Old Barnwell - cut down every tree it seemed and lost some opportunities as a result IMHO. New course with buzz so not ranked yet.
What opportunities were lost?
Brian, with such an expansive property and land that was covered in pines I would have liked to have seen a couple holes use some of them. Create a dogleg, maybe a lone tree in the fairway as the course has great width to pick a side. Even have a few on one side of the fairway on a par 5 like August 15? That is what I was thinking and since the mature trees were already there, IMHO an opportunity missed.
That's fair enough. A question to which I do not know the answer is: were there mature trees that could serve such a purpose on the portions of the property that are now cleared? On many such sites in the SE US, the land is actually not covered by large, mature trees, but rather a mix of scrub grass, bushes, and smaller pines. Since larger trees were left in place on portions of the course, I wonder how much of the land was previously covered by large trees. Perhaps one of Brian, Blake, Nick, or someone else with knowledge of the development could fill us in if they see this.
I'll chime in here, but before doing so I just want to state unequivocally that I respect Jeff's and anybody's opinion that Old Barnwell is overrated. I'm incredibly biased and love the course and our club for so many reasons, but one of the best things I think Brian and Blake did was to make bold decisions, some of which will not appeal to everyone, which is fine by me. Also, we just opened the golf course for our second season earlier this week, so to be "overrated" right out of the gate is a wonderful problem to have, and all credit should go to B&B (especially the overrated part
).
As far as the tree clearing goes... the entire central valley of the property was part of the original 444-acre parcel I purchased. The trees across that entire swath of land were all baby pines, between 4-10 years old. I'm not a forestry expert by any means, but I'd say the range of height was 5ft-12ft, and even with the largest trees you could wrap two hands around the diameter of the trunk. We couldn't even sell them for pulp. In other words, it made a lot of sense for Brian and Blake to clear that swath of land to open up vistas and create the more exposed feel of the Upper Loop (1-5, 17 & 18). But at the time clearing everything wasn't a slam dunk decision, but it is one I'm grateful they made.
The 75-80 acres we purchased on the south side of the property was full of mature pines, through which Brian and Blake routed some of the finest holes on the course (all of 9,10, 13, 14, and the tees on 11 & 15). Though the fairways are wide, you are playing in and around the trees. I know this all too well, as I careened off several yesterday on the left side of 9!
To respond more specifically to Jeff's post, I will point out that a lone tree in a fairway exists on 16 (though not exactly as you describe), and some mature pines line the left side of the landing area on the par five 12th hole and to the back left of the green. This doesn't mean Jeff is wrong (or right), it is just reflective of how he experienced the course. Could Brian and Blake have used the baby pines more effectively? Perhaps. But therein lies the beauty of this entire message board! The world will never know, which means we get to debate back and forth about theoretical decisions made (or not made) at our favorite, least favorite, or most overrated courses.