Golf Club Atlas

GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: David Davis on October 21, 2014, 09:02:16 AM

Title: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: David Davis on October 21, 2014, 09:02:16 AM
drastically improved or changed maintenance practices, increased playing corridors, brought back natural sand areas etc.

I'm looking for a list of links courses that have been worked on and restored or brought back to life in the last 10-20 years.

Preferably courses that had been totally overgrown due to neglect and had been following incorrect maintenance practices not excluding overwatering, poor bunker maintenance etc.

Any help would be great if you know of them. Off hand I can give examples of several courses in the US that have done similar things just in the last few years. Think Shinnecock, NGLA and Maidstone. I'm looking for links courses in the UK an Ireland specifically.

If you know who was responsible for the drastic change/improvement by all means mention this.

Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Adam Lawrence on October 21, 2014, 09:15:48 AM
David - I think you are going to struggle on this one. No British or Irish links has ever become as severely treed as Noordwijk is... and Shinnecock, Maidstone and National, for all their virtues, are not links.
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Rich Goodale on October 21, 2014, 09:29:21 AM
David - I think you are going to struggle on this one. No British or Irish links has ever become as severely treed as Noordwijk is... and Shinnecock, Maidstone and National, for all their virtues, are not links.

Not that much of a struggle, David and Adam.  Monifieth had a huge tree problem and removed mucho arboles over the past 2-3 years, and this improved the course tremendously.  Neighbouring Panmure also did serious tree removal over the past few decades (or so I was told recently by people in the know when I played the course for the first time).  A year or two ago, Dornoch cut down its only 3 trees (out of play, between the 10th green and 11th Championship tee).  I'm sure there have been others.

Rich
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Sean_A on October 21, 2014, 09:31:40 AM
DD

Burnham has carried out extensive removal of buckthorn in the last 20 years.  For instance, down the right of #4 used to be almost a certain lost ball, now its just rough. Behind the 16th green there was a large area of buckthorn cleared and then more once the club decided to extend the green.  There are other places as well.

Ciao
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: David Davis on October 21, 2014, 09:33:01 AM
David - I think you are going to struggle on this one. No British or Irish links has ever become as severely treed as Noordwijk is... and Shinnecock, Maidstone and National, for all their virtues, are not links.

Adam, you killjoy you!

At least let the masses respond before you rain on my parade!  :P

I know they are not true links although not far off and maybe an argument could be made there. Link between the sea and the fertile ground. Sand based soil, yes on these accounts, the first arguably the second for sure.

They also fit the mold of being neglected at some point in terms of maintenance.

I didn't say they had to have all of these things and I'm trying to exclude The Netherlands here. I'm looking for UK and Ireland examples. Surely you have some without going into levels of comparisons of extremes?
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Michael Goldstein on October 21, 2014, 10:40:02 AM
David,

Paraparaumu probably fits here. Leo can explain more but there used to be a lot of trees and now they've all gone.

I can't speak to the history of many UK or Irish courses.

MG
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: David_Tepper on October 21, 2014, 10:49:04 AM
In addition to the recent removal of the only few trees on the course, Royal Dornoch did remove a fair amount (not a "massive" amount) gorse on the course 7-8 years ago. Some of the gorse was removed from the edges of the playing corridors, such as on holes 16 & 17. The rest of the gorse removed was from areas that were not really in play or where only a very, very poorly hit shot would land, such as a topped shot off the 12th tee.   
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Paul Gray on October 21, 2014, 11:09:51 AM
Hayling. Although I'm afraid to say that the playing corridors have not been widened as a consequence, quite the opposite in fact.
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Tony_Muldoon on October 21, 2014, 11:14:13 AM
As ever the correct GCA answer is TOC!

Not only have they carried on with the century old tradition of clearing out the Gorse - this time on 7 but they've narrowed the fairways and 'improved' the greens on .....


I need to go lie in a quiet room.
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: David Davis on October 21, 2014, 11:18:05 AM
David,

Paraparaumu probably fits here. Leo can explain more but there used to be a lot of trees and now they've all gone.

I can't speak to the history of many UK or Irish courses.

MG

Michael, thanks, any photos of the before after on this? That would really helpful.
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Robin_Hiseman on October 21, 2014, 11:35:42 AM
Both Carnoustie and more especially Royal Birkdale have taken out thousands of trees in recent years.
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Mark_Rowlinson on October 21, 2014, 11:38:23 AM
Conwy has removed a lot of gorse over the years to help visitors get round in under 6 hours! I can remember the buckthorn being taken out at Royal Birkdale.
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: David Davis on October 21, 2014, 12:00:51 PM
What about other issues other than trees?

Firming up the ground even further, changes in irrigation practices, changing grass sort on greens and surrounds and reshaping to do so?

Thanks
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Niall C on October 21, 2014, 12:01:46 PM
David

Robin beat me to it by mentioning Carnoustie. The green keeper John Philps reputedly waged a one man war on trees by chopping down a couple every time there was a storm and then blaming the loss of the trees on the high winds. These days it seems to be official policy. Not sure if they took advice from Martin Ebert on that.

Martin certainly convinced Royal Troon to clear out a bunch of gorse on the 10th so that they could reinstate the MacKenzie bunker. Other than that I don't think that there was much more to do there apart from maybe the 11th.

Glasgow Gailes also have recently done a tremendous job in clearing away all the gorse in front of the par 3's so that you're not just faced with a wall of gorse in front of the tee. They have also taken away pockets of trees that surrounded the 3rd, 4th (I think) and 5th greens. A great start but still quite a bit more to do. Martin Hawtree has been advising.

A few years back Silloth undertook a comprehensive clear out of gorse however it didn't take long for the gorse to come back. I suspect that most links periodically have a good clear out or they would become over run. That's what happens when you clear off the sheep  ;).

Niall  
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Adam Lawrence on October 21, 2014, 12:02:14 PM
What about other issues other than trees?

Firming up the ground even further, changes in irrigation practices, changing grass sort on greens and surrounds and reshaping to do so?

Thanks

Deal is a fantastic example of a links that had spent several years being managed poorly and has got right back on track.
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Wayne_Kozun on October 21, 2014, 01:45:39 PM
As ever the correct GCA answer is TOC!
That's what I was going to say but I was thinking of about 130 years ago when it was done by OTM.  Where Melvyn when you need him?
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Thomas Dai on October 21, 2014, 02:31:00 PM
Cruden Bay removed/reduced an area of gorse around the 11th/12th/13th holes a few decades ago. Too many rabbits living there was the justification I was given at the time.
atb
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Mark Chaplin on October 21, 2014, 06:33:38 PM
Deal has a bush on the 13th and Sheehy wants to remove it, despite it being at least 100 years old!!
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Pete_Pittock on October 21, 2014, 09:07:16 PM
Gearhart, in Oregon. They lost half in a massive windstorm about seven years ago. I heard tell that they have eliminated most trees, but haven't confirmed.
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Garland Bayley on October 21, 2014, 10:15:04 PM
Gearhart, in Oregon. They lost half in a massive windstorm about seven years ago. I heard tell that they have eliminated most trees, but haven't confirmed.

Astoria also lost about half of their trees. Unfortunately they have indicated they plan to replant. It began totally treeless from the photos I have seen.

Of course Bandon courses wouldn't exist without gorse removal.
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Paul Gray on October 22, 2014, 05:02:10 AM
Gearhart, in Oregon. They lost half in a massive windstorm about seven years ago. I heard tell that they have eliminated most trees, but haven't confirmed.

Astoria also lost about half of their trees. Unfortunately they have indicated they plan to replant. It began totally treeless from the photos I have seen.

Of course Bandon courses wouldn't exist without gorse removal.


Are either of those courses true links?
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: David Davis on October 22, 2014, 06:06:07 AM
Gearhart, in Oregon. They lost half in a massive windstorm about seven years ago. I heard tell that they have eliminated most trees, but haven't confirmed.

Astoria also lost about half of their trees. Unfortunately they have indicated they plan to replant. It began totally treeless from the photos I have seen.

Of course Bandon courses wouldn't exist without gorse removal.


Are either of those courses true links?

Paul, as I'm sure the other gents will confirm, yes, they both are. I've only played Astoria but have seen Gearhart. Astoria is better of the two but they definitely qualify as true links courses. Both located in the dunes on sandy soil which is certainly the link between the ocean and the fertile ground on that stretch of coast between Astoria and Seaside.
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Ally Mcintosh on October 22, 2014, 06:12:29 AM
David,

A couple of others:

At Portmarnock Links Hotel, head greenkeeper Fintan Brennan has successfully overseen the widening out of some playing corridors by clearing some scrub and extending short grass run-offs.

This has been done even more dramatically at Portmarnock Golf Club where Gary Johnstone has made a huge impact on the links. A lot of the non-indigenous Swedish Pines planted in the 50's have been cleared and short grass run-offs have been given large extensions. Gorse has been cleared in certain areas of encroachment as well, such as around 9 green and in front of 11 tees. And where formal, ornamental planting had taken place (the clumps to the right of 18 fairway)... The best individual example of how a hole can be improved is at the famous, par-3 15th along the coast. Here, a solitary palm tree was removed from behind the green and the buckthorn on the dune ridge by the green was removed as well as the ugly, boundary fence that ran the length of the hole. Beach / sea views down the strand have now been opened up from the tee and the hole looks natural and more fearsome (whilst playing slightly less tight).... Don't have before and afters to hand unfortunately...
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: David Davis on October 22, 2014, 08:55:31 AM
Ally, thanks, great info there.

Thanks as well to everyone who's helping out on this thread. Much appreciated and the information will (hopefully) be put to good use hopefully in benefit of many of you who decide to travel to the lowlands in the future.
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Garland Bayley on October 22, 2014, 02:22:54 PM
Gearhart, in Oregon. They lost half in a massive windstorm about seven years ago. I heard tell that they have eliminated most trees, but haven't confirmed.

Astoria also lost about half of their trees. Unfortunately they have indicated they plan to replant. It began totally treeless from the photos I have seen.

Of course Bandon courses wouldn't exist without gorse removal.


Are either of those courses true links?

It all depends on your definition. They didn't make Peper's book, probably because of grasses.
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Sean_A on October 22, 2014, 04:35:13 PM
Deal has a bush on the 13th and Sheehy wants to remove it, despite it being at least 100 years old!!

Get rid of it!!!!

Si!!!

Ciao
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: David Davis on October 22, 2014, 04:45:03 PM

It all depends on your definition. They didn't make Peper's book, probably because of grasses.


There is only one correct definition as far as all the research I've done on this shows, as I've already mentioned above. I'd love to hear anyones thoughts on why Astoria for example would not be a true links course.

It fits all points as far as I'm aware. I'd be interested to hear G. Peper's reasoning.

Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Jon Wiggett on October 23, 2014, 05:36:33 PM
Deal has a bush on the 13th and Sheehy wants to remove it, despite it being at least 100 years old!!

Get rid of it!!!!

Si!!!

Ciao

You could always just reroute the course ::)
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Bill_McBride on October 23, 2014, 08:17:54 PM
Deal has a bush on the 13th and Sheehy wants to remove it, despite it being at least 100 years old!!

It's a nice "bush" (and a bloody big one if you ask me) on 13, until you've lost a ball in it.   Then it's a forest. 
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Sean_A on October 24, 2014, 03:02:53 AM
Deal has a bush on the 13th and Sheehy wants to remove it, despite it being at least 100 years old!!

Get rid of it!!!!

Si!!!

Ciao

You could always just reroute the course ::)

Yes you could, but it would be easier and better to remove the offending bush  :o

Ciao
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: David Davis on October 24, 2014, 03:32:44 AM
Deal has a bush on the 13th and Sheehy wants to remove it, despite it being at least 100 years old!!

Get rid of it!!!!

Si!!!

Ciao

You could always just reroute the course ::)

Yes you could, but it would be easier and better to remove the offending bush  :o

Ciao

I can't remember said bush, it must not be in the middle of the fairway?
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Paul Gray on October 24, 2014, 07:35:43 AM

It all depends on your definition. They didn't make Peper's book, probably because of grasses.


There is only one correct definition as far as all the research I've done on this shows, as I've already mentioned above. I'd love to hear anyones thoughts on why Astoria for example would not be a true links course.

It fits all points as far as I'm aware. I'd be interested to hear G. Peper's reasoning.



I can vouch for the fact that Peper is wrong about at least one of the entries in his book and I know others have said similar so I wouldn't worry about that too much.

As far as I'm concerned, if both the courses referenced have millennia worth of sand blown in from the sea and a history of being covered in ice during the last ice age then you have links golf. 
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Garland Bayley on October 24, 2014, 01:36:55 PM

It all depends on your definition. They didn't make Peper's book, probably because of grasses.


There is only one correct definition as far as all the research I've done on this shows, as I've already mentioned above. I'd love to hear anyones thoughts on why Astoria for example would not be a true links course.

It fits all points as far as I'm aware. I'd be interested to hear G. Peper's reasoning.



I can vouch for the fact that Peper is wrong about at least one of the entries in his book and I know others have said similar so I wouldn't worry about that too much.

As far as I'm concerned, if both the courses referenced have millennia worth of sand blown in from the sea and a history of being covered in ice during the last ice age then you have links golf. 

I reviewed his reasoning from the book. He seems pretty selective about applying his principles as Pac Dunes has trees, but doesn't get excluded even though he says it is one of the biggest disqualifiers. He says Chambers Bay is disqualified as it is too far from the ocean, never mind that there is ocean water a few feet from the course. Weston-super-mare is a links to him even though it is often referred to as Weston-super-mud. I'd say he is actually pretty subjective.
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Paul Gray on October 24, 2014, 02:27:36 PM

It all depends on your definition. They didn't make Peper's book, probably because of grasses.


There is only one correct definition as far as all the research I've done on this shows, as I've already mentioned above. I'd love to hear anyones thoughts on why Astoria for example would not be a true links course.

It fits all points as far as I'm aware. I'd be interested to hear G. Peper's reasoning.



I can vouch for the fact that Peper is wrong about at least one of the entries in his book and I know others have said similar so I wouldn't worry about that too much.

As far as I'm concerned, if both the courses referenced have millennia worth of sand blown in from the sea and a history of being covered in ice during the last ice age then you have links golf. 

I reviewed his reasoning from the book. He seems pretty selective about applying his principles as Pac Dunes has trees, but doesn't get excluded even though he says it is one of the biggest disqualifiers. He says Chambers Bay is disqualified as it is too far from the ocean, never mind that there is ocean water a few feet from the course. Weston-super-mare is a links to him even though it is often referred to as Weston-super-mud. I'd say he is actually pretty subjective.

Yep, the tree argument always struck me as a very dumb argument; the sort I'd expect to here from someone with precious little knowledge of the subject. It's a unique landscape but not one trees are incapable of growing on.
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Brent Hutto on October 24, 2014, 04:14:50 PM
I do not think the primary transport for the sand that creates links land was wind.
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Rich Goodale on October 25, 2014, 12:29:36 AM
This "is it links/is it not links?" discussion could dance on the head of any pin forever.  (George) Peper and Malcolm Campbell's book is a good attempt by two experienced golf writers (both of whom I know casually, and have played golf with, once all together) to square the circle of this "debate" but their work is more a commercial product than an academic treatise.  The best analysis of this issue that I have seen is here:

http://www.finegolf.co.uk/books/true-links/

I've known Lorne for a long time and last played golf and shared a few pints with him only a couple of months ago, up in Dornoch, which we both visit regularly and love.  Please read his thoughts and then continue this conversation.


Rich
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Thomas Dai on October 25, 2014, 06:02:11 AM
Question -

I have been told that sheep arn't keen on nibbling gorse, but would other sorts of bushes and general scrub have arisen on a links if sheep were still grazing there and the new growth shoots were not nibbled away as soon as they popped their heads up? I imagine the same applies to inland golf as well.

atb

PS - one aspect of some of the older US courses profiled herein recently, Myopia Hunt and Garden City being the two phototours that immediately come to mind, is the relatively small amount of trees/scrub within the course area but how trees frame the boundaries of the course from the outside world. Just a general observation.
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Niall C on October 25, 2014, 07:53:59 AM
It's been a wee while since I read True Links but from memory the authors make a decent fist of trying to define a links course (as opposed to links turf) and I think discuss some of the anomalies that can occur. Lorne Smith mentions Golspie and Powfoot as two courses that aren't included even though they have some fine links turf however in terms of the criteria put forward by Pepper and Campbell, courses had to be predominantly links to be considered.

Powfoot and Golspie on the other hand have large parts of the course that aren't links. Other examples might be Longniddry (although I think the amount of links turf there is probably a lot less than Golspie/Powfoot) and Garmouth & Kingston.

Niall
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Paul Gray on October 25, 2014, 08:03:11 AM
I've never met Lorne but do have a lot of time for his Finegolf efforts. And he's right in picking up 'True Links' for some of its empathise on style rather than turf. As I said, trees just shouldn't be considered an issue. And nor should sea views. Ultimately, this issue can only truly be resolved with the input of golf playing geologists, since this discussion isn't simply about what makes fine golf but actually about something more specific.

Somebody please tell me when exactly a sand dune by the sea isn't a sand dune by the sea.  ;)
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Jon Wiggett on October 26, 2014, 09:39:43 AM
Deal has a bush on the 13th and Sheehy wants to remove it, despite it being at least 100 years old!!

Get rid of it!!!!

Si!!!

Ciao

You could always just reroute the course ::)

Yes you could, but it would be easier and better to remove the offending bush  :o

Ciao

Or just abandon the hole altogether and split the 16th into a par four and par three. This would give the golfer a nice relaxing walk after playing the 12th and end the discussions on 16 a better par 4 or par 5?  ;) ;) :D ;D ;D :P Just incase you thought I was being serious ::)

Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Sean_A on October 26, 2014, 01:09:33 PM
Deal has a bush on the 13th and Sheehy wants to remove it, despite it being at least 100 years old!!

Get rid of it!!!!

Si!!!

Ciao

You could always just reroute the course ::)

Yes you could, but it would be easier and better to remove the offending bush  :o

Ciao

Or just abandon the hole altogether and split the 16th into a par four and par three. This would give the golfer a nice relaxing walk after playing the 12th and end the discussions on 16 a better par 4 or par 5?  ;) ;) :D ;D ;D :P Just incase you thought I was being serious ::)



Yes, you could, but it would be easier and better to remove the offending bush ::) 

Paul

From memory, Peper doesn't state that the lack of trees and sea views are necessary for links, that was a "purist" PoV which is essentially rejected. 

Though I agree with Lorne, Peper somewhat confuses style of design with the terrain, location, turf and grasses.  It shouldn't matter a jot if a links is predominately an aerial or ground game allowance design.  Its the location, land, turf and grasses which matter, not the design.  That said, I agree that Sand Hills etc are not links.  They may look and play like links, but to be divorced from the sea by that much distance negates the claim.  I can understand clubs wanting to cash in on the links marketing, but they are better off creating a distinct marketing which reflects the distinct type of courses they are.  In the long run, they will all be better off.

Ciao       

Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Jon Wiggett on October 26, 2014, 01:22:11 PM
Yes, you could, but it would be easier and better to remove the offending bush ::) 


But why go to all that trouble ??? and surely its under a TPO or has some sort of hysterical value ::)

Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Jon Wiggett on October 26, 2014, 02:03:54 PM
Yes, you could, but it would be easier and better to remove the offending bush ::) 


But why go to all that trouble ??? and surely its under a TPO or has some sort of hysterical value ::)



The only historical value I can see it having is that it's been there a long time. Hardly reason not to chop it down.

It is unsightly, slows down play and pisses golfers off as it entails instant lost ball if you go in it. Chopping it down would hardly be a large undertaking. It makes absolutely no sense for it to be there in my view. I also would like to see a lot more width added to the course more generally. It's an amazing course but it eats up far too many golf balls for my liking.

Brian,

did I say historical????? Look at what I actually wrote, then go lie down in a dark room and think about it. Gee, my tongue is stuck so hard in my cheek it is beginning to hurt. ::) ::) ::) :P :P :-X :o  8) 8) 8) 8) ;) :-* :-* :'(
GET IT ;D
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Sean_A on October 26, 2014, 02:09:58 PM
GET IT  ;D

Ahhhh, an appropriate emoticon.  I am not sure how you thought anybody was meant to get the foot in mouth deal with  ::)

Anyway Sheehy, I am with you.  Deal is a victim of a lack of width, but the bush situation is very weird.  It is hard to believe anybody woul want that thing around.    

Ciao
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Jon Wiggett on October 26, 2014, 02:28:57 PM
Sean,

abandon the hole or redesign the course, you really took that seriously???? As far as I know, foot in mouth is not the same as tongue in cheek Sean so no I did not expect anyone to think foot in mouth but it is not unknown to roll your eyes when hearing or saying something slightly unbelievable. What do you use  ::) for?

anyway I too agree the bush should go so all our ducks are nicely in a row. Now off to get on with my life  :-* ( :-*is for sarcasm) :-X ;)

Jon
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Paul Gray on October 26, 2014, 02:34:12 PM

Though I agree with Lorne, Peper somewhat confuses style of design with the terrain, location, turf and grasses.  It shouldn't matter a jot if a links is predominately an aerial or ground game allowance design.  Its the location, land, turf and grasses which matter, not the design.  That said, I agree that Sand Hills etc are not links.  They may look and play like links, but to be divorced from the sea by that much distance negates the claim.  I can understand clubs wanting to cash in on the links marketing, but they are better off creating a distinct marketing which reflects the distinct type of courses they are.  In the long run, they will all be better off.

Ciao       



100%

Perfectly put.
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Niall C on October 27, 2014, 03:17:49 PM


Somebody please tell me when exactly a sand dune by the sea isn't a sand dune by the sea.  ;)

Oh, that's easy. When the dune has been created by nature it's a dune, and when the "dune" has been created by the hand of man it's just a pile of sand  ;)

Niall
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Thomas Dai on October 27, 2014, 03:26:11 PM
Somebody please tell me when exactly a sand dune by the sea isn't a sand dune by the sea.  ;)
Oh, that's easy. When the dune has been created by nature it's a dune, and when the "dune" has been created by the hand of man it's just a pile of sand  ;)
Niall

I asked this question once of someone who's knowledable of coastal kinda stuff and was advised that sometimes it's the sea/waves washing sand/other wee particles ashore, sometimes it's a river washing sandy/silty stuff downstream and sometimes it's a bit of both.

atb
Title: Re: Links courses that have undergone massive tree/brush removal and...
Post by: Garland Bayley on October 27, 2014, 04:37:34 PM
...
From memory, Peper doesn't state that the lack of trees and sea views are necessary for links, that was a "purist" PoV which is essentially rejected. 
...
Ciao       



With respect to sea views, his criteria is closeness, not views.

"Is there a freedom from trees?" is in his criteria. However, he seems to grade a course on several of these criteria, but does not specify exactly how many of them must be passed, making it somewhat a subjective exercise.