Perspective from the 19^th Hole is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

At any golf course there is an issue that almost always sparks serious debate:  Trees on the course.

Are they good or bad?

Do they add to course architecture or subtract from it?

There are no easy answers to questions such as this.  Plus, as golf courses age, trees that once were “this” tall grow to be “this” tall, thus obscuring views.

This issue arose last week during the annual PGA Golf Championship which was held at Aronimink in Philadelphia.  Writing in Global Golf Post, here is how Ron Green, Jr., described the situation in a column that appeared under this headline:  Debate over trees simmers at Aronimink.

“It is a discussion that titillates course architecture nerds, many of whom bemoan – and rightly so – the outsized impact technology now has on the game.

“How necessary are trees to a great golf course design?

“Nearly 100 years after Donald Ross, the da Vinci of his time, laid out a course that rivaled Pinehurst No. 2 for his ultimate affection, Aronimink.  It was something of a case study last week because modern-day master Gil Hanse and his partner Jim Wagner took down a significant number of trees when they worked nearly a decade ago.”

For his part, Ross, when he wrote a book about golf, said that “trees should not crowd out the real intent of a golf course.”

Aronimink wasn’t strip-mined but it was opened up, creating expansive vistas across the property creating bumps and rolls with a natural rhythm, giving the layout much of its character. 

I have not been there, but views on TV reminded me of a “links-style” course, much more than a “parkland layout.”

In a less public way than at Aronimink, the “trees or no trees” issue has come up at the course where I play most of my golf in Salem, Oregon, Illahe Hills Golf and Country Club.

It is now about 65 years old and, of course, small trees have now become big trees, hampering the layout first created by course architect Billy Bell.

So, our golf course superintendent has made it a goal to remove trees to provide what he calls “a clean layout.”

The moves have sparked some controversy because, on occasion, trees created a visual backdrop for some holes.  Now that those trees are gone, the visual backdrop doesn’t exist.

But, for me, not an arborist, I favor removing trees for this simple reason:  When you have too many trees on a golf course, the ones you want to be healthy are adversely affected by so many competitors.

So, let the three debate continue, as I advocate for fewer of them.