Desert Designs - Just, well, Wrong?

[Forrest Richardson]

As I have pointed out several times before, many desrt (arid climate) courses use treated sewage (effluent) to irrigate. This works as a win-win solution because the effluent is not suited for much of anything else. Parks do not do well using it because of the close contact with people. Golf courses are fully managed and have much more sophisticated sprinkler systems — engineered specifically for effluent when that is the source of water.

The reason this is so important to understand lies in the use of the treated water — and how it best gets back to the source: The ground (the acquifer). There simply isn't a better method of disposing of treated effluent than to filter it back into the ground, while at the same time using it to sustain a plant. A percentage transmits to the atmosphere, which is also good.

As for the Build! Build! Build! mentality of many community (residential) projects, I am on board that far too many mundane and unimaginative courses have been built. The good news is that they will be there to be transformed in future times — and perhaps not in the present locations. My theory is that several of these will be returned to open space with desert plantings — trails, etc.  Water rights and "golf entitlement" may be purchased so the course can relocate — or better, so an entitely new (and better) course is established.

[Jonathan Cummings]

90 acres seems like quite a bit of grass for an arid site.  If memory serves me right Palmer's Hapuna on the windward side of the Big Island has only 42 acres of grass.  Few people realize that parts of Hawaii are cronically parched.

JC

[Garland Bayley]

Desert golf is probably not anymore frivolous than desert living in general, but to be sure, we have effed up the Colorado river.

Of course you have to understand that in Oregon, we think Los Angeles shouldn't exist in what would otherwise be a desert. Every once in a while the Californians float the idea of diverting some of the Columbia River to supply water to California. There are also proposals to use super tankers to bring water from Alaska to California. When you consider how preposterous these proposals are, you may realize that life in the desert is unnatural. So Martin's suggestion about it not being suited for golf is not at all far fetched.

When they invent a way to use wave power to desalinate ocean water, I will begin to believe Los Angeles is long term viable.

In the mean time, I suggest reading Cadillac Desert.

[Forrest Richardson]

Jonathan — 90 is really about right. As Tom D. points out, at under 7,000-yards the 90 acres translates into width and a more open course. I have desert courses from 55 acres to 95. Granted, the 55-acre course is barely 6,000-yards, but I think the 80-90 acre range is more comfortable.

And, to a previous post, 90 acres is not the absolute limit in Arizona. It comes into play for 18-holes and a range when you are in one of our Active Management Areas (AMAs). These areas are defined by the Arizona Department of Water Resources as areas where ground water (and river water) is restricted for industrial uses — golf is included in industrial use. Interestingly, however, effluent (treated sewage water) allows a golf developer to exceed the 90 acre theshold in one of these areas — or to have other large areas of turf within the development.

[Tom_Doak]

Forrest:  I believe it's also true that the tribal courses in Arizona can include as much turf as they want.

Bill M:  There was about 300,000 cubic yards of earthmoving (cut and fill) at Stone Eagle.  A portion of that was screened and used for topsoiling fairways and roughs.  The only dirt that was imported was sand mix -- one foot for the greens and six inches for the tees.  

So, the tees were shaped with a dozer or trackhoe (the latter to minimize disturbance) and then a bit of mix was carted up to them.

[Forrest Richardson]

Tribal courses can pretty much do what they want...but those in Maricopa County (Phoenix/Scottsdale Area) would probably not think of it due to the political fallout. At Bill Coore's new work at Ft. McDowell, for example, I think the acreage of turf is around 80 acres — probably less because the range will be shared with the first course.

I am to understand that Coore's course at Ft. McDowell also took care to move through the Army Corps of Engineers 404 Permits for wetlands. Although Tribal Governments are supposed to do this, it is generally known that many take liberties when it comes to this Federal oversight — simply put: Tribes often cite issues that allow them to bypass this process. From close sources, the new course at Ft. McDowell took great care to identify and preserve desert washes that were considered wetlands environments.

By the way — the course looked great just before grassing. I think it will become one of the areas best.

[Ryan Farrow]

Some information about the Arizona golf industry.
The study is from the Arizona State Polytech school.


"The golf course itself occupied 42,555 acres, irrigation water was applied on an estimated 30,749 acres, and the total area of turfgrass was 28,793 acres. The total amount of irrigated water used on all Arizona golf courses in 2004 was 145,982 acre/feet. Of this amount, 61,591 acre/feet was ground water, 56,022 acre/feet was reclaimed water, 23,129 acre/feet was Central Arizona Project water, and 5,241 acre/feet was surface water.

[Forrest Richardson]

BillV — Our Links at Las Palomas is a desert dunes setting...but on the Sea of Cortez. Therefore, a true links environment...yet a desert to be certain. Does this make desert golf more to your taste?

[Forrest Richardson]

Baja California is a nice place...but it will not introduce you to The Links at Las Palomas...for that you will need to head more easterly, to Sonora, Mexico...the other coast (east side) of the Sea of Cortez.