry, but once again everyone sees your agenda and rejects it...except for Patrick who has his own, similar agenda.

You made a whole lot more sense in your essay days.   Damn, you're a good researcher but you're letting your own biases influence your analysis of the facts and you didn't used to do that.

You should really consider dropping this whole line of agenda-driven posting because your skills are valuable here and you're starting to risk any remaining credibility.

I'm sure you'll disregard what I'm saying here, but I think that's unfortunate, and I think most others here would agree.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

Are you actually claiming that Crump cleared land that wasn't used for the golf course?

Yes

The third hole was planned by early 1913 and has always been that way.  The 4th hole was also planned by Crump at this time and flowed in the opposite direction.

Mike, that's nonsense.
What kept the trees from populating the area of the 3rd hole as you contend ?
Now, you're also contradicting Simon Carr.
By what source can you confirm that the third hole was a sandy oasis void of trees or underbrush when Crump discovered it ?

Why in the world would he clear trees on land that was never part of the golf course and never planned to be part of the golf course?
Crump was uncertain as to where the golf course would ultimately end up, that's why he cleared the property and later envisioned planting thousands of trees to repopulate what he cleared.  Didn't you know that ?

We can see with our own eyes what land has been cleared of trees, and it's not the land behind and above the green.

You can't be that stupid.
Please, reread what I wrote and reread what you wrote.

Are you actually claiming that you wouldn't be able to see the house, the sand, or the undulations...even if standing right on the third green?

The house is invisible from the 3rd green.
It always was.
It's ONLY visible from the top of the ridge AFTER the trees were cleared.


Did the trees in this section somehow end up stunted due to some strange agronomic phenomenon?   Perhaps a targeted blight??   Perhaps a deceptive lie on Crump and Tillinghast's part to prove you and MacWood are both agenda-driven and ignorant of the facts when it comes to this stuff?

your ignorance on this issue is excusable since you're so unfamiliar with the property and the impact on sight lines of tree clearing.

[Tom MacWood]

Mike
Again, if you logically consider the facts, like the fact Crump wasn't playing golf in 1910, the Crump letter of 1912, and understand what sites he was considering prior to the current site, the train window story makes little sense, but if you are emotionally attached to the train myth...I see no harm. And actually I see no harm in locals perpetuating the entire Philadelphia mythology....IMO they are good stories.

[Bryan Izatt]

.............................


BTW, how does undergrowth grow in a dense pine forests in NJ?

Shouldn't you be asking that question of Simon Carr  
You know it's amazing, you're so quick to accept a vague phantom account, yet you reject contemporaneous eye witness accounts and contemporaneous photos.  Objective you're not.

Why should I ask the late Simon carr?  I was asking you.  The answer is that it doesn't grow in dense pine forests, but it could well grow in a  (partly) deciduous forest.

"Vague phantom account"?  Is this Tillie's train story?  Where did I say I accepted it.  I am debating your claim that the topography of the area wasn't visible from the train.

So, are you saying that Carr was a more reliable contemporaneous reporter of events than Tillie?  Why?

.............................

What is this constant reference to TEPaul's fire theory.  I'm (thankfully) not on his e-mail list.  What I posted was from the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.  I, for one, assume that it is factually accurate based on historical research.  Take it or leave it as you wish.

..................................


With regard to the picture below, how high is the hill on the left relative to the tracks?  To the base of the pines in the foreground?  

How high is the embankment leading from the pond to the tracks?

What was the setback of the tree line from the tracks in 1910?

Do the pictures that you mentioned in your initial post show the pre-construction lay of the land?  Have you been able to get a picture of them or scan them yet so we could post them.  They would be helpful in persuading me and others.

I'll let you figure those things out.

I have no desire to persuade you and others as I would be attempting to persuade you against your will, and after production of the data, you'd be unpersuaded still

You never know, I might be persuaded by rational supported argument.  

Let me answer the questions above, since you won't.

The hill ramping up to the left side of the picture is about 50 feet higher at it's peak than the tracks and maybe 70 feet higher than the pond. The trees are nowhere near as tall as the hill.  Maybe they are 25 to 30 feet at most, and they would have been shorter in 1910.  And, pretty scrawny.  

The embankment from pond to RR track looks to be about 15 to 20 feet.  The trees immediately across the tracks do not appear to be any taller than the embankment.

The setback would have been around 25 feet.  Enough so that Crump just might have looked at an angle down the tracks and seen the hills as the train approached them.  Surely he would not have sat immobile looking straight out at 90* to the train, would he?






BTW, in the picture below, do you really think the few pines they left look more than 20 feet high?  Or do you think they were transplants?  And, the forest behind the green up the hill to the house looks to be totally deciduous with only a couple of pines thrown in.

[JESII]

Pat,

At some point you're going to have to back up your statement from the beginning of this thread that you have photos from the time before Crump started doing any work on the course. I doubt they'll help your case or you would have posted them already.

[JESII]

Tom,

You've repeatedly said Crump and Tillinghast didn't even play golf in 1910, let alone make a golf excursion to Atlantic City yet that isn't reported by anyone is it? The articcle say these guys didn't play in the regular tournaments. That does not equate to not playing any golf. In fact the article seems to say Tillinhast actually did win the one tournament he did play. Why would you run with that when it's so clearly not true?

How can you be sure the Pine Valley site was the site of the hunting trip(s)?

[Mike Cirba]

The hunting trips could have easily happened after the train ride.

It would seem sensible to me that if Crump was going to go root around in the woods for a day or so exploring the site he'd bring his gun, as he was definitely an avid hunter.

I do have to admit I enjoy watching these guys and their stories/excuses bumping off the rails like an old pinball machine stuck on tilt.

This one may have set a record for outlandish claims, but that doesn't deter these two in the least! 

[JESII]

Mike,

Your post 179 isn't showing a picture I don't think.

[Mike Cirba]

Jim,

Sorry for the confusion...I was referring to the picture I posted in #175 which shows, during winter, the mix of deciduous versus evergreens, the amount of undergrowth, the amount of visible sand, the height of the trees, the visibility of the undulating land, all from ground level.

To suggest that Crump could see nothing from the train across the property is simply a shameful and transparent attempt to discredit Tillinghast because his contemporaneous reporting at Pine Valley and Merion (not to mention Shawnee) flies in the face of the ridiculous repeated attempts at revisionist history on this site.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bryan, et. al.,

There seems to be a new wrinkle in the train story.

The Philadelphia and Atlantic City Railroad line that runs through Clementon and adjacent to Pine Valley wasn't the main line of the Philadelphia and Atlantic City Railroad, it was a branch line than ran 23 miles from Camden to Winslow Junction, a town Southeast of Clementon that was on the main line.

So, if you were going to Atlantic City from Philadelphia, why wouldn't you take the main line, verus a branch line ?

What's also interesting is that the RR Tracks are about 100' ASL, yet, the land, on both sides of the tracks, north and south of the tracks rises rather quickly to 150' ASL.  It's not as if the land north of the tracks was flat, it isn't.  Perhaps that's where PV gets its name, sitting low between the two 150' elevations.

Bryan,

I know that you want to debate with me.
But, you want to debate strictly for the purpose of disagreeing with me, which is OK,
Unfortunately, you're totally unfamiliar with the area, and are asking me to supply you with sufficient information so that you can formulate an opposite view, and thereby engage in meaningful debate.  Essentially, you're asking me to argue with myself, which means that I'm twice as right

The last time you engaged in a debate with me where you were totally unfamiliar with the area being discussed, NGLA, you INSISTED that you could see the Atlantic Ocean from everywhere at NGLA except the low points.  Then you modified your position to state that you could see the Atlantic from the hill on the 3rd hole..  Neither position is correct, you can't see the Atlantic Ocean from everywhere on NGLA except the low spots.  You and Mike had mistaken the site reported in the newspapers for the current site, yet you insisted that you could see the Atlantic Ocean from everywhere but the low points on NGLA.  And when that position was proven to be totally inaccurate, to save face, you picked another location, which also proved to be incorrect.

I enjoy jousting with you, I think your bright and linear in your approach, but, I can't be a ventriloquist, supplying both sides of the debate.

What no one seems to want to address is how the elevation for the bulk of PV sits high up above the RR Tracks, making it invisible if there were NO trees.

It's impossible to see the 13th hole, the 12th, the 11th, 10th, 9th, 8th, 7th, 6th, 5th, 4th, 3rd.

You might, and I'll stand on the roof of my car next to the tracks to see, you might be able to see parts of # 1, # 2, # 18 and # 17 if there were NO TREES.  

I'll take pictures from the tracks so that you can judge for yourself.
I'll have to send them to you to post since I don't know how to do that.

Stay well

[JESII]

What's also interesting is that the RR Tracks are about 100' ASL, yet, the land, on both sides of the tracks, north and south of the tracks rises rather quickly to 150' ASL.  It's not as if the land north of the tracks was flat, it isn't.  Perhaps that's where PV gets its name, sitting low between the two 150' elevations.

That must have been quite a site!

Traveling through the dead flat pinelands of south Jersey and all of the sudden you're riding between two large, undulating, sandy hills with abundant natural water. Now that you're considering buying land to build a golf course I wonder if you might go have a closer look...

[Jeff_Brauer]

Pat,

Again, I don't think he had to see any specific holes to see the land had hills and sandy base, vs flat and clay, which would spur his interest.

Secondly, I checked the history and maps of the Philly and Atlantic City RR.  The line through Clementon WAS built as a mainline in the 1870's.  There were many line and railroad consolidations over the years.  Are you sure it was not a main line in 1910 when Crump first went by it on rail?

Of course, the big question in all this is where is the evidence that Tillie decided to make things up, tell lies, etc?  Again, I agree with TMac's essay analysis - there is probably truth to all the stories, and they combine somehow.  If Tillie wrote it, we can presume Crump told him about it.  We cannot presume that he and Crump were lying by using 100 years later "logical analysis" absent any real facts, especially given some of the agenda driven, fact absent analysis of the two main perps here.

[Mike Cirba]

Patrick,

Where do you come up with this stuff?

The Clementon and Sumner train stations were on the main route to Atlantic City.

[Mike Cirba]

Pat,

By the way, you may want to find yourself a more credible source.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,

Again, I don't think he had to see any specific holes to see the land had hills and sandy base, vs flat and clay, which would spur his interest.

How would he see that if the land was a dense forest with undergrowth so thick it was like a jungle ?

Secondly, I checked the history and maps of the Philly and Atlantic City RR.  The line through Clementon WAS built as a mainline in the 1870's.  There were many line and railroad consolidations over the years.  Are you sure it was not a main line in 1910 when Crump first went by it on rail?
I"m pretty sure that the Clementon line was classified as a branch line.
Remember, it didn't even have a station, large or small, just a shelter and platform.
That hardly sounds like a main line stop.
In the 1880's there were only 25 residences in the entire area of Clementon, so again, why would you create a main line stop there ?

I believe the main line went through other towns.
Clementon is listed as a branch line, and, I'm hoping to get detailed historical info on the subject.


Of course, the big question in all this is where is the evidence that Tillie decided to make things up, tell lies, etc? 

That's a false assumption on your part.
Just because someone's statement may be incorrect doesn't mean that they lied.


Again, I agree with TMac's essay analysis - there is probably truth to all the stories, and they combine somehow. 

It would seem logical that GAC had a prior degree of familiarity with the site.
It would also seem logical that the pursuit of due diligence with respect to site selection would lead him to take a trolley or a train to the site for further inspection.

If Tillie wrote it, we can presume Crump told him about it. 

Or that a third party told him about it.

We cannot presume that he and Crump were lying by using 100 years later "logical analysis" absent any real facts,

YOU and YOU alone are the one presuming that.
No one, other than you has suggested that AWT was lying.

especially given some of the agenda driven, fact absent analysis of the two main perps here.

I"ve asked you several times to define or outline my agenda and to date, you've been unable to offer any credible evidence regarding this thread.

Mike Cirba's stab in the dark had me trying to "goad" TEPaul into returning to GCA.com.
I've emailed and spoken to TE about returning and the last thing I would do would be to try to goad him to return.
So, please, tell us, exactly what my "agenda" is.

Thanks

Going back to the original post on this thread, which Mike Cirba hijacked in his reply # 1, the question remains, was PV more a product of topos, or field work.

With the site NOT being cleared until construction began, and Simon Carr's eye witness account that the property was woods with underbrush so thick it was like a jungle, AND, GAC being a novice, virtually inexperienced in any phase of GCA, it's unlikely that he knew how to familiarize himself with the land, like Bill Coore.

Are topos, inclusive of the red/blue topos really the genesis of the most unique 18 holes on the planet ?

[Mike Cirba]

Patrick,

As I mentioned in my first post, the answer to your question isn't something folks here have to guess at, or make up stories about.

Tillinghast documented the entire process contemporaneously and did so incredibly well.

Crump found the land on a passing train, likely hunted it when he went out multiple times to walk the property, had the property cleared and topographically mapped, sought advice from all sorts of local, regional, and even international expert sources, and as most of the projects that yield greatness show, spent enormous personal time on the site working out different routings and designs and spent the remainder of his life trying to perfect it.

I'm not sure how or why you seem mystified by this, as it's virtually the same method that CBM (possibly less train rides and hunting although it's very possible that's where he first spotted NGLA as well along the Shinnecock Rail Line) followed at NGLA.   In fact, the parallels between the two projects are quite stunning, including the agronomic failures.

As far as the train stations, you can find the Atlantic City Line stations on the following link.   The Sumner Station later became known as Pine Valley.   The stop immediately proceeding it in Clementon, 1.4 miles from the Sumner stop off the first fairway of PV, was a lovely station which can be seen in the old postcard.   

By the way, notice the size and type of trees along that station.

http://www.sjrail.com/wiki/index.php?title=Station_Pages_for_the_Atlantic_City_Railroad

[Patrick_Mucci]

What's also interesting is that the RR Tracks are about 100' ASL, yet, the land, on both sides of the tracks, north and south of the tracks rises rather quickly to 150' ASL.  It's not as if the land north of the tracks was flat, it isn't.  Perhaps that's where PV gets its name, sitting low between the two 150' elevations.

That must have been quite a site!

Traveling through the dead flat pinelands of south Jersey and all of the sudden you're riding between two large, undulating, sandy hills with abundant natural water. Now that you're considering buying land to build a golf course I wonder if you might go have a closer look...

Jim,

You've driven down East Atlantic Ave more than a few times.

Tell me what you can see, north and south as you make that drive.

I suspect, the same things that could be seen in 1910, .... dense woods as Simon Carr described.

I'm sure that you're aware that the elevation changes are offset and and not immediately adjacent to the tracks.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

As I mentioned in my first post, the answer to your question isn't something folks here have to guess at, or make up stories about.
Then why are you offering your fabricated version ?

Tillinghast documented the entire process contemporaneously and did so incredibly well.

No, he didn't, and your use of newspaper articles as irrefutable sources has proven to be seriously flawed.
You even admitted so yourself.

Crump found the land on a passing train, likely hunted it when he went out multiple times to walk the property, had the property cleared and topographically mapped, sought advice from all sorts of local, regional, and even international expert sources, and as most of the projects that yield greatness show, spent enormous personal time on the site working out different routings and designs and spent the remainder of his life trying to perfect it.

That's solely your fabricated version.

I'm not sure how or why you seem mystified by this, as it's virtually the same method that CBM (possibly less train rides and hunting although it's very possible that's where he first spotted NGLA as well along the Shinnecock Rail Line) followed at NGLA.   In fact, the parallels between the two projects are quite stunning, including the agronomic failures.


They're not remotely similar.
CBM found his site in short order and developed it quickly.
GAC took years to find his site and nearly half a decade to develop it.

As far as the train stations, you can find the Atlantic City Line stations on the following link.



I found that website before you did.
Notice Clementon's station's size.
What's the date of the timetable and what's the date of the postcard ?
Hardly an honest representation of PV 

The Sumner Station later became known as Pine Valley.  
The stop immediately proceeding it in Clementon, 1.4 miles from the Sumner stop off the first fairway of PV, was a lovely station which can be seen in the old postcard. 
There's a conflict.
The Clementon station is listed as a platform and a shelter.
The post card depicts a different structure.

The Clementon line is listed as a branch, not the main line. 

By the way, notice the size and type of trees along that station.
As to the size of the trees, the photo is taken in the middle of the town of Clementon.
You're incapable of being intellectually honest.
How could you represent or rather misrepresent the equating of the town of Clementon and the site at PV adjacent to the tracks ?

As to the map on the link below, I think you'll find that Clementon and Sumner are on the black line, not the red line.[/size]

http://www.sjrail.com/wiki/index.php?title=Station_Pages_for_the_Atlantic_City_Railroad

Date of the station pages ?


Date of the postcard.
I found a photo of the station in 1910 and the area doesn't appear to be built up as much.