[Joel_Stewart]

Over the last couple of days, my family and I spent time in Lake Tahoe at the Resort at Squaw Creek.  This is a fairly nice hotel located in the valley of Squaw Valley and includes a RTJ Jr. golf course.  

A small bit of back ground, the course is now about 15 years old and I had not played it in 12 years. The course was caught up in legal mumbo-jumbo for over 10 years with every enviromental group suing the developer to stop the building but it finally went through.  Lastly, Kyle Phillips served as design associate to RTJ on the course.

At some point, the developer agreed to follow the Audubon certification and has agreed to use "nothing" to treat the golf course.  (Half the course sits on top of a marsh).  Well to make this short, I found the course to be a collection of grass and weeds.  Anyway, do courses exist that are fully certified or is partial certification more realistic?

http://www.audubonintl.org/programs/acss/golf.htm

[Bob_Huntley]

Joel,

I played there last year and vowed never to return. The enviromental thing is a joke. Basically a marshland with horrible wooden slats to traverse over between grassland and the opportunity to loose a ball a hole.

All in all, an unmitigated disaster.

Just a couple of miles away, an absolute delight at a fraction of the cost.... Coyote Moon.

[Bob_Huntley]

Oops, too many "O's" in lose.

[TEPaul]

Bob:

The so-called Audobon Society that many of these golf courses are certified by is not the same National Audobon Society many have heard of for years and you may be thinking of!

[Mike_Young]

Yes they can work.  Ron Whitten did an article on Cateechee a couple of years ago at the Audubon conference that may be of interest  http://www.golfdigest.com/courses/critic/index.ssf?/courses/critic/cateechee.html  and our maintenance level is as good as any.  http://thegolfcourses.net/golfcourses/GA/36217.htm
We actually hosted the Audubon conference a few years ago.
It has mainly been a boost for marketing though and I think that is why many developers use it.

[Steve Lang]

 

When we were in Alberta with the gca.com group in july there were several regional golf courses being publicized on tv as using natural methods of fertilizing and weed control.. not the big name courses though.. they were talking about the years of effort to transition away from "easy" chemical methods of turf maintenance.

In the end, chemicals are chemicals, be they natural or synthetic, and the only real issue is what else comes along in the mix.. salts, other byproducts or microscopic parasites etc..  

I believe its all about sustainable development in the long run.  Now, what would be the ethical issues for "auditors", should they play the courses first?

[Peter Galea]

I believe that it was a condition of approval by the County that Squaw Creek be pesticide free.
The Audubon Cooperative mandates no such thing.

[Chris_Clouser]

Prairie Dunes is an excellent example of where this works well.  Below is a link to an article on the net about it and what they do there.


http://www.mhhe.com/biosci/pae/environmentalscience/casestudies/case3.mhtml

[TEPaul]

Last time I heard about the so-called "Audobon Society" certifying some golf course it was actually something called the "Audobon Society of New York" that apparently has no real connection to the old National Audobon Society that most have heard of!  

This could be somewhat confirmed by a forum I went to about four years ago in my neighborhood that is incredibly into federal conservation easements, birds, other delicate little beings or whatever!

The local conservation association in my area who held the forum had the head of the real National Audobon Society as the featured speaker. There were probably two hundred people at this forum at the Radnor Hunt Club and the head of the National Audobon Society gets up and proclaims that the three biggest enemies of the National Audobon Society are deer, cats and golf courses!!

At that point I started laughing uproariously, about 199 people looked at me very angrily, I got very red in the face, shut up and hunkered down and eventually slunk out of the forum at the first break!!

[Jim Sweeney]

TP: I sense skepticism in your post. The Audubon Society of New York, the organization that sponsors the certification program for golf courses, has gone to great lengths to pubicize that it is not affiliated with the National Audubon Society. I'm sure you know th history and purpose behind the ASNY, and the USGA's involvement in getting them started, so enough of this.

The program works wonderfully when used as intended. We have a number of fine examples here in KY where the Superintendent and his crew have embraced the program and done neat projects to enhance wildlife on the course. Lassing Poine and Boon Links are two that come to mind.

Gotta go. maybe more on this later.

[TEPaul]

JimS:

Don't get me wrong---whatever that Audobon Society is that certifies golf courses I think they've done a great job both in influencing how golf courses are maintained and in altering the terrible reputation and perception golf courses have always had in this regard.

What I'm saying is just that judging from what that head of the National Audobon Society said at a forum in my neighborhood about four years ago about golf courses, it doesn't seem like the National Audobon Society has completely bought into this idea yet!!  

Personally, I think they should though. One thing that head of the National Audobon Society seemed to conveniently overlook in my area is there's some old line farming going on around here and that application is without question about five times more damaging to the land and all those delicate little critters that live on it than any golf course could ever think of being!

[Joel_Stewart]

Whats the difference between and organic golf course and Audubon certified?

Bob H.  The resort at Squaw Creek is a joke, one of the worst courses I have ever played.  With that said, the course was packed with tourists and execs for a convention.

[Joe Hancock]

Not to diminsh the Audobon intent and involvement, there are many courses that use BMP's ( best management practices) that work in harmony with nature as well as any certified program does. It boils down to how much an organization cares about the environment of their golf course. People can care about such things without making it a marketing campaign, believe it or not.

Joe

[ian]

It is an organization that is set up to collect fees for their endorsement of an enviornmental sensitive golf development.

The first course I ever did was certified upon opening. I was proud to do this until I went through their crazy process. We carefully conformed to all the rules of naturalized areas, minimum maintained turf, etc, etc. until we hit greens drainage. I found them inflexible, they insisted my drainage had to outlet into buffer zones rather than into the ponds (sound reasonable right). The ponds were lined with HDPE plastic to catch and treat the entire communities run off! We were irrigation with treated water that went through the communities own treatment plant.

We insisted that the requirement was rediculous, but they would not budge. After a drawn out fight, we told them we were going to withdraw from the program, that their requirement was unreasonable. The next day all the drainage was allowed to go into the ponds.

We have had other similar experiences, and have choosen to avoid the endorsment; and instead create a management agreement that is at least as good if not better than anything they would have ever required

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ian,

Yes, they like those grass filters don't they?  Its funny, but I have a brochure from the state of Minnesota saying that discharging pollutants in ponds is probably the best way to filter them.  If one grain of fertilizer gets into millions of gallons of water, it should dilute to almost nothing.

Most golf courses today are designed to meet the Audubon "best management practices." In fact, many of those are now written into regulations in most places. Basically, reduce fertilzers, use organics where possible, only treat when necessary as measured by a damage threshold, not to keep it green, etc.  In design, filter all runoff, limit turf, and find ways to reduce irrigation, etc.

A good program, but I tell clients my course will meet their certification, and they don't necessarily need to go to the expense of having them in, although, I am glad to work with them and have learned a lot.

[paul cowley]

jeff...ah yes ,  another example of the alchemistic logic from our various regulatory agencies !

....i have threatened at times to write a book on the different regulations and mandates of all the state and federal agencies...but i fear upon completion i would have to shoot myself to help ease the depression .

 ....has anyone heard the one about the state of marylands FIDS habitat ? [thats forest and interior dwelling bird species for you uninitiated ]......excuse me , i feel the need to massage my typing hand in a meat grinder  

[Jeff_Brauer]

Paul, don't do it!

I haven't heard of Marylands, but I have had to address the issue "forrest fragmentation" and "predatory birds" chasing out the preferred songbirds.  Basically, there is a contention that any piercing of a forest by clearing opens up the area for less desireable birds, which take over nests up to 300 feet from the opening.

It's the basic "down and out" from the environmentalists playbook.....However, I have not seen a site that hasn't already been pierced by power lines, roads, etc. into fragments smaller than that.

[Joel_Stewart]

I'm going to bump this to see if there are any new courses in the last4 years that have really made strides in conditioning as an Audubon certified golf course?

[Ian Larson]

Ridgewood Country Club has been fully committed to and certified by The Audobon Society for well over a decade now. I would say that their conditioning isnt too shabby.

[Michael Dugger]

Don't the standards need to be flexible and site specific?

[Scott_Burroughs]

From the Audubon website (note it's not complete elimination of chemicals.  My club is certified and they use some occasionally.  They rarely water):

http://acspgolf.auduboninternational.org/

Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program for Golf Courses
Getting involved is easy.  Membership is open to golf courses in the United States and internationally, including private clubs, public and municipal courses, PGA sites, 9-hole facilities, resort courses, and golf residential communities.  After joining the program, your next step is to take stock of environmental resources and potential liabilities, and then develop an environmental plan that fits your unique setting, goals, staff, budget, and time.  Audubon International provides a Site Assessment and Environmental Planning Form to provide guidance, as well as educational information to help you with:

Environmental Planning
Wildlife and Habitat Management
Chemical Use Reduction and Safety
 Water Conservation
Water Quality Management
Outreach and Education
 

Based on a site specific report provided by Audubon International, you develop a plan that works for your golf course.  By implementing and documenting environmental management practices in the above areas, a golf course is eligible for designation as a Certified Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary, improving its stature and reputation.

[JSPayne]

Ok, time to chime in with some clarification......

I am by no means an expert, but have been involved with what your guys are talking about at several facilities now, including the one I'm currently at. Also, I don't think I'll have time to expound on everything there is to know about this in this post, but hopefully I can help a little......they say education is the key to understanding.

So first, some quick points:

What you all are referring to is AUDUBON INTERNATIONAL, and their Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program for Golf Courses. Courses can become members of this organization for a small annual fee. They can become "Audubon Certified" by completing their program, which I will explain more about later. They can become an "Audubon SIGNATURE" golf course by completing a more rigorous program of certification that can only be accomplished if the decision to go this route is decided at the time of construction. Courses already in exisitance cannot become a Signature Course.

The program is, as stated in their literature, "designed to help landowners preserve and enhance the environmental quality of their property."

After becoming a member (by simply paying a fee), there are six catagories of certification, that can be completed at any time, taking however long you want. Those catagories are: Environmental Planning, Wildlife and Habitat Management, Chemical Use Reduction and Safety, Water Conservation, Water Quality Management and Outreach and Education.

Like I said, I am currently participating in the certification program at my current property. I have become a member and have completed the Environmental Planning catagory. Basically all that entailed was filling out paperwork about alot of details of the property (acerage, water source, grass types, etc.) and going through a checklist of items from all the other catagories and saying whether we've already met their goal, are in the process of getting to their goalor haven't even started working on the goal.

They actually don't REQUIRE anything. If anything, their goals are mainly of encouragment of reduction and consciencous monitoring. Some examples: for wildlife management, they ask you to monitor wildlife species, make a list, make a map of habitats, and say if you've tried to create any new habitats (birdboxes, brush piles, new native areas, etc.). Water conservation is about monitoring how much you're using now, and providing results of any reductions, through more mindful usage, or converting irrigated turf to unirrigated native, or any other ideas.

The program is not designed to make a golf course a better golf course. It's designed to ENHANCE the golf course's role and perception in the human, plant and wildlife community it is a part of. It's goals are mainly to bring awareness to many environmental aspects that almost all of us already deem important and gives us an outline of how to monitor, track and make improvements on these fronts.

Basically, it's good PR for a course from a business standpoint, but from where I sit as a superintendent, it's just the right thing to do. And if I'm going to do it voluntarily with or without them providing an outline for me, I might as well participate in a program that can help back us up and provide support for such ideas in reaching out to the community, government and other regulators.

In my own personal opnion, this program is less about golf or even the golf course, and more about showing that the people who own and run this property are concerned about their role and impact on the community beyond being just being another business.

And BTW.....all I do really know about the Resort at Squaw Creek is that they are a "Audubon Signature" facility (which means they followed guidelines starting with the construction) and they are 100% organic. I don't think the two labels are connected, though being organic obviously ties in with Audubon's ideal goals. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the 100% organic mandate was made by a government or regalatory agency, not Audubon, but don't quote me on it.

And for what it's worth, I played there 3 years ago, had a great time, even though I thought the course was tough because of all the marsh/native areas, but thought the maintenance was great, considering what I know and how difficult 100% organic can be to achieve.

[Rob_Waldron]

At Billy Casper Golf we have registered all of our golf courses in the Audubon Certification Program. We require our superintendents to get on board with the program in a pro-active effort to maintain our golfers in an environmentally sensitive way. There is a constant outcry against golf courses by "tree hugging" left. We feel we amke the environment better with our maintenance practices. Audubon Certification provides a documented methodology. Their involvement in golf has been extremely helpful by educating the uninformed and promoting golf as environmentally sensitive. If only the numerous farms in Pennsylvania and Maryland were as sensitive as our golf courses the Chesapeake Bay would be much cleaner than it is.

[Carl Johnson]

Ok, time to chime in with some clarification . . .

. . . and say if you've tried to create any new habitats (birdboxes, brush piles, new native areas, etc.).  . . .

JS Payne: do you know how the program defines "native" areas and "new" native areas?  Since a huge portion of a golf course consists of non-native grass (typically "Bermuda" grass, in my area), most of which probably replaced original native plants, you'd think they'd look for some kind of proportionality, that is, for every acre of native plants destroyed you'd have to provide a acre of "new" native area.  That would seem to be just about impossible.

Thanks, Carl Johnson

[JSPayne]

Carl,

I try to be careful with how I use "native" as many educated people out there know that TRULY "native" areas are hard to come by anymore.

Audubon refers to them more as "natural", "low maintenance" or "minimally used" areas. Aspects of these areas are part of the Wildlife and Habitat Mangement and Water Conservation sections of the certification.

Also, since I have never participated in their Signature program which occurs from the start of construction and may or may not have requirements for creating "new native areas" for those that may be disrupted or destroyed during construction, I can't really speak to any such requirements.

But....straight from the certification paperwork for post-construction certification:

Wildlife and Habitiat Management
Overall Purpose: To have enhanced natural areas and landscaping on the golf course to protect and sustain native habitats and the wildlife that depend on them for survival. (Native habitat will obviously vary depending on location and may take some research to find out what kind of habitat actually existed before the golf course was there if most of it was destroyed during construction).
Goals: To continue to expand our general knowledge of the plants, wildlife species and habitats found on the golf course, to improve MINIMALLY USED and landscaped areas to provide habitat for a variety of wildlife species and to preserve the rich biodiversity of our region by protecting existing native habitats and species and landscaping primarily with indigenous (native) plants.

They also ask how many acres of natural land are protected from distrubance and if you've created any new wildlife habitat areas, through gardens, landscaping or decreasing the amount of managed turfgrass acres.

Water Conservation
In this section, only a small portion simply asks, "Have you reduced your irrigated acerage?" and asks you to describe how your efforts have been successful in conserving water. I would say that the conclusion to try and plant native species in an newly unirrigated area would be the smart and logical thing to do, but no where does Audubon require that you do so.

By the way, similar to Water Conservation, the Chemical Use Reduction and Safety section simply asks if you have REDUCED pesticide and fertilizer use on your property. It also asks for the percentage of your fertilizer that is organic before and after joining their program. No where does it mandate or require any specific restriction or even a specific reduction that is necessary to become certified. It's all about showing awareness and ATTEMPTING to become a better steward of the environment and wildlife through these efforts.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()