Pietro
I am not suggesting trees aren't a legitimate design feature. However, I am saying because of the potential damage trees can do to courses in terms of playablity, agronomy and aesthetics that super duper extra care should be taken about the planting of trees (or their being allowed to mature from self seeding) and how they are maintained. Meaning, a very detailed tree plan should be in place. Folks argue the toss about bunkers and other stuff, but in most cases trees are far more impactful than any other feature. Once trees are allowed to grow, all other course considerations are impacted, so there should be very specific reasons of why and where trees are planted. Instead, people treat trees virtually the same as grass...expected aspects of golf. IMO, ideally that shouldn't be the case unless courses are carved from forests/woodlands etc. Trees should be seen as features, just as water, bunkers, shaping and green shapes are. I think what we often get are green walls surrounding fairways which dictate play not only from the tee and fairway, but also for recoveries. I understand you like that sort of design, I am only pointing out the difficulties caused by trees and how easy it is for trees to quickly dictate the restrictive nature of how courses are presented, played and maintained. As I say, I rarely see a course with trees that doesn't have some sort of issue. Its an expensive endeavour to properly maintain and control trees so it is often not dealt with properly.
Ciao