News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


jg7236

"Board Certified Golf Course Architects"
« on: June 21, 2005, 01:43:55 AM »
Hello To All:

Why is it today that everybody thinks they can call themselves a "Golf Course Architect."  I think it is great to dream and work as hard as one can to make those dreams come true.  Just because one plays a lot of golf, has extreme love for the game of golf, read a couple of golf course architecture books, doesn't give them the right to call themselves a "Golf Course Architect."

It seems like everybody these days is using this term "Golf Course Architect" too loosely.  Some that are using this term have never ever actually experienced building a golf course from the ground floor trenches on a backhoe, front loader, dumptruck, or just using the good old fashion shovel.  Some have never maintained a golf course and have no idea what NPK mean in regards to fertilizer.  Some can't even read a grading plan correctly. Some don't even know what Auto-CAD is and don't want to know.  Some have very little plant and turf identification knowledge.  Just because you have extreme love for the game of golf doesn't give one the right to call him or her self a "Golf Course Architect."

I didn't right this insert to get under anybody's skin, I wrote this to see what your perspective was on this subject.  My suggestion is to provide a board certified examination just like the American Society of Landscape Architects does.  If one doesn't pass, they have to go back and gain more experience in the field or possibly in the office, then they can take the board again.

Cheers,

John N. Gunning IV

Mike_Sweeney

Re:"Board Certified Golf Course Architects"
« Reply #1 on: June 21, 2005, 07:17:01 AM »
My suggestion is to provide a board certified examination just like the American Society of Landscape Architects does.  

Just curious, how many members are there in the ASLA?

rgkeller

Re:"Board Certified Golf Course Architects"
« Reply #2 on: June 21, 2005, 07:44:50 AM »
One wonders if Mr. Flynn would have passed the required examination.

Kelly Blake Moran

Re:"Board Certified Golf Course Architects"
« Reply #3 on: June 21, 2005, 07:55:56 AM »
I do not believe ASLA administer the registration process.  I believe it is an organization called CLARB.  I am a registered landscape architect, but know little about the various organizations.  You can be a member of ASLA and not be a registered landscape architect.  In PA we are now required to take continuing education, which amounts little more than to attending the state ASLA convention and attending seminars for two days, some of which are very informative.  There are other internet and mail order classes you can take as well.

I understand the jest of John's comments, I think, because I have heard similar questions from contractors who deal with some people that are entering the field but have no idea the steps required to implement the design in the field.  However, as RG insinuates there are some brilliant designers that would not meet the standards of exams yet they are some of the standouts in the field.  Ultimately you have to worry about your own skills, abilities, creativity, and integrity, and trust that paying attention to those attributes will give you enough opportunity to practice your craft, and the rest will take care of itself.  

Bill Gayne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Board Certified Golf Course Architects"
« Reply #4 on: June 21, 2005, 08:35:51 AM »
John,

If one didn't pass the "board certification" how would you prevent them from building a golf course? This sounds more like a marketing idea "Hire a member of the American Institute of Architects that is certified in golf course architecture."

I'm a member of the AICPA and they do this type of designation all the time for specialty services such as financial planning, valuation, tax services, etc. It demonstrates to the purchaser of the services that you have some recognized competency. But if you don't have the designation that doesn't mean you are incompetent in the task that needs to be done.

As far as all the technical staff skills that you described when building a golf course, do you really need to have the skills necessary to perform the work of staff? Or is it sufficient to be able to define the work that must be done and evaluate the quality upon competion?



« Last Edit: June 21, 2005, 08:37:57 AM by Bill Gayne »

Mike_Young

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Board Certified Golf Course Architects"
« Reply #5 on: June 21, 2005, 08:38:34 AM »
I concur with KBM above.
I am also glad that most artist do not have to be certified or we might have a totally different take on the arts.
Having said this, I also don't think being a landscape architect or a degree in landscape architecture prepares you for GC architecture NECESSARILY.  I think common sense, humility, and research do.

Yesterday I was on a site where a young recent graduate of an LAR school that had been working on a construction crew at another golf course had come by.  He had informed them he was a golf architect. He had brought a construction company along as well as an attitude according to the people there.  One of his "recommendations" was to move a tee back into wetlands.  When he was told by the supt that these were wetlands, he informed him quickly that "wetlands" was a bad word and he should never mention that around a golf course, just do it.  You can have all the degrees, associations and board certifications you wish but if your stupid it won't help.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2005, 08:40:29 AM by Mike_Young »
"just standing on a corner in Winslow Arizona"

wsmorrison

Re:"Board Certified Golf Course Architects"
« Reply #6 on: June 21, 2005, 09:02:54 AM »
rgkeller,

Why do you say that?  More than likely none of the classic architects could pass a test developed sixty or more years after they died.  What's the point of that?  But an architect like Flynn would surprise many of you in his broad knowledge base and expertise.  Among all the dead guys, it might help to recognize Flynn's overall efforts and knowledge of golf architecture and agronomy.  I think rather than using Flynn for an example, he might be the exception.

The amateur architects including Fownes, Wilson, Crump, etc had help from experts.  Their concepts were implemented but there were experts in the requisite fields to assist them during their trials and errors.  Today, there are so many more regulations and codes that nobody can simply say they are an architect and practice the craft.  I don't see how this is possible.

Now, getting back to Flynn.  Along with Hugh Wilson, Walter Harban, Piper and Oakley, Flynn was instrumental in many of the experiments and efforts in agronomics.  Flynn developed and tested numerous strains of turf grasses for golf courses, football fields and other athletic fields.  Flynn was involved in WWII camouflage of airports, planting wheat and other grains to hide the runways.  Flynn personally took over the agronomic failure of Pine Valley in the late teens and rescued the lost fairways in short order.  The methods used to grow grass on sand was used on many courses after this (I think NGLA included).  

Flynn was one of a handful of experts on agronomy such as it was in his days.  He had an excellent understanding of trees and plantings.  JD Rockefeller, Jr. and Clarence Geist had Flynn as their consultants on all matters relating to landscaping of their estates.  Flynn was personally close to both of these men the richest men of their day.  They could have hired anyone and chose Flynn for the landscaping of their renowned estates.

Flynn's experiments with bent grasses and Howard Toomey's patented process of planting stolons was way ahead of its day.

As for his design expertise, Flynn was revoutionary in the way he structured his business and the method of designs he employed.  Flynn did all the design work out of his architecture company and joint ventured with Howard Toomey to provide a one stop shop for design, engineering and construction.  

Flynn was an early practitioner of making numerous drawing iterations before coming up with a presentation plan based upon long hours on site in the field.  His drawings, despite some doubters were drawn to scale and meant to be built as drawn.  If you look at some of his drawings and early aerial photographs the similarities are obvious.  Now, I'm not saying that there weren't any changes made as he went along, undoubtedly unsuspected subsurface issues may have forced changes or he revised a bit here and there.  However, overwhelmingly his courses were built as designed.

Flynn understood angles of repose and his mimicry of nature was done for both aesthetic and maintenance reasons.  If you carefully study the engineering and construction of the Cascades and Indian Creek and consdider the naturalism that was man-made, I think it is evident Flynn was ahead of his time.  His forward thinking allowed him to design in elasticity so that his courses today required less change because of systematic design features.  

Flynn was much more than a designer, he was a creative and artistic force in his day with a business model that was revolutionary in his field.

What areas of expertise would such a test cover?  Look for some guy to post on GCA, read some books and visit and play hundreds of courses and declare himself a designer or architect is ludicrous.  If you read medical books and visit hundreds of hospitals, are you a surgeon?  If you study painting and visit hundreds of museums are you an artist?  Of course not.  

There may be shortcuts but there are no shortcuts to success.  I think, like most of the arts, the apprentice system works best after a foundation of learning is established.  I don't think just anyone should call themselves golf course architects--but the truth will be known.

rgkeller

Re:"Board Certified Golf Course Architects"
« Reply #7 on: June 21, 2005, 09:28:05 AM »
Well, the idea of a group of "experts" making decisions on which and who may seek gainful employment in their field evidently appeals to some.

I would rather the free market determine entree and success in arenas where the public safety are not at risk.

Requiring a Bill Coore to take a test devised by Rees Jones and Tom Fazio does not strike me as the path to great golf course design.

Whose test would Picasso have been required to pass?
« Last Edit: June 21, 2005, 09:29:26 AM by rgkeller »

wsmorrison

Re:"Board Certified Golf Course Architects"
« Reply #8 on: June 21, 2005, 10:07:25 AM »
rgkeller,

It seems we are in agreement after all.  The market will best determine the entrees and successes.  I don't know of any developer or ownership group that can trust safety, maintenance and environmental issues to a designer without a team of experts to provide the full range of required expertise.  However, an architect/architecture firm can and does provide this expertise.

So there is an important distinction between designer and architect.  A designer (including tour professionals) is someone who can create concepts whether or not they are possible to develop and an architect is someone who can create concepts and have them developed.

« Last Edit: June 21, 2005, 10:08:25 AM by Wayne Morrison »

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Board Certified Golf Course Architects"
« Reply #9 on: June 21, 2005, 10:23:15 AM »
I'm with rg on this one.

The issue isn't whether Flynn would satisfy the requisite tests. I'm sure he would. The issue is whether he or anyone else ought to be required to pass muster before some sanctioning body.

I see no need for such a process for golf architects.

Doctors have to be certified and lawyers have to pass bars because they can do real and permanent harm if they aren't competent. There is a public interest in their being qualified (at some basic level, at least).

There are no similar "public harm" concerns with architects. If they botch a few courses, no big deal. All architectural mistakes are redeemable.

The price incompetent architects pay for incompetence is loss of acceptance in the market place. Which is the way it should be.

Their competence should not be pre-judged by a sanctioning body.

Bob


Mike Nuzzo

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Board Certified Golf Course Architects"
« Reply #10 on: June 21, 2005, 11:41:54 AM »
Gunning,
Howdy, and I hope all is well.

I would hope you'd be more interested in how low the fees are for new designers (or architects) ...  see the thread on the next page - Average Design Fees.
I would be very interested to learn what you've been hearing, as I assume you've been talking to quite a few architects or designers.  

Maybe I'm not objective (although I do call myself a designer not an architect) but I'm glad there are different ways professionals have found their way into golf design.
I wrote an essay in Paull Daley's new book, GAVIII, about non-traditional entrances to the field.

Who is keeping you from opening Gunning Golf Architecture, Inc.?

Cheers
Thinking of Bob, Rihc, Bill, George, Neil, Dr. Childs, & Tiger.

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re:"Board Certified Golf Course Architects"
« Reply #11 on: June 21, 2005, 12:28:40 PM »
John G:

So if Bill Coore and Jack Nicklaus and I didn't score as high on the CAD test as you did, would that make you a better golf course designer?

I understand your frustration, ten or fifteen years ago I used to wonder if I would ever be able to compete with people who had none of the background that I did.  But one of the most important steps to becoming an architect on your own is to be persistent as all hell, to keep working and keep getting better until you finally get a chance to show what you can do.  There's no guarantee that you'll get your chance ... it's a very competitive world nowadays ... but complaining about the system will get you nowhere.  

Marty Bonnar

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Board Certified Golf Course Architects"
« Reply #12 on: June 21, 2005, 12:43:51 PM »
John the Fourth,
the MSc in Golf Course Architecture which I, and several other regular posters here, did at Heriot Watt University in Edinburgh was/is recognised by the European Institute of Golf Course Architects as enough to gain a 'Graduate' membership.

The Royal Institute of British Architects require DEGREES for membership. The Landscape Institute requires DEGREES. The Royal Institute of Civil Engineers requires DEGREES. Why Golf Course Architecture as a profession haven't cottoned on to a simple BASIC membership qualification is a question only the profession can answer. I know I have AN answer, but I'll hold on to it for the moment, if I may...

FBD.
The White River runs dark through the heart of the Town,
Washed the people coal-black from the hole in the ground.

Bob_Huntley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:"Board Certified Golf Course Architects"
« Reply #13 on: June 21, 2005, 01:18:52 PM »
Hello To All:


It seems like everybody these days is using this term "Golf Course Architect" too loosely.  Some that are using this term have never ever actually experienced building a golf course from the ground floor trenches on a backhoe, front loader, dumptruck, or just using the good old fashion shovel.  Some have never maintained a golf course and have no idea what NPK mean in regards to fertilizer.  Some can't even read a grading plan correctly. Some don't even know what Auto-CAD is and don't want to know.  Some have very little plant and turf identification knowledge.  Just because you have extreme love for the game of golf doesn't give one the right to call him or her self a "Golf Course Architect."


I have it on the very best authority that MacKenzie never saw a back-hoe and Jack Neville knew nothing of Auto-Cad. Would this disqualify them?

Bob

jg7236

Re:"Board Certified Golf Course Architects"
« Reply #14 on: June 21, 2005, 04:40:35 PM »
All is good with me Mike!

Tom I am not complaining by any means about the system!

Bob it definitely wouldn't disqualify MacKenzie.!