[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

Some suggestions as to why:

It's another straw man.

There is no point discussing it any more.....

As for your demand that I address what you think is your big theory, no thanks.  It has all been covered before.  Believe what you want to believe. 

it really doesn't make much of a difference to his understanding.

I'm sorry, but I couldn't resist and I'm getting punchy late Friday afternoon.

By the way, when is the moron convention next year?

And on another topic, who do we like in the game 7's this weekend?

Tampa or NY Rangers?

Ducks or Hawks?

I have a dilemma - Hawks from my hometown are my second favorite team. However, Jay Flemma had me on his podcast last October and I predicted Ducks and Lightning to be in the finals.....so I find myself rooting for the Ducks just so I will be right.  Sort of like me rooting for an October routing, so I can be right. (just to tie it back.....)

[DMoriarty]

Mike, I've been answering your questions for weeks, including a bunch today. But you continue to ignore even the most simple questions.   You ask constantly but answer rarely. If you want to play games regarding a couple of simple questions, that's up to you.

Jeff and Mike, I've explained why I don't want to get into a long discussion about the state of the supposed housing component in March 1906.  I understand your points, but In my opinion,  they were just repeating the same old information. I just don't think it matters as to the question of what happened at ngla.

I've also repeatedly explained my thoughts on the Whigham article. I could be wrong.  

What else do you want from me? What else is there to say about these issues? We disagree.

My questions to Mike or specifically addressing something he said not long ago. They go to the port of the NGLA matter.

[MCirba]

_______________________________________________________________________________
Now how about you answer my questions:

1. How did they know what to clear if they hadn't marked the borders?

2. Why do you have them clearing land that they did not own?

David,

I finally have a minute (and a beer) while waiting for my wife.  Let me give you my best guess based on learning some things here during recent discussion between you, me, and Jeff.

It's why I say I think we're not far apart except perhaps the housing piece but that's ok.  If we ever find the original sales agreements that will hopefully clarify matters.

First to the second question.  Like you, I really don't believe they cleared the land prior to securing it.  That would be pointless.  But my related question was based on the erroneous assumption that they would need to clear the land to create a detailed enough survey map for CBM'S architectural needs, or 2 to 3 foot intervals.  Jeff corrected me and showed me that would be labor intensive and time consuming but possible.

But also like you, and I hope I'm reading you correctly, I don't think the property was surveyed for golf purposes by Raynor or anyone else prior to securing it.   

Now, to segue into your first question.

I also don't think anyone staked out the original 200 acre agreement.  Since no one had any plans (including the owner) for the 450 acre parcel, what would be the point?  Its not like it's going anywhere and you'd have to do all that work again after the hole boundaries were finalized.

Instead, I think CBM did some calculations and felt that 200 acres would easily encapsulate the landforms he identified, knew his starting and ending point a little way from the Shinnecock Inn, knew he wanted to skirt Bullshead Bay for his Eden and Cape, knew he wanted to get out to the bluff over the Peconic Bay and calculated 2 mile long by 4 acres wide to get to his desired purchase agreement total of 200 acres and knew that would be big enough.

I'm thinking that clearing and construction happened somewhat in tandem and I'm intrigued by your idea that he sited the greens first and look forward to that discussion.    In the end, I think he needed to buy 205 to get everything he wanted which was a pretty good estimate, but clearly not a good estimate for including both golf and housing.

I think as he got onto the land his first concern was the golf course and as his routing developed as the land was cleared he went hog wild.  For an out and back routing, he show little concern for drawing within the lines and it looks to me as though the boundaries were plotted in sections as the holes and routing evolved during construction. 

Hope this helps and I'll explain further if this isn't clear as I type on a phone but that should hopefully move us forward.

[DMoriarty]

Mike while I appreciate your answer, I am still having trouble figuring out how you the order of the things I asked about. Part of what might be happening is that I think you may be confusing when the acquired an option and thus "secured" the property (in the Fall) with when they finally took possession (in the Spring.)  Also, you've changed so much of your position so drastically, that I am not sure I am accurately putting it back together. So as to try and make sure we are on the same page, I've tried to put my understanding of your position on these issues into a simple chronology:
  Pre-Option.  You believe there were no written plans, no drawings, no maps, no surveys, and CBM and HJW had not staked the land or the course.
  Option (Dec/Nov.)  You believe that CBM acquired an option without either party having surveyed or staked out the approximate borders of the parcel.
  Pre-purchase (Dec/Nov06 to May/June07)  You believe, that even while planning the course, NGLA never staked or surveyed the approximate boundaries of the property or survey the boundaries.
  Purchase (May/June07)  After the planning was already complete and land purchased, you believe that CBM and HJW finally to staked and surveyed the boundaries of the course.
  Post-Purchase You that NGLA began constructing and clearing the golf course.  

Do I have it correct?

A few questions:
- You've been insisting for years that couldn't possibly have planned the course course before clearing it.  You now seem to be saying the opposite?  Do you now believe the course was planned before they cleared the property?
- When exactly do you believe the property was first surveyed "for golf purposes?"  (And what does that mean, anyway?)  If before the purchase, then how did they know where to survey "for golf purposes" if they had never marked off or surveyed the boundaries?  
- Do you actually believe that the agreed to a transaction involving real property without every identifying, marking, or surveying the land in question?

Some comments and questions specific to your post:

But also like you, and I hope I'm reading you correctly, I don't think the property was surveyed for golf purposes by Raynor or anyone else prior to securing it.

You are not reading me correctly. The Globe article indicates that maps with elevations had been created and sent abroad.  I don't know what exactly these were (contours, centerline elevations, rough sketches with elevation estimates, or something else) but according to the article something had already been done along these lines, and it was for "golf [course] purposes" else why send them abroad to the advisors?

I also don't think anyone staked out the original 200 acre agreement.  Since no one had any plans (including the owner) for the 450 acre parcel, what would be the point?  Its not like it's going anywhere and you'd have to do all that work again after the hole boundaries were finalized.

"The point" would be to identify the parcel subject to the option.  Generally, identifying the property subject to the option isn't just a good idea, it is a legal requirement.  

"The point" would also be to give CBM an idea of the boundaries of parcel for when they were out there planning the golf course. How do you suppose CBM could have known if he was even within the agreed upon area if he had not staked out the boundaries?

And they would NOT have to do all the work over again.  They'd only have to adjust the borders where changes were to be made, if any.

For an out and back routing, he show little concern for drawing within the lines and it looks to me as though the boundaries were plotted in sections as the holes and routing evolved during construction.

Drawing within the lines? Haven't you been saying that there were no lines whatsoever?   And haven't you been writing that the planning was complete before the lines were drawn?

[DMoriarty]

Regarding the issue of when the property was mapped and the borders at least roughly drawn, Bryan's "source" contains a passage indicating that in 1906, CBM was invoiced by a "draftsman" named W.B. Duncan at the end of 1906 for "tracing of the property, Shinnecock Hills Club."  

Despite the obvious potential confusion, in its early years CBM's project was sometimes referred to as the Shinnecock Hills course or club.

[Bryan Izatt]

I did notice the "tracing" story.  What do you suppose the "tracing" was?  Was the draftsman creating a copy of an existing document?  Or, was he creating the tracing that would be used to create the blueprint?  Or, something else ...........

[Bryan Izatt]

Back in 2003 George Bahto started a thread that was about elevations at NGLA.  It was about the blueprint and he summarized:


"You know I had the original blueprint for NGLA in my possession - the picture of it is one page 63 of my book.

This blueprint has no fairways drawn in, was the original routing beginning on present #10, and had the original name of the course as  “The National Golf Course of America”.

But best of all it has yellow crayon marks, apparently sketched in by Macdonald, indicating where he was thinking of placing his hazards. These marks were not exactly detailed but were done as an artist would, just sort of side strokes of a crayon sketched in - it is sort of a “working drawing.”

There are also India ink marks on the blueprint, blackening in some areas of original yellow marks, as if he was negating earlier ideas.

No fairways drawn, but there were elevation marks along the line of play of each hole - if I had to guess, I would say they were about every 25-feet.

I recorded them all.

The numbers ranged from a low point of +3 ....  (presumably feet - the “key” (scale) is missing from the plan)   

 .....   to high point of +57 ........    (let me qualify the “high point” number by saying I am not taking into
account the Alps Hill area on present hole #3).


Later on he says there is no "key" for the blueprint and no date.  Too bad.


Another interesting tidbit for the clearing and agronomic fanatics is the following CBM quote that George provided (no source provided)


We did not plow, but cut the brush off throughout the summer while we were making our compost for the seed bed.
Cutting the brush left the roots in the ground to bind  it, and these rotted into excellent humus in a few years.  It requires nearly 140 tons of compost to top dress one acre one inch in thickness for the fair green seed bed. One inch is scant, two is better. Constant watching is necessary  to avoid killing by drought, and the seeded fair green should be covered by light horse manure in winter to prevent winter-killing while the grass is young and tender. The 140 tons of compost is made up as follows:

1. Finely ground limestone    10 tons
2. Clay sandy loam            20 tons
3. Sandy peat muck            75 tons
4. Manure                     35 tons

Presumably the summer referred to is the summer of 1907.


And, another short quote about more agronomics.


PUTTING GREENS


The best putting greens we have on Shinnecock Hills (he's talking about National here indicating it is part of the Sh. Hills)  were built as follows: In order to conserve moisture, blocks of salt meadow sod, eight to twelve inches in depth, were first placed in the sand, disc-harrowed and cross-harrowed, until the surface was evened up; a heavy coating of crushed lime-stone was then placed on this frayed meadow sod; then a quantity of the best sandy loam obtained in the hollows between the hills was mixed with an equal quantity of our compost sufficient to make a six to eight-inch bed for seeding.  Some greens were seeded entirely with Rhode Island Bent,  others with Creeping Rent. sometimes sold in England as "South German Agrostis,'' while others with New Zealand Fescue, but the majority of the greens were seeded with various mixtures of these seeds. Seed was used at the rate of 3 pints to 9 square yards.


At least for the greens he got his sandy loam from hollows in the hills.  I wonder if that counted to his 10,000 loads.


And, finally another interesting bit on two fronts.


I found those "abandonded" tees on 8 - 12 by comparing the yardage on the original scorecard to the print.

The old proshop came from Bayberry - it was given to the club by Charlie Sabin. You had to love that old wreck of a proshop. I think the second pro shot himself there - he was ther a year, if I remember correctly. He probably hadn't seen anyone for 3 months and went crazy.


Anybody have any idea where those abandoned tees were?  Can anyone read the blueprint well enough to point out the yardage differences on those holes?

Re the "old proshop", can someone tell me where that was?  Same place as the current one?  If it's the same location as the current one, what does the fact that he says Sabin donated it (presumably post 1917 when he acquired Bayberry) mean relative to the 2.5 acres they bought either "immediately" after the deal closed in June 1907 or that they reputedly bought for the clubhouse in 1910?

[Sven Nilsen]

Another interesting tidbit for the clearing and agronomic fanatics is the following CBM quote that George provided (no source provided)


We did not plow, but cut the brush off throughout the summer while we were making our compost for the seed bed.
Cutting the brush left the roots in the ground to bind  it, and these rotted into excellent humus in a few years.  It requires nearly 140 tons of compost to top dress one acre one inch in thickness for the fair green seed bed. One inch is scant, two is better. Constant watching is necessary  to avoid killing by drought, and the seeded fair green should be covered by light horse manure in winter to prevent winter-killing while the grass is young and tender. The 140 tons of compost is made up as follows:

1. Finely ground limestone    10 tons
2. Clay sandy loam            20 tons
3. Sandy peat muck            75 tons
4. Manure                     35 tons

Presumably the summer referred to is the summer of 1907.


And, another short quote about more agronomics.


PUTTING GREENS


The best putting greens we have on Shinnecock Hills (he's talking about National here indicating it is part of the Sh. Hills)  were built as follows: In order to conserve moisture, blocks of salt meadow sod, eight to twelve inches in depth, were first placed in the sand, disc-harrowed and cross-harrowed, until the surface was evened up; a heavy coating of crushed lime-stone was then placed on this frayed meadow sod; then a quantity of the best sandy loam obtained in the hollows between the hills was mixed with an equal quantity of our compost sufficient to make a six to eight-inch bed for seeding.  Some greens were seeded entirely with Rhode Island Bent,  others with Creeping Rent. sometimes sold in England as "South German Agrostis,'' while others with New Zealand Fescue, but the majority of the greens were seeded with various mixtures of these seeds. Seed was used at the rate of 3 pints to 9 square yards.


At least for the greens he got his sandy loam from hollows in the hills.  I wonder if that counted to his 10,000 loads.

The source for these quotes is CBM's piece in Piper and Oakley, something I recommended you read (or reread) quite a few pages back.

Sven

[MCirba]

Great stuff, guys.   I think we're getting there, although some still may not quite agree but I think the pieces are coming into place.

Before I respond to David's timeline questions, please take another look at the blueprint.   




Please note that the western border, seen in this view along the right side, is a series of straight lines, first out from the area of the Shinnecock Inn, then turning down towards Bullshead Bay where he had located land and water for his Eden and Cape, then almost mirrors and parallels the shore line from thereon, making sure to grab the land of the Alps, before turning again along the length of Peconic Bay.

All straight lines.   No fairways defined.   Turning at places to parallel the water.   A routing that goes out and back and grabs those natural features CBM said he identified on his horseback rides.

I think we're getting there.

[MCirba]

Mike while I appreciate your answer, I am still having trouble figuring out how you the order of the things I asked about. Part of what might be happening is that I think you may be confusing when the acquired an option and thus "secured" the property (in the Fall) with when they finally took possession (in the Spring.)  Also, you've changed so much of your position so drastically, that I am not sure I am accurately putting it back together. So as to try and make sure we are on the same page, I've tried to put my understanding of your position on these issues into a simple chronology:
  Pre-Option.  You believe there were no written plans, no drawings, no maps, no surveys, and CBM and HJW had not staked the land or the course.
  Option (Dec/Nov.)  You believe that CBM acquired an option without either party having surveyed or staked out the approximate borders of the parcel.
  Pre-purchase (Dec/Nov06 to May/June07)  You believe, that even while planning the course, NGLA never staked or surveyed the approximate boundaries of the property or survey the boundaries.
  Purchase (May/June07)  After the planning was already complete and land purchased, you believe that CBM and HJW finally to staked and surveyed the boundaries of the course.
  Post-Purchase You that NGLA began constructing and clearing the golf course.  

Do I have it correct?

David,

Let me first revise what you wrote above and then on a separate post I'll answer your questions.   If you feel my position has changed you'd be correct but I like to think that's because we're getting additional information we didn't have previously and it's starting to make more sense to me.  

Let me start by saying when I read "Scotland's Gift", I think the sentence, "The company agreed to sell us 205 acres and we were permitted to locate it as best to serve our purpose." and then a paragraph or two later the phrase, "We obtained an option on the land in November 1906..." are referring to the same event.   That is likely the source of our varying interpretations but I believe I'm correct because the next phrase after that is, "and took title to the property in the spring of 1907" (actually June) so I think he's now just giving us the general timeframe of these events and not describing a chronology that followed what he wrote a paragraph and sentence prior.

So to continue in that vain...

 Pre-Option.  You believe there were no written plans, no drawings, no maps, no surveys, and CBM and HJW had not staked the land or the course.   That is generally true.   Here's what I think happened.   In the late fall of 1905 CBM became aware of the large land buy that a Brooklyn company had made from a London syndicate.   It's likely CBM knew these guys.   He'd already been scouting around in those hills and sometime prior to December 1906 made an offer for 120 acres.   The new NGLA book claims December 1905, and I'd be interested to know more about the source but I suspect it was actually after CBM's return from abroad in May/June 1906.  In June upon Macdonald's return from abroad he was quoted as saying he had draughsmen making exact reproduction drawings of holes he'd been interested in from abroad and other reports said that the process of selecting the best holes and gaining unanimity among the experts here and abroad would be the critical next step.

I believe those drawings are what are referred to in the October "Boston Globe" report, which contains numerous errors and describes the property he bought as the entire size of Sebonac Neck.   I think someone, probably Travis, spilled the beans that CBM had been riding around on land there and was close to making an offer for 200 acres.   They'd probably already decided it at that time, in fact.

I think it likely that CBM made an offer on the 120 acres sometime that summer and was rejected.   The rejection probably came with the rejoinder something like, "we'd love for you to build a course out here but that's right where we're planning housing. We have stuff around the edges that we're not planning to use...why don't you look at that?"

Probably very begrudingly once he realized it was over by Shinnecock Hills Golf Club, he and Whigham took their horse rides, I believe in the August/Sept timeframe.   His description of insect infestations would be consistent with that.   Seeing landforms for his Alps, redan, Eden and then creatively discovering a new hole concept, the Cape, and discovering that the soil was more sand and less gravel they decide to make an offer for 200 acres and the developer agrees, essentially saying "take what you'd like for golf in term of the boundaries and we can write up an agreement with metes and bounds after you figure it out."  

In the meantime, papers are drawn up that very generally state CBM's intent to buy 200 acres on Sebonac Neck.   They likely describe the property he wants much as the CBM was quoted in the newspaper accounts of December 1906 did, going two miles along the eastern edge from the proposed site of the Shinnecock Inn, along Bulls Head Bay, up for a short stretch and turn back along Peconic Bay and 4 acres wide throughout, which measures roughly 200 acres.

They may or may not have paid someone to stake out or map the land at that time but I don't think it really matters.   I think he likely paid that draftman referred to in 1906 to just measure and shoot the general lines so he could get a clear idea of what 200 acres looked lke to make sure all his desired landforms were included.   None of it was legally binding yet in terms of the specific boundaries and may have been just something for CBM to start doing rough routings on.  

In any case, we know on the afternoon of December 14th, 1906, CBM signs the agreement to option a general 200 acres.   He tells us he's secured 2 miles long by 4 acres wide.   He states that the next five months will be used to determine the holes and their distances, after which the property will be staked and plaster cast models made to guide the constructors.

More to come...

[DMoriarty]

I did notice the "tracing" story.  What do you suppose the "tracing" was?  Was the draftsman creating a copy of an existing document?  Or, was he creating the tracing that would be used to create the blueprint?  Or, something else ...........

I briefly looked into what "tracing" meant in those days, and it seems it was the process of copying a previously existing document onto tracing paper.  (Then a blueprint could be created from the trace.)

So there was a previously existing drawing, apparently referred to on the invoice as "the property, Shinnecock Golf Club."

[MCirba]

  Option (Dec/Nov. 1906)  You believe that CBM acquired an option without either party having surveyed or staked out the approximate borders of the parcel.    See my previous answer.   I think CBM probably paid someone in 1906 to map out what 200 acres along the bay running from the Shinnecock Inn out to Peconic Bay and following the general outline of the shore looked like.   I think the 4 acres wide part is the critical piece as he simply wanted to make sure all the landforms he wanted were included before making his offer.   If he traced an existing map as per your recent response I think again the idea was simply to ensure enough land was bought consistent with his agreement with the Founders and that would incorporate the landforms he discovered.


  Pre-purchase (Dec/Nov06 to May/June07)  You believe, that even while planning the course, NGLA never staked or surveyed the approximate boundaries of the property or survey the boundaries.   No, I don't believe that.   We know CBM told us that Raynor helped him with the purchase of the property so he had to have mapped out the land before June 1907.   I suspect that was simply the final boundary map with any necessary adjustments that took place during final routing and hole designs.   I think during this period the remaining holes and their lengths were determined, the finalized routing was determined, and Raynor was likely employed to survey and record the final metes and bounds so that papers could be drawn for the final Sales Agreement.  

A 1909 report stated that "In a general way the planning of the course preceded the clearing and the planting of the ground, changes and modifications being made as the work progressed"  

I think Raynor was likely employed in this process as well, which is why I like your theory of them siting all of the greensites first and then surveying the distances.   I think it's eminently sensible, especially on land that they weren't yet going to clear, but I also think it's why this took a few months to get done correctly before going to sale.   I think the routing was determined on the ground, not on paper but then transferred to paper by Raynor.   I think by April they had their routing in place and in early May they hired Mortimer Payne to lead construction.  

  Purchase (May/June07)  After the planning was already complete and land purchased, you believe that CBM and HJW finally to staked and surveyed the boundaries of the course.   No, the metes and bounds were determined before then by Raynor I believe as CBM told us.   But I think if you look at the western boundary of the property, that was predetermined in the sense of straight lines turning at points to parallel the shoreline and keep within the 200 acres already pre-determined.  

  Post-Purchase You that NGLA began constructing and clearing the golf course.   Macdonald and others describing the clearing process taking place that summer makes sense and I think they basically clear-cut and then fertilized and planted grass on the entire property.   They did not plough except for some of the greens, which required a special treatment described in Piper and Oakley.  Lack of fairway lines on the blueprint would be consistent with that approach.   The greens were built first and we know that work was completed by September 1907.  

I think overall that western border being a series of dead straight lines only turning in relation to the adjoining sea is very telling.   Much as Behr said, he wanted to ensure he had enough land to encompass the land forms he'd found and even with that, there was land left over for other purposes.    

I believe those straight lines clearly indicate that he did not fit the boundaries to the golf holes.   He bought a big enough box to work within and then determined the best golf holes within the box.  

I hope this helps and I believe this has been a terrific discussion.   We still have questions but as I said, I think the picture is coming into view.

[Sven Nilsen]

Mike:

The straight lines tell us nothing, other than that was how property lines were created.  In the absence of a natural feature (like a creek), you use lines between points to demarcate borders. 

Also, you overstate the room between the western boundary and the golf course.  Go back and look at the overlays in this thread.  Other than down near the southern part of the course, there is very little room left over for other purposes, if any.

If anything, the way the lines are angled to track the turns on the course suggests to me the golf holes came first, and then the boundary.

Sven

[DMoriarty]

Regarding your longer answer, rather than bogging down the conversation sifting through all the conjecture about who knew who, who suggested the purchase, who spilled the beans, what the option agreement said, what was "legally binding," etc., I'll just set it aside and try to cut to the quick.  You wrote: "They may or may not have paid someone to stake out or map the land at that time but I don't think it really matters."

The reason it matters is because you have long insisted that the land had not been staked out (or even specifically identified) at the time the option was obtained.  In Scotland's Gift, CBM wrote that they again earnestly studied the contour and selected those that would fit with what he had in mind, after which they staked out the land they wanted.  You have long insisted that  this did not happen until Winter and Spring.

If you have changed your mind on this issue, then great.  But it does matter.

[DMoriarty]

Where they could, surveyors drew straight lines, especially when it came to setting out the borders for the purpose of the transfer of real property, because they had to describe those borders in "metes" and legal description in metes for non-regular curves lines is incredibly difficult. If it is curvy border, it was probably a "bound" border, like along Bullshead.

[MCirba]

David,

Please see my answers in Blue below;

A few questions:
- You've been insisting for years that couldn't possibly have planned the course course before clearing it.  You now seem to be saying the opposite?  Do you now believe the course was planned before they cleared the property?  Yes but was surprised to learn that it wasn't cleared before summer 1907 but that now makes perfect sense as they now owned the property outright.   Until Jeff Brauer's response yesterday I assumed they would have to clear it before getting it surveyed "for golf purposes".  
- When exactly do you believe the property was first surveyed "for golf purposes?"  (And what does that mean, anyway?)  If before the purchase, then how did they know where to survey "for golf purposes" if they had never marked off or surveyed the boundaries? By "for golf purposes" I mean a topographical survey down to 2 foot intervals.   Anything bigger than that has too much variation for architectural use on a golf course.   To your second question, I think they knew in general terms what the width of the "box" they were working within was.   If it was because a 200 acre map had already been drawn prior or because Raynor was working along side them at that point we know this got accomplished in conjunction with the routing being done that spring of 1907.
- Do you actually believe that the agreed to a transaction involving real property without every identifying, marking, or surveying the land in question? It appears something was done in 1906 (tracing) but we're not sure and I don't think the agreement to secure land with the Real Estate company would have any mention of metes and bounds but only generalities.   They agreed to purchase 200 acres of 450 available whose boundaries would be determined later, yes.  CBM described the general area as running along the bays and two miles long by 4 acres wide.   It incorporated the landforms he wanted and that was the most critical thing.

Some comments and questions specific to your post:

But also like you, and I hope I'm reading you correctly, I don't think the property was surveyed for golf purposes by Raynor or anyone else prior to securing it.

As described above, I don't think the property was surveyed down to 2 or 3 foot intervals for golf purposes prior to securing the land.   If a map was drawn with rough outlines of what 200 acres looked like along the coast that would be all by that point, I'd imagine.

You are not reading me correctly. The Globe article indicates that maps with elevations had been created and sent abroad.  I don't know what exactly these were (contours, centerline elevations, rough sketches with elevation estimates, or something else) but according to the article something had already been done along these lines, and it was for "golf [course] purposes" else why send them abroad to the advisors?    I don't think that's what was sent to advisors abroad although I could be wrong.  I don't think it matters much to our timeline in any case.  

I also don't think anyone staked out the original 200 acre agreement.  Since no one had any plans (including the owner) for the 450 acre parcel, what would be the point?  Its not like it's going anywhere and you'd have to do all that work again after the hole boundaries were finalized.

"The point" would be to identify the parcel subject to the option.  Generally, identifying the property subject to the option isn't just a good idea, it is a legal requirement.  I think the 200 acres defined in the agreement would be as CBM described them in news accounts in December 1907, as running along the shore for two miles x 4 acres wide.   If they included an outline map of what area that entailed I'd be surprised to learn it was a detailed contour map with 2 to 3 foot elevations.

"The point" would also be to give CBM an idea of the boundaries of parcel for when they were out there planning the golf course. How do you suppose CBM could have known if he was even within the agreed upon area if he had not staked out the boundaries?

And they would NOT have to do all the work over again.  They'd only have to adjust the borders where changes were to be made, if any.

For an out and back routing, he show little concern for drawing within the lines and it looks to me as though the boundaries were plotted in sections as the holes and routing evolved during construction.

Drawing within the lines? Haven't you been saying that there were no lines whatsoever?   And haven't you been writing that the planning was complete before the lines were drawn?

I was wrong in my last few statements.   Looking at the blueprint again this morning I think I have it right now.

In other words, I think the straight line western boundaries show us the parameters of the box that CBM had to work with.   When I said he drew outside the lines I was wrong;  the box already included the landforms he had previously identified.

[DMoriarty]

David,

Please see my answers in Blue below;

A few questions:
- You've been insisting for years that couldn't possibly have planned the course course before clearing it.  You now seem to be saying the opposite?  Do you now believe the course was planned before they cleared the property?  Yes but was surprised to learn that it wasn't cleared before summer 1907 but that now makes perfect sense as they now owned the property outright.   Until Jeff Brauer's response yesterday I assumed they would have to clear it before getting it surveyed "for golf purposes".  

Which came first, the rough routing or the survey for golf purposes?

- When exactly do you believe the property was first surveyed "for golf purposes?"  (And what does that mean, anyway?)  If before the purchase, then how did they know where to survey "for golf purposes" if they had never marked off or surveyed the boundaries? By "for golf purposes" I mean a topographical survey down to 2 foot intervals.   Anything bigger than that has too much variation for architectural use on a golf course.   To your second question, I think they knew in general terms what the width of the "box" they were working within was.   If it was because a 200 acre map had already been drawn prior or because Raynor was working along side them at that point we know this got accomplished in conjunction with the routing being done that spring of 1907.

Still hoping you will tell me, "when exactly do you believe the property was first surveyed for golf purposes?"  Was it before they routed the course?  After they routed the course? 
________________________________________

Maybe it is just drug-induced flash backs to 1L Property Law, but whenever you start talking about how you don't think the option agreement specified the property in question, I cringe. For real property transactions (including options for real property) there were (and are) well known and long established legal standards requiring identification of the parcel in question, and so your conjecture that CBM acquired an option without specifically identifying the parcel in question doesn't sit well with me.  I know that CBM apparently said that there was some wiggle room regarding the exact lines, but I am very curious as to how that was worded in whatever deal they cut.   I'd be very surprised it if was a vague as you suggest.

[MCirba]

Regarding your longer answer, rather than bogging down the conversation sifting through all the conjecture about who knew who, who suggested the purchase, who spilled the beans, what the option agreement said, what was "legally binding," etc., I'll just set it aside and try to cut to the quick.  You wrote: "They may or may not have paid someone to stake out or map the land at that time but I don't think it really matters."

The reason it matters is because you have long insisted that the land had not been staked out (or even specifically identified) at the time the option was obtained.  In Scotland's Gift, CBM wrote that they again earnestly studied the contour and selected those that would fit with what he had in mind, after which they staked out the land they wanted.  You have long insisted that  this did not happen until Winter and Spring.

If you have changed your mind on this issue, then great.  But it does matter.

David,

I think any survey done prior to December 1906 would have simply been to measure the distance along the general route CBM wanted to take to include the landforms for the Alps, Eden, redan, and Cape, skirt past Bullshead Bay out to Peconic Bay.   He knew his starting and ending points.  He knew he wanted the stretch along Peconic Bay, I believe.

In fact, I think any map drawn prior to December would have been to measure that route (2 miles) and then determine the width he'd need to get to a pre-determined 200 acres (4 acres wide) that he wanted to purchase consistent with his Agreement with the Founders.   

I think when CBM wrote "Again, we earnestly studied the contour and selected those that would fit in...after which we staked out the land we wanted" happened in the spring of 1907.   I still think "Again" means sometime after those first times they did it on horseback, yes, but believe that he's talking about the design work in the  spring.   

I think first they found landforms and soil they knew they could use and even identified some holes.   They believed they could easily get their golf course within those pre-determined 200 acres they'd estimated needing for their purposes and optioned the property.

Then, Again, after they were sure they had an option in hand they studied the landforms to determine which additional holes to place  and their distances, much as CBM told us he was going to spend the next five months doing.

[MCirba]

I'm going to be tied up until probably sometime tomorrow but wonder how much variation there is in that blueprint between the eastern and western borders on average?

I'm not a draftsman but it looks pretty consistent throughout except for nips and tucks here and there.   

[Sven Nilsen]

"In fact, I think any map drawn prior to December would have been to measure that route (2 miles) and then determine the width he'd need to get to a pre-determined 200 acres (4 acres wide) that he wanted to purchase consistent with his Agreement with the Founders."

Mike:

You are so tied to the RE concept that you can't see the obvious truth.  The width was determined by the golf course, not by a desire to have additional land available to honor a throw away clause in a concept piece drafted close to three years prior that his founders did not care about in the least.

The lines track the course, as does the width. 

Sven

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bryan,

Below is YOUR interpretation of where the roads were in 1904, prior to CBM's inspection of the properry, and once again your interpretation is dead wrong.

Like Mike, you've determined your conclusion/goal and are forcing and fabricating information to support your conclusions/goals.

You have a NETWORK of roads running through the property in 1904.

Yet, in 1906 CBM tells us.

"This property was  little known and had never been surveyed."

It abounded in bogs and swamps and was covered with an entanglement of bayberry, huckleberry, blackberry, and other bushes and was  infested by insects.  

THEONLYWAY ONE COULD GET OVER THE GROUND WAS ON PONIES".

But wait, you claimed that as early as 1904 that there was a network of roads throughout the property.

And earlier, you insisted that they couldn't get vehicles to NGLA because there were NO roads.
Now you're claiming that a network of roads were all over the property.

You keep changing your position to suit your latest attempt to dispute the siting of the clubhouse

If there was a network of roads throughout the property, they could have used those roads, but Macdonald clearly stated that the ONLY way one could get around the property was on horseback.  That there were NO ROADS

What happened to your roads ?
Did a hurricane wipe them out ?

If you were familiar with the property, and the topography, including the topo you supplied, you'd know that the yellow lines you indicated below are misplaced.

The road leading to Peconic Bay was a coastal road along Bullhead Bay, and not one running through the golf course as you would have us believe.

Your road leading to Peconic Bay would be on a steep slope rather than the flats adjacent to Bullhead Bay.

Essentially, your lack of familiarity with the land has caused you to err again and create and locate roads where none existed.

[MCirba]

Sven,

In December after the option was completed Macdonald was quoted as saying the land he secured was 2 miles long and 4 acres wide, which makes up approximately 200 acres.

How much do you think those straight western boundary lines deviate from being 4 acres wide to their eastern counterparts across the property?   Again, metes and bounds would be nice to see but it looks pretty consistent throughout, no?

[DMoriarty]

Mike,

You seem to be throwing all sorts of conjecture to avoid acknowledging that CBM staked out the parcel after earnestly studying the contours and determining what he needed for the golf course he envisioned.  Why not just listen to what he wrote in Scotland's Gift?

The distance on the blue print between western border and the eastern boundary is not uniform. It is narrowed at the south end of the course, wider in the middle, and widest at the North end.   As Sven points out, this generally fit the golf course itself.

[MCirba]

Mike,

You seem to be throwing all sorts of conjecture to avoid acknowledging that CBM staked out the parcel after earnestly studying the contours and determining what he needed for the golf course he envisioned.  Why not just listen to what he wrote in Scotland's Gift?

The distance on the blue print between western border and the eastern boundary is not uniform. It is narrowed at the south end of the course, wider in the middle, and widest at the North end.   As Sven points out, this generally fit the golf course itself.

David,

Yes, because I think this is a map with the exact boundaries after they had been slightly refined by Raynor as the holes were determined and routing finalized.     It's pinched in a little here where land isn't needed or let out a little there to expand where necessary but overall the deviation from a standard of 4 acres wide is not great.   

[DMoriarty]

Mike, That is what you want to think, but it is not what CBM said.  You can't just ignore Scotland Gift.   He said they staked out the borders after earnestly studying the contours in search of places for his the holes he envisioned, then he gives examples of such holes (Cape, Eden, Alps, Redan).  This was before the option.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()