[Rob Rigg]

Hello Supers,

Does anyone have an article or any quantifiable data that they can share on the above topic?

Someone from a club has contacted me about instituting a walking only policy and they are looking for some data to back up the benefits to the course.

Any help would be much appreciated.

[Tom_Doak]

Rob:

What kind of "proof" are you looking for?  Quality of maintenance is pretty hard to quantify ...

As someone who's been involved with a few walking-only courses, one of the most interesting revelations has been to see how much traffic damage is done to the course BY THE MAINTENANCE CREW, running around in their vehicles without having a cart path to jump onto everywhere.  You can then extrapolate to what a bunch of golf carts would add to that.

However, golf carts don't do any damage if they are confined to the paths, which is a problem for the argument, but how do you quantify how much poorer the golf experience is with carts on paths?

[Rob Rigg]

Tom,

Let's assume we are talking about a private course in a warm climate where carts are free to roam the fairways, because the members have rejected a cart path only policy.

What does a course spend per year (on average) maintaining cart paths and grass that is heavily impacted by carts?

Would these expenses be avoided if a course was walking only? Or will maintenance vehicles chew up turf without cart paths (to your point)? In which case the savings could be minimal.

I have seen pristine fairways chewed up on rainy days by people in carts who are not thinking straight, but not sure how often that occurs.

The grass at the cart path/fairway junction is usually mauled but that area is rarely in play so not sure how much it really matters.

Fescue fairways with heavy cart traffic tend to die, especially during a hot summer, but aside from Tetherow I am not sure how many fescue courses with cart traffic are around - that might be an anomaly.

Has anyone ever tried to quantify the financial impact of carts on a golf course from a turf maintenance standpoint?

Maybe this is not a reason to consider becoming a walking only club?

Of course there are many others.

[Trey Stiles]

Rob ,

I've never had a walking only course , but I've seen amazing result on specific holes by restricting to path path only.  I've seen fairways that struggled for several seasons ( 419 bermuda ) with cart traffic but had dramatic recovery once the carts were on the path only.

Tom makes an excellent point about maintenance and marshal crews. Without excellent and ongoing training , they tend to create traffic patterns.

You might suggest that they do their own test of  " walking only " on a couple of problem holes by going paths only on those holes ... The results might surprise everybody in short order.

From a financial perspective , It varies from region to region , but in Texas , our experience has been that if your cart path only , your rounds drop dramatically.

[Cristian]

Rob:

What kind of "proof" are you looking for?  Quality of maintenance is pretty hard to quantify ...

As someone who's been involved with a few walking-only courses, one of the most interesting revelations has been to see how much traffic damage is done to the course BY THE MAINTENANCE CREW, running around in their vehicles without having a cart path to jump onto everywhere.  You can then extrapolate to what a bunch of golf carts would add to that.

However, golf carts don't do any damage if they are confined to the paths, which is a problem for the argument, but how do you quantify how much poorer the golf experience is with carts on paths?

How do you quantify it? I do not know. But this is the effect of cart paths on a good course to my appreciation of the course:


1- without cart paths

2- with cart paths

(not favourable)

[Don_Mahaffey]

Rob,
1. have someone step on your foot.
2. drive a car across your foot.
3. report findings

smartassedly yours,
Don

[Joe Hancock]

A few points:

1) Not all cart courses have cart paths.

2) Not all walking courses have maintenance trails that dictate where the maintenance vehicles enter and exit the course.

3) Cart traffic can actually work in the supers' favor when it comes to thatch control.

4) Carts are at their worst on over-irrigated courses.

5) Carts don't have to be the evil that everyone wants to make them out to be.

6) Random is good.


Joe

[Bill_McBride]

I personally think the 90 degree rule causes a lot of damage to both rough and fairways at the 150 yard marker.  Does that make sense.  I'm with Joe Hancock, "random" is best -- think "scatter."

Walking only is a great concept and objective, but it will never fly south of the Mason-Dixon line in the summer.  Too much heat and humidity.

[Jaeger Kovich]

Bill - I agree with the 90 degree rule. I also find that when paths end abruptly and run into grass, causes problems as well.



Has any one else heard of this at Stanwich Golf Club in Greenwich, CT?

A club pro at a ny golf club was telling me on our way to play Stanwich, that, not only is 90% of play with carts, but they mow the grass in exactly the same pattern everyday, including on the greens which have a reputation of being ice.

When we played, the greens were not as fast as I had heard, and a lot of renovations were just on the final stages. Over all the place was beautiful and the conditions of the course were way above average, even for private clubs.... is this maintenance/ cart policy possible or were they ill-informed?

[Bill_McBride]

Bill - I agree with the 90 degree rule. I also find that when paths end abruptly and run into grass, causes problems as well.

Jaeger, that's where a couple of posts and rope and a "SCATTER" sign will pay off, get that traffic dispersed right away.

[Mike Nuzzo]

Rob,
Will you be removing the cart paths?
There is still significant maintenance around the cart path if not removed.

I'll send you a certified letter that states carts suck as proof if you like.
Joe only likes carts because he was an owner.
I do believe that if I were starting a new club that the cart revenue is much less than the industry accounts for - if you don't build the paths, the buildings, the electricity, the cleaning station, the labor, the added maint, the repairs, the increased damage just off the paths....

Great pics Cristian

[Jaeger Kovich]

Bill - I agree with the 90 degree rule. I also find that when paths end abruptly and run into grass, causes problems as well.

Jaeger, that's where a couple of posts and rope and a "SCATTER" sign will pay off, get that traffic dispersed right away.

But the members hate those! And nobody listens to them! And some poor soul on the maintenance crew has to bust his butt moving that stuff constantly! If people could be trusted to drive golf carts like decent human beings and awareness, then there wouldn't be an issue!  There is just something evil about those carts, not only do they kill plants, but they turn people into daredevils!... I myself am guilty of doing 360's down water soaked fairways and getting thrown from carts!

Walking has to be way better... it doesnt kill stuff and people dont turn into Evil Kenivel

[Rob Rigg]

I fear the thread is starting to stray a bit . . . 

This is actually a serious decision that a club is considering.

It is likely that they have a "basic" cart path system that was routed onto a classic course - ie) cart paths around green and tees but none to the side of the fairway/rough lining the hole. If it is wet, people are asked to drive in the rough or walk.

This is why the question is really about how carts negatively impact the turf on a course (if they do at all).

I think it is understood by almost every golfer that the impact on the course is much less when walking than taking a cart.

But it is interesting that no one has published an article or quantified data to confirm this.

ie) Apparently this is just a theory, accepted but not proven

If someone could offer proof, it would be great to read it and be able to show it to committees or property owners considering building or renovating courses.

Mike - I am not sure if the old cart paths would be ripped out or not - the financial cost/benefit of doing that or just letting them sit there would need to be determined

Christian - I agree wholeheartedly - unless cart paths are very careful built on a course - ie) out of site - they are an absolute eyesore

[Ken Moum]

I do believe that if I were starting a new club that the cart revenue is much less than the industry accounts for - if you don't build the paths, the buildings, the electricity, the cleaning station, the labor, the added maint, the repairs, the increased damage just off the paths....

Don,

I think you have identified the great unanswered question.

Does cart revenue actually pay for all those things--especially the buildings, power, labor to manage the fleet?

Or is the  bookeeping like that I see at most clubs re. the food and beverage operations? At my course, the board looks at the balance sheet where the only costs charged against the F&B operation are labor and cost of materials so they think it's making money. While the golf course maintenance budget shows NO income, so they think it's a total loss.

[Sean_A]

Rob:

What kind of "proof" are you looking for?  Quality of maintenance is pretty hard to quantify ...

As someone who's been involved with a few walking-only courses, one of the most interesting revelations has been to see how much traffic damage is done to the course BY THE MAINTENANCE CREW, running around in their vehicles without having a cart path to jump onto everywhere.  You can then extrapolate to what a bunch of golf carts would add to that.

However, golf carts don't do any damage if they are confined to the paths, which is a problem for the argument, but how do you quantify how much poorer the golf experience is with carts on paths?

Tom

Some, that would be me - tee hee, think cart paths are permanent damage to a course.  I say let it be random, but carts aren't allowed out if the course can be damaged. 

Ciao

[Joe Hancock]

To try to confine this to the grass/ turf......I still stand by my list. But, there's too many variables to make the blanket statements that have been posted, despite their experience or lack thereof in maintenance and ownership. I would not use one man's opinion/ analysis as any kind of "proof".

A simple picture of a course with an active cart fleet of 46 carts. Notice the absence of cart paths, bare ground, ropes, stakes and signage:



Joe

[Brent Hutto]

It's navel-gazing to try and account for the "true" revenue from having golf carts vs. not having them. The costs can be accounted for as well as any other thing that damages the course but on the revenue side it's impossible to quantify the Great What If. I'm referring to the number of rounds (for daily-fee courses) or memberships (for clubs) that would be lost if no carts were available.

You most certainly can not tote up $15 per round times 10,000 rounds using carts per year and say that the net revenue to the course is $150,000/year. How many of those 10,000 golfers would have walked if there were no carts? You don't know and without a plausible estimate for that, any number you come up with for revenue is bushwa. Nor do you have any good idea of the (presumably much smaller) impact that having a "walking only" course might have on attracting hard-core walking golfers.

But aside from the impossibility of measuring revenue, I think it's becoming clear from this thread that no such study of cost impact, as requested by the original poster, is extant.

[Anthony_Nysse]

Joe,
  The pic that you posted is a randon, open fairwya/rough area and to that, the pic you posted is what I'd expect it to be. Cart traffic is its worst around tees and greens, where cart drivers are like cattle herds-everyone goes to the same spot. Those that have cart paths around tees and greens, as we do, the ends of both are resodded AT LEAST 1x per year because the traffic beats it's death, literally. Thos that do not have paths near tees and greesn have some really, compacted, beat down gras several feet of the edges of thier greens.

Tony Nysse
Asst. Supt.
Colonial CC
ft. Worth, TX

[Joe Hancock]

Tony,

Thanks, and that is my point. There are too many variables to make a blanket analysis here:

Terrain
Soil types
Routing
Construction methods
Turf species
Volume
Etc.

Joe

[Melvyn Morrow]

I have the answer to your problem Rob, its called a Hovercart and does not require wheels (see photo 1 of Hovercart on 5th GreenTOCC).


The advantage is that it reduces the wear and tear on the course, reduces the need for a path and overnight minimises maintenance costs.

The Hovercart is also useful to collect those wayward shots in the lake or pond and if water is shallow enough may just allow the player the chance not to drop a shot ((see photo 2)


Regards the Maintenance costs these Hovercarts can either skip across the fairways or if required could use the adjacent rivers as Hovercart paths (see photo 3), slashing the costs by building tarmac paths.


To those keen on Walking, we have refused to cut the exhaust noise from their Hovercarts in the hope of driving those prone to using carts off the course. There is also a possibility that motion sickness will also prevail giving a greater advantage to the Walking Golfer.

This advertisement on behalf of Golf Hovercarts UK, has by law to carry a health warning that Hovercarting may have drastic effects on your body due to the lack of exercise because you will be sitting on your bum most of the time and may reduce your life expectancy. There could be some side effects such as believing that you are a real golfer which leading to early dementia of the golfing kind.

The new range of Hovercart models will be available in June 09 and will comprise of the different models (only being on Sale in the USA).

The two seat Sports Coupe, with beer fridge called “The Gay Garland”
The four seat Family Salon with option ‘are we there yet ‘sick bags called
“The Gray Cruden Bay” available in only strong multi colours
The three seat (one front & two rear) Limousine for the hi tech modern golfer called the “CADOAK ROUTING GPS”  with chameleon option camouflage package. Note:- We are working on the J Daly "all in" option package model with shirt & shoe storage facilities, but not currently on sale.

Melvyn

[JSPayne]

As a superintendent, I know of no actual PROOF, or data, to support the claim that carts are harder on turf than walkers....aside from doing the math of weight of golfer+clubs over the surface area of a foot vs. 1/4 the weight of a cart+golfer (or 2)+clubs over the surface area of a tire and attributing the increased weight distribution directly to compaction of the soil (compaction = less water and oxygen availabilty to the plant = poorer turf health).

However, by my own visual and experiential knowledge, I know carts to be more detrimental.

Rob, the best suggestion for you has already been made:

Do your own "experiment" and rope off a few holes on your course and put out signage for "Cart Path Only." Should there be no paths in the fairways, confine carts on some holes to drive in fairway only, and others to rough only. Observe the results over an entire busy summer season. The improved condition in the non-cart areas will speak for itself. Financial maintenance savings (especially on a course with little to no existing paths) may be hard to quantify, but the aesthetic improvements are guaranteed.

In case you're unaware, there's a reason most courses who host a PGA tour or televised event restrict all cart traffic (even from maintenance, as much as realistically possible) months before the event. Torrey Pines in San Diego, CA actually built fairway cart paths SPECIFICALLY so they could restrict carts to them during the months before the last US Open (THIS is proven fact, from the mouth of Mark Woodward, former Director of Golf for San Diego, now GCSAA CEO).

[Rob Rigg]

Thank you Mr Payne!

[David_Tepper]

Rob Rigg -

Have you contacted the USGA for information on your question?
If anyone has studied this matter, my guess is they have.
I am sure they would be willing to share whatever data they have with you.

DT

[tlavin]

Here's my proof:  We stopped letting carts onto Olympia Fields North Course one month before the US Open.  In four days, the golf course looked completely different.  All of the grass was standing straight up (the rough) and you couldn't find a ball without looking quite awhile.  The fairway grass was also noticeably different in appearance.  After a couple weeks, the golf course had assumed a brand new identity.  When the only wheels that hit a golf course are maintenance vehicles, it is a very good thing, indeed.

[Anthony_Nysse]

Here's my proof:  We stopped letting carts onto Olympia Fields North Course one month before the US Open.  In four days, the golf course looked completely different.  All of the grass was standing straight up (the rough) and you couldn't find a ball without looking quite awhile.  The fairway grass was also noticeably different in appearance.  After a couple weeks, the golf course had assumed a brand new identity.  When the only wheels that hit a golf course are maintenance vehicles, it is a very good thing, indeed.

My experience is VERy similar to Mr Lavin's. We rope off all playing areas 3 weeks before the tournament and only allow a selected # of flagged carts "inside the ropes." What a difference on the plnt. Thats when we really start to get definition and start to grown grass. In fact, the ropes go up next week!

Tony Nysse
Asst. Supt.
Colonial CC
Ft. Worth, TX

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()