Even with the amount of water golf courses use, what’s more environmentally damaging, a golf course or 200 acres of concrete jungle that can’t appropriately manage water runoff (at all)? Getting rid of golf courses isn’t the environmental answer, but there are clearly better practices in conserving water and adjusting the public’s perspective on what a golf course should look like in August.
1 Like
4 Likes
@djpie I’m an agronomist, course designer, with a philosophical focus on environmental sustainability. I always say that a golf course that only serves golfers has lost its way. So many golf courses, in my eyes, are green space preservation first and foremost. Happy to take this offline for a deeper dive. Will be at CommonGround tomorrow and Friday too 
9 Likes
The land use issue on Muni Courses in dense urban areas is less about water use and more about the need to use that land for something other than golf…parks, affordable housing, housing, city infrastructure, etc.
Land use though is less of an environmental argument and more of a social or humanitarian argument although environmental concerns could be a part of that arguement depending on how the land is being repurposed.
2 Likes
I’m not sure that land use isn’t an environmental concern…if large or anyway significant parts of the world become uninhabitable because of environmental factors (heat, sea levels) than how cities use land is seen as part of their response to an environmental crisis
A consideration in face of environmental concerns is how we use our remaining resources- I see land as one of those resources. Although my perspective will be skewed by my experience living in an area where the housing crisis is always a topic of conversation…
3 Likes
A couple of thoughts:
I think the future golf course development in more populous areas will occur in areas where there isn’t a competing use of land for housing or more traditional development types. Golf courses are able to be built on land that isn’t suitable for most other types of development, due to terrain, floodplain, or simply a need to manage stormwater. Part of the reason you see see so many terrible designs for golf courses within subdivisions is due to the fact that the land being used wasn’t otherwise buildable. The golf course is likely occupying land that would otherwise have gone unused. If golf is going to continue to grow in the development of new courses, the ability to adapt course management practices to work within environmentally sensitive areas will be essential.
There is also a lot that can be done with water reuse for irrigation. My local course received a grant from the City and the Watershed to undertake a significant water reuse project. This project had multiple benefits in that it, significantly reduced the amount of runoff making its way into the watershed system, provided an irrigation source for the golf course allowing a 50% reduction in their ground water use, and provided a significantly cleaner flow of water into the watershed system allowing for cleaner local lakes.
Project info is here: https://www.ricecreek.org/index.asp?SEC=31ABD821-A665-4BD3-BD8C-94D2358D5FE0&DE=F968FCD9-42ED-4D64-ABD5-B58EB8BF0715&Type=B_PR
1 Like
You can’t have giant cities and suburbs without green spaces, and golf courses can be a viable option for a multi use green space if done correctly. See St. Andrews. Green Spaces are critical in managing water run off. I think there is a place for golf courses in and around urban areas and I think they can be a net positive to the area socially, economically, and environmentally speaking if done correctly.
2 Likes
FTFY
I realize there are other big issues like land use and water conservation but Alex Weber would be a very interesting person to talk to about marine pollution and golf balls. https://www.theplasticpick-up.org/the-golf-ball-project
1 Like
The town I live in plowed over a 9 hole muni three summers ago to build some McMansions. For some places they probably think they can get a significant bump in property tax revenue from homes instead of having a local muni.
Earlier this summer I was playing a muni in Auburn Hills, MI called Fieldstone, it was a 75 degree day, and we’d had rain two days before, and the greens staff was watering the course in the middle of the afternoon. I asked the Super why water the course with the rain we had gotten and he gave me some line about the health of the grass and “it needs to eat in the middle of the day the same as we do.” I mentioned the course would be more interesting to play and a bit more fun if they let it dry and brown out a bit, and he said that people want the course to be green, and that it visually looks better.
2 Likes
I see parallels with the Strong Towns movement which I’ve come to really appreciate. If we have concerns about land and the lack of it to support everyone, building more single family homes on a golf course is losing the forest for the trees.
In Seattle, our city council is looking at 4 of the muni’s to determine whether they should repurpose them for other uses, such as housing or office space. It’s as if they don’t realize that in large swathes of the city, they’ve limited apartment buildings to 7 or 8 stories high.
I have serious concerns about water usage though, especially when I see pristine courses in places like Vegas. I don’t know the answer for that problem, but tearing down golf courses to throw in more houses at the expense of any green space is attempting to solve the wrong problem.
But what do I know.
1 Like
2 Likes
Water usage applies in the northwest as well. I played Salish Cliffs in July and it was almost offensive how overwatered the course was.
The Seattle golf course debate has gone so far off the rails I don’t even know where to begin with that one.
1 Like
Vancouver is the same
When I lived in Brooklyn, I always liked to imagine McCarren park as a wedge range. Who needs a giant public pool?
(not meant seriously)
It is more of a separate topic, but just google “Municipal Golf Courses Closing” and their are multiply articles a week about city governments looking to close municipal courses although the majority of them are for financial and not environmental (or land use) reasons.
In fact there is a really good article that came out on it yesterday.
100%. I’ve seen that more times than I can count while golfing in the area. It’s pretty startling.
I think my issue with the Seattle golf course debate is that it feels like they started with the golf courses and worked towards a goal, instead of starting with the goal and working back to potential solutions (of which reclaiming the courses could certainly be one). But I’ll leave it there instead of derailing this thread.
Where else are you going to float around in chlorinated piss water?
2 Likes
The hipsters sunbathe on the patchy grass during the summer. No thanks.