Dam; tom drew a distinction between natural and man made hazards. I doubt that very many will have a problem with pebble's oceanside holes. Bobby Jones was another who disliked water hazards in his famous comparison where he likened ordinary hazards to automobile crashes and water to a plane crash. He notee that in an auto crash, you had achance to walk away.. I think there is a real fascination first because, done properly, they are pretty to look at. Second, they are often part of the "hard is good" philosophy. Particularly when they are built near a green, they require a well hit shot to carry them. Slight mishits which might run near or even on a green are penalized. That said, from my perspective, there are no hard and fast rules. From time to time, the ground may lend iself to a water hazard even where none exists and, artfully done, theu can be quite interesting.
Two other points. If a pond is needed for irrigation purposes, and there is not an out of the way place to hide it, then an artful use of the pond is warranted. Perhaps a diagonal carry off of a tee creating strategic interest is useful. Second, on renovations, Mark Mungeam told me that once a hole has water on it, members won't let you remove it. Thus sometimes improving or moving an artifical hazard is the way to go. But on balance, all things being equal, I am in the camp that says that recovery shots create some of the greatest interest in the game for players of all skill levels and thus with respect to water hazards, I believe less is more. If the main beef is with searching for lost balls in tall rough, maybe the rough is too tall in the wrong places.