If there is a linear time trend there'd be little point in doing the acf on the raw data; it would be dominated by the common time trend, rather than correlation in the error terms and it would be stronger for a longer series, even though the actual dependence was the same.
I don't think that we're looking at the same edition of the same book (you should give a full reference), but I see the discussion of this data set in the one I have.
Shuway and Stoffer say:
There is an obvious upward
trend in the series, and we might use simple linear regression to estimate that trend
by fitting the model
then later
In general, it is necessary for time series data to be stationary so that averaging
lagged products over time, as in the previous section, will be a sensible thing to
do. With time series data, it is the dependence between the values of the series that
is important to measure; we must, at least, be able to estimate autocorrelations with
precision. It would be difficult to measure that dependence if the dependence structure
is not regular or is changing at every time point. Hence, to achieve any meaningful
statistical analysis of time series data, it will be crucial that, if nothing else, the mean
and the autocovariance functions satisfy the conditions of stationarity
and then
as we suggested in the analysis of the chicken price data presented in
Example 2.1, a straight line might be useful for detrending the data; i.e.,
I believe these quotes from the text provide a complete account for why they acted as they did - they remove the estimated linear trend to attempt to achieve mean-variance stationarity (weak stationarity).
They then go on to look at differencing rather than removing a linear trend, and discuss why that might be a better choice.