Headingley GC 10 years ago vs now

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Indeed, same at my place. Also improves pace of play depending on where the trees were.

…and same at my place.

Removing mature trees and clearing low level scrub from under and between them so that we can see the remaining mature trees in all their glory…and very importantly thinning and removing barriers to wind getting in to the fairways to aid drying out. Also improves pace of play as we are not hunting in low scrub looking for our ball, we can usually find it quickly but still have options of varying difficulty for the next shot.

And just ask members of East Renfrewshire - club I was member of in late 70s, early 80s - on the success or otherwise of the major tree planting programme the club did back then.

 

[sunshine]

The two photos are deceptive. After tree removal the photo is taken from "further back" making the remaining trees appear much smaller and less significant and the foreground "barer".
I've played around with the pics and there is clearly some difference, but that difference appears less significant when the images are brought more into an equal view.

Good photo work.

What is clear is that the trees are more spaced out, which has got to be healthier for the trees, and also allows more light on to the playing surfaces and air to circulate. And the remaining trees still provides a playing hazard / barrier.

 

[Robster59]

…and same at my place.

Removing mature trees and clearing low level scrub from under and between them so that we can see the remaining mature trees in all their glory…and very importantly thinning and removing barriers to wind getting in to the fairways to aid drying out. Also improves pace of play as we are not hunting in low scrub looking for our ball, we can usually find it quickly but still have options of varying difficulty for the next shot.

And just ask members of East Renfrewshire - club I was member of in late 70s, early 80s - on the success or otherwise of the major tree planting programme the club did back then.

See Post #7.
Correctly planted trees can be a benefit to the course, sometimes for aesthetics, and sometimes for player protection (reduce the chance of stray balls hitting them).
But, if thousands are planted really close, don't get thinned out properly (as ours weren't), and long-term impact isn't considered, then they can cause issues. Not to mention the time it takes to maintain the areas around the trees.
Our course did not have trees for the first 50 years, it is a heathland course and the overhead photos from pre-tree planting days show it as having very few trees on the course. The trees are not native to the course and are now also getting to the end of their natural life. We are just in the process of removing 80-90 larches from the course as they are diseased and Scottish Forestry have ordered us to take them down.
The selective removal of trees at our course has absolutely benefited it in terms of improving the condition of the ground.

 

[Bratty]

See Post #7.
Correctly planted trees can be a benefit to the course, sometimes for aesthetics, and sometimes for player protection (reduce the chance of stray balls hitting them).
But, if thousands are planted really close, don't get thinned out properly (as ours weren't), and long-term impact isn't considered, then they can cause issues. Not to mention the time it takes to maintain the areas around the trees.
Our course did not have trees for the first 50 years, it is a heathland course and the overhead photos from pre-tree planting days show it as having very few trees on the course. The trees are not native to the course and are now also getting to the end of their natural life. We are just in the process of removing 80-90 larches from the course as they are diseased and Scottish Forestry have ordered us to take them down.
The selective removal of trees at our course has absolutely benefited it in terms of improving the condition of the ground.

I always laugh when members say, "the course was never like this. It's always been treelined" when they're 50 years old and the course is a hundred or more!
Case in point was The Addington. Members were up in arms when all the tree removal started, especially up the 12th hole which had a huge swathe of trees all the way up the left side to the green.
I sent the GM an image I found online of the same hole in the 1920s, and there's virtually no trees! Told him to just show that to members to shut them up!
One member told him, "well I wasn't born then, so it doesn't count!"... honestly, some people!

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

See Post #7.
Correctly planted trees can be a benefit to the course, sometimes for aesthetics, and sometimes for player protection (reduce the chance of stray balls hitting them).
But, if thousands are planted really close, don't get thinned out properly (as ours weren't), and long-term impact isn't considered, then they can cause issues. Not to mention the time it takes to maintain the areas around the trees.
Our course did not have trees for the first 50 years, it is a heathland course and the overhead photos from pre-tree planting days show it as having very few trees on the course. The trees are not native to the course and are now also getting to the end of their natural life. We are just in the process of removing 80-90 larches from the course as they are diseased and Scottish Forestry have ordered us to take them down.
The selective removal of trees at our course has absolutely benefited it in terms of improving the condition of the ground.

Ha! Somehow missed your post I was a member just as the main tree planting started…would have been around 1977. I can remember thinking that it was going to change the nature and feel of the course very significantly as the open windswept moorland landscape was brutal at times - and when I played a few years ago I hardly recognised the place for the trees - and even then you were busy doing serious drainage work on 2 and 17, and tbh 18 was a bit of a quagmire up to the burn.

Still have a great memories and affection for the place even though my membership was over 40 yrs ago.

One other more general benefit about tree and low level scrub removal that has been very noticeable at my place, is how it opens up views and vistas both across the course and beyond, when previously things felt, and were, quite enclosed.

 

[D-S]

Not an expert but how will removing trees keep the course drier? I would have though the trees would take up water so more trees = less water?

Trees only do not suck up water when they are dormant in the wet winter months, only when they are in leaf. Often root systems get into drainage systems (as this is where they find water) and prevent them working effectively.

 

[HeftyHacker]

Our 11th is often the first green to close when it gets wet and last to open. This winter they've removed a load of trees and the reason (as others have said) was apparently to get more sunlight to the green.

 

[Robster59]

Ha! Somehow missed your post I was a member just as the main tree planting started…would have been around 1977. I can remember thinking that it was going to change the nature and feel of the course very significantly as the open windswept moorland landscape was brutal at times - and when I played a few years ago I hardly recognised the place for the trees - and even then you were busy doing serious drainage work on 2 and 17, and tbh 18 was a bit of a quagmire up to the burn.

Still have a great memories and affection for the place even though my membership was over 40 yrs ago.

One other more general benefit about tree and low level scrub removal that has been very noticeable at my place, is how it opens up views and vistas both across the course and beyond, when previously things felt, and were, quite enclosed.

You'd be surprised again if you played it now. The fairways are vastly improved, all the trees down the side of the 18th have gone as well as many other around the course.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

And yet…and yet…

Speaking this afternoon with a long standing member and the subject of our tree removal came up. Oh how anti it she was, she could scarce have been more so. She was utterly convinced that the trees helped drain the course given the water they suck up (and to what extent I know not how correct she is), and that any benefit gained from wind getting into fairways through tree removal was negated by her hating that she could see through the trees to lots of other holes…she much preferred the ’privacy’ afforded when playing a hole enclosed by trees and scrub.

We agreed to completely disagree and parted on friendly terms as we are great chums.

 

[Bratty]

And yet…and yet…

Speaking this afternoon with a long standing member and the subject of our tree removal came up. Oh how anti it she was, she could scares have been less so. She was utterly convinced that the trees helped drain the course given the water they suck up (and to what extent I know not how correct she is), and that any benefit gained from wind getting into fairways through tree removal was negated by her hating that she could see through the trees to lots of other holes…she much preferred the ’privacy’ afforded when playing a hole enclosed by trees and scrub.

We agreed to completely disagree and parted on friendly terms as we are great chums.

You can't please all the people, and those who love the privacy will certainly hate tree removal. Our place just said you have to trust us that this will improve the playing surface, and if you don't like it, there's other courses out there!

 

[sunshine]

See Post #7.
Correctly planted trees can be a benefit to the course, sometimes for aesthetics, and sometimes for player protection (reduce the chance of stray balls hitting them).
But, if thousands are planted really close, don't get thinned out properly (as ours weren't), and long-term impact isn't considered, then they can cause issues. Not to mention the time it takes to maintain the areas around the trees.
Our course did not have trees for the first 50 years, it is a heathland course and the overhead photos from pre-tree planting days show it as having very few trees on the course. The trees are not native to the course and are now also getting to the end of their natural life. We are just in the process of removing 80-90 larches from the course as they are diseased and Scottish Forestry have ordered us to take them down.
The selective removal of trees at our course has absolutely benefited it in terms of improving the condition of the ground.

Sounds like an act of vandalism from the course committee in the 1970s.

 

[sunshine]

And yet…and yet…

Speaking this afternoon with a long standing member and the subject of our tree removal came up. Oh how anti it she was, she could scarce have been more so. She was utterly convinced that the trees helped drain the course given the water they suck up (and to what extent I know not how correct she is), and that any benefit gained from wind getting into fairways through tree removal was negated by her hating that she could see through the trees to lots of other holes…she much preferred the ’privacy’ afforded when playing a hole enclosed by trees and scrub.

We agreed to completely disagree and parted on friendly terms as we are great chums.

Although she may believe she is an armchair agronomist, I think we can agree she is just ignorant.

 

[Marshy77]

Such a fantastic course. Played it just before Covid and they were working on one of the holes, which is now open, and looks amazing. Think there doing some other work around the course and on the 1st too. We were made really welcome too by the pro which set us up for a really enjoyable round.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Although she may believe she is an armchair agronomist, I think we can agree she is just ignorant.

I think her big gripe is that in some places she can see more of adjacent and other holes than she used to be able to see. I did mention that as the course is >125yrs old only the very older of the trees have always been there. And most of those taken out have either been much younger or non-native - especially to a heathland landscape.

 

[Robster59]

Sounds like an act of vandalism from the course committee in the 1970s.

I think that's a bit harsh. There was a push from the Scottish Government to plant more trees, and the club got a financial benefit for doing this. In reality, every course in the area has the same issue, not just ours. IMHO, probably the thing they should have done, but never did, was thin out the trees after 2-3 years. But I think it was thought most of them would die off anyway so they didn't. In the end most of the trees survived. It's always easy to be wise in retrospect.

 

[Robster59]

And yet…and yet…

Speaking this afternoon with a long standing member and the subject of our tree removal came up. Oh how anti it she was, she could scarce have been more so. She was utterly convinced that the trees helped drain the course given the water they suck up (and to what extent I know not how correct she is), and that any benefit gained from wind getting into fairways through tree removal was negated by her hating that she could see through the trees to lots of other holes…she much preferred the ’privacy’ afforded when playing a hole enclosed by trees and scrub.

We agreed to completely disagree and parted on friendly terms as we are great chums.

What does she want the privacy for?