Tom Doak,
To the architectural addicts on this site and perhaps to others, there's an interest in knowing where the "purity" lies.
Not just on Ross courses, but mostly, on all good to great courses.
"Building Sebonack" is the kind of roadmap or record that helps determine what was intended or perhaps, more accurately, what was built.
I found the book fascinating for a number of reasons, none of which I'll go into.
As a member of a golf course for over 64 years, I've seen a significant alterations over those 64 years, some internal, some external, some approved, others not approved.
Other than tee lengthening, there's something to be said for preserving the "purity" of the original design.
Yes, I know that almost any course can be improved subsequent to opening day, but, where and when does that "process" end ?
When do alterations obscure the original design integrity ?
When does the course lose it's distinctive design ?
When does it lose it's pedigree and transition to a mutt, a quilt work wrought upon the course by dozens of authors other than the original author.
If my son and I return to Streamsong in five years or ten years, do I want to see that which you crafted, or that which you crafted, as modified by others ?
Even if the modifications resulted in improvements, there's something to be said for preserving the original.
Paintings, books and wines don't get modified over time, why should golf courses ?
Now, I realize the unique interactive nature of a golf course versus the above, but, there's something to be said for being able to identify what you did, versus what others did to amend/alter your original design.
I know that it would rankle you if, within a year of opening, someone modified several of your holes.
But, look at it another way.
Wouldn't you want golfers to know what you did, along with knowing what others did to modify your original designs ?
Wouldn't you want golfers to know that certain changes were NOT your doing ?
If I return to Streamsong and see that someone has modified the 5th hole, one of my favorite par 3's in golf, I'll be more than a little vocal about it and claim to all those within shouting distance that Tom Doak would never have disfigured that hole and that it should be restored as he intended, designed and built it.