[Adam Warren]

Very early in my time here on GCA, we talked about how at my course we were losing trees to Imprellis poisoning.  Several options were discussed, and only a few areas of concern will have action taken as far as some sort of replacement/hazard/etc. 

Now, as the Green chairman, I have several other areas of concern.  That and some equipment replacement were priorities 1a and 1b up to this point.  I have only been a member a few years, and was not around for what some of the previous chairmen were involved in on the golf course.

One of the previous Green Chair LOVED/LOVES trees.  Needless to say, he got a little carried away and was no student of architecture by any stretch of the imagination.  They are smallish at this point, but most are VERY close to the fairway.  They will never be large and encroach on the lines during his lifetime.  What I am getting at, is we MUST get many of these trees out before they get too large and become very difficult and expensive to remove.  Who might provide guidance on the best way to approach this ( I do not know what role the greenkeeper played in their placement, so want to tread lightly) as well as advice on any related issues?

[PCCraig]

Just chop them down in the winter and blame an ice storm.

[Paul Gray]

Adam,

On no expert of this but I'm currently trying to educate our committee and also politely upset people for a living (and that isn't just me being flippant) so I do have a grasp of delivering news which most won't want to hear.

Firstly, deal in what you are quite happy to present as facts, i.e. this is good architect because of this, that and the other. Be sure to explain it as being universally accepted within architectural circles and not simply a matter of opinion. If you let the necessary work become perceived as simply a different viewpoint (and that it exactly what people will automatically see it as because they have no idea how little they know and it'll help their cause to make the whole thing as cloudy as possible), the facts as you see them will simply be dismissed. Most people are smart enough to realise when there's an educated view and an uneducated one and they hate the idea of being left in the dumb camp. Do however throw them the odd bone, if only to emphasise that everything else you are promoting is fact.

I've personally gone down the route, and since found that it's a route employed by Tom Doak, that you should draw on the support of the great architects. Don't be afraid to literally bring quotes to the table from the likes of Mackenzie. In doing so you make it a debate not between you and others but between the greatest architects in the history of the game and your fellow members. Essentially, politely ask them if they really think they know better than the people that wrote the books in front of them.

Remember in all of this that getting the message across to everyone is crucial. You can't expect people to adopt your viewpoint if your viewpoint doesn't get beyond the committee. If you have a newsletter, write an explanation within. Also email all members with an explanation. Be available to answer questions and be prepared to stand strong. Some people are going to come at you convinced that they are right and you are wrong. Let them rant until they wear themselves out and bring them back to Earth with your facts. Some people will love you for educating them and some certainly won't. Just remember that most people instinctively fear change and are only going to 'get it' when it's all done and dusted, and only then gradually.

And finally, the very best of luck!

[Bill Brightly]

Adam,

Are you in the US? You might invite the USGA agronomist to visit your course, and ask him to comment on trees, including which ones should be removed. As a former Greens Chair, I cam tell you that it is very powerful to be able to tell fellow members that the trees came down on the advice of the USGA (for turf and playability issues.)

[Jerry Kluger]

Just get some photos from Old Town showing before and after tree removal.

[Jason Topp]

Adam - You need to have a few beers, coffee or lunch with your superintendant.  You need to have a very close informal relationship to deal with these types of issues. 

On the trees, you need to know your super's views.  Be sure and make it safe for him to be frank in his opinions.  If that requires spending time just with small talk so be it. When you know he is comfortable being straightforward with you, I would ask about future turf issues.  I suspect he will share many of your concerns but if not, you need to know where he stands. 

Turf health is the strongest weapon in the fight against trees.  Every member is in favor of good playing surfaces.  Your superintendant is much better qualified to discuss turf health issues than you are and you need his support.  Architectual discussions are much less likely to lead to consensus

Bringing the USGA in can undermine the superintendant or be seen as an insult.  Do it if you and the super think it is needed to sell tree removal.  It might or might not be needed depending on your membership.

[JMEvensky]

Adam - You need to have a few beers, coffee or lunch with your superintendant.  You need to have a very close informal relationship to deal with these types of issues. 

On the trees, you need to know your super's views.  Be sure and make it safe for him to be frank in his opinions.  If that requires spending time just with small talk so be it. When you know he is comfortable being straightforward with you, I would ask about future turf issues.  I suspect he will share many of your concerns but if not, you need to know where he stands. 

Turf health is the strongest weapon in the fight against trees.  Every member is in favor of good playing surfaces.  Your superintendant is much better qualified to discuss turf health issues than you are and you need his support.  Architectual discussions are much less likely to lead to consensus

Bringing the USGA in can undermine the superintendant or be seen as an insult.  Do it if you and the super think it is needed to sell tree removal.  It might or might not be needed depending on your membership.

+1

Make sure the Superintendent knows you've got his back--and not just on tree removal.

[Ian Mackenzie]

We just finished going through this.
It was a three year process. I could write pages about this.

Fits, it's NEVER to called "tree trimming" or "tree remediation/deletion".
We reffered to it as a "Trophy tree preservation program" designed to ensure that specimen trees remained healthy and could thrive.

Meanwhile, we removed all "understory" or "sucker" trees that hindered growth, blocked sun and impaired turf health. The goal is to highlight the oaks and elms and get rid of the ash, cottonwoods and silver maples (in Chicago).

We started here:

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/feature-interview/dunlop-white-feb-2005/

http://www.dunlopwhite.com/www.dunlopwhite.com/Restoration_and_Tree_Management_files/GAV2_SHADYTREES.pdf

http://www.dunlopwhite.com/www.dunlopwhite.com/Restoration_and_Tree_Management_files/TriadGolf_TreeRemoval.pdf

Make it also about turf health, sunlight, air flow and less about strategy and you will have a wider audience.
Feel free to PM me.

[Paul Jones]

How many people do you think should make up a Greens Committee.  Should there only be 1 + Super or 5, 10, etc...

[Ian Mackenzie]

How many people do you think should make up a Greens Committee.  Should there only be 1 + Super or 5, 10, etc...

Depends on the club and the culture.
When in doubt, use this as a reference. It says "5-7": http://www.usga.org/uploadedFiles/News_Headlines/GreenCommittee.pdf

There are options:

1. Benevolent Dictator
2. Activist committee that is on same page
3. "Bake Sale Committee" that most clubs have with 10+ members talking about drivel and voting on flowers and benches instead of maintenance schedules and playing conditions.

[JMEvensky]

How many people do you think should make up a Greens Committee.  Should there only be 1 + Super or 5, 10, etc...

The best Green Committee is always an odd number-- and 3 is too many.

Attempting to placate every faction is a fool's errand. Put knowledgeable people on it along with people willing to learn.

The last thing you want is a group of people whose opinions are based on nothing but their own opinions. Solipsism is a killer.

[Paul Jones]

Ian,

Thanks for the link.

JME,

I love that line - "Put knowledgeable people on it along with people willing to learn"

[Paul Gray]

Ian,

Thanks for the link.

JME,

I love that line - "Put knowledgeable people on it along with people willing to learn"

Reminds me about the old Persian quote MacKenzie referenced:

He who knows not, and knows not that he knows not, is a fool. Avoid him.

He who knows not, and knows that he knows not, will learn. Teach him.

He who knows, and knows not that he knows, will fail. Pity him.

He who knows, and knows that he knows, is a wise man. Follow him.

[Bill Brightly]

Adam - You need to have a few beers, coffee or lunch with your superintendant.  You need to have a very close informal relationship to deal with these types of issues. 

On the trees, you need to know your super's views.  Be sure and make it safe for him to be frank in his opinions.  If that requires spending time just with small talk so be it. When you know he is comfortable being straightforward with you, I would ask about future turf issues.  I suspect he will share many of your concerns but if not, you need to know where he stands. 

Turf health is the strongest weapon in the fight against trees.  Every member is in favor of good playing surfaces.  Your superintendant is much better qualified to discuss turf health issues than you are and you need his support.  Architectual discussions are much less likely to lead to consensus

Bringing the USGA in can undermine the superintendant or be seen as an insult.  Do it if you and the super think it is needed to sell tree removal.  It might or might not be needed depending on your membership.

Jason,

Our superintendent has respect for our local USGA agronomist. Perhaps you have not worked with a good USGA rep?

Let's go with the assumption that the super is in favor of tree removal. The average super will want less trees not just to improve turf, but also because trees can make a mess of bunkers and require other tasks such as leave removal and "limbing up."

So bringing in the USGA is one more valuable tool when "selling" the tree management program to the membership. It worked for me when I was Greens Chair...

[Craig Sweet]

In my experience, Greens Committee's and Super's, tend to take a "willy nilly" approach to tree planting.  Most have zero knowledge of the growth habits of the tree's they are planting...final height, shape, speed of growth, root system, fertilizer and pest control requirements...so with no knowledge they plant them where the other trees are.  We started planting trees 15 years ago with the concept in mind that 50 years from now they would be replacing the current 50 year old trees...and the course would look the same in 2050 that it does today.  The only problem was/is the new trees were planted 10-15 yards closer to the current fairway mow lines...far from the original trees.  So, in essence, in 50 years time we will have a much narrower course. It was totally unintended, but that is what the "willy nilly" approach brings.

As someone who has to maintain a golf course I am more concern with the effects of tree planting on turf quality than I am the architecture of the course.

[Adam Warren]

I believe that was the view on the trees that were planted as well by the previous Green Chair.  He just kind of saw a line where some might be good and started getting them placed.  Many of them are barely yards off of fairways.  And some of them are yards off fairways of run off areas, which then lead to uphill lies for the golfer and an impossible punch shot when these trees grow up.  As stated before, it will lead to difficulty in turf health not only for the rough but likely the fairway as well since they will be so close.  Thanks for some of the advice.  Gotta get these suckers out of here.

[Bradley Anderson]

I think it needs to be written into the club bylaws that the committee and the superintendent defer to the club's consulting golf course architect on all matters pertaining to trees. Architects will not force a superintendent to protect a tree if it is compromising turf health.

The superintendent should be allowed to make the decision to remove a tree or portions of a tree if it is unsafe. In those instances the superintendent should have the latitude to hire the services of a professional arborist to perform removal/pruning and to provide his written explanation and recommendation in support of the work.

One further consideration that I like is to make a list of species that are not fit for the property and then begin their removal as funds become available. I have never seen a Silver Maple, Willow, Cottonwood tree that improves a golf hole.

[Charlie Gallagher]

I want to echo Jerry's comment and add that if you want to see the full posibilities and benefits of a tree removal program one should visit Worcester Country Club in Shrewsbury MA. This wonderful Donald Ross hosted the 1925 US Open, the first Ryder Cup, and the 1960 US Womens Open. 14 years ago its fairways were lined with massive maples, oaks, and white pines. The upper part of the course was invaded by the Asian beatle and hundreds of trees were removed and destroyed. At about that time, a heavy ice storm hit the Worcester area and many more trees had to be removed due to the damage caused.
As trees were cut, the membership began to see the possibilities created by thinningl. The wind is far more of a factor in play now, and the long visual sight lines all over the course  present the beauty of its holes from many vistas. Fescue has been planted where long lines of large deciduos growth once stood. The turf at Worcester is much healthier than it once was and its grassed areas get more sun than they did 15 years ago.
Copses of trees are an optimal feature of most parkland courses, but the strategy should come from the land and the achitect's presentation, not tree blockage. I do make exception for the unusual speciman.
My thoughts.

[Roger Wolfe]

In our bylaws...

"Should the Board of Governors retain the services of a golf course designer to
consult on the preservation, enhancement, and maintenance of the course, the annual review of
the master plan by the greens committee shall include consultation with said golf course designer.
No change to the golf course or planning area should be undertaken unless such changes are
consistent with the then current master plan. Any changes to this master plan shall require a two
thirds (2/3) vote of the Board of Governors."

[Paul Jones]

To add on to what Charlie said about Worchester CC... 

Also check out Sleepy Hollow.  The member I played with told me the joke at the club after the tree removal program, now able to see the Hudson River... they will say "Who Put That There".

[Bill Brightly]

In our bylaws...

"Should the Board of Governors retain the services of a golf course designer to
consult on the preservation, enhancement, and maintenance of the course, the annual review of
the master plan by the greens committee shall include consultation with said golf course designer.
No change to the golf course or planning area should be undertaken unless such changes are
consistent with the then current master plan. Any changes to this master plan shall require a two
thirds (2/3) vote of the Board of Governors."

Roger,

That is a great clause. We have one in our bylaws, too. That stops aggressive Grounds Chairs and/or superintendents from making architectural changes to the golf course. So now you tell me: does that clause apply to the planting of trees? The replacement of dead or damaged trees? Tree removal?

As the second in a line of Greens Chairman who took out hundreds of trees, I say no.

[Anthony_Nysse]

 We took down 80 trees last month and about 150 since I have been at Pine Tree. We got our consulting architect involved and also our local USGA agronomist so all our bases were covered if there was any questions of conflicts. We also have the tee shot, landing area and green photos from 1962 showing, in detail, the way PT looked upon opening. Keep in mind, we were an old dairy farm at one time.
 90%+ of the trees removed with 30-40' olives that were all planted in the late 1970's when it was "cool." In fact, they used to have an "Arbor Day" event where the money from the event went to the purchase and planting of trees.  Most of our members think we took down 20+ trees, but ant figure out why the rough is so much thicker and filled in than it once was.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()