On what basis are you questioning it's environmental friendliness and how does that differ from any regulation course that gets built and worshiped on here.
I don't consider myself a snob when I can recognize efforts of a RV park owner wanting to add to his customers experience by adding a 9 hole golf course, and when doing it making sure it's overhead is low and environmentally sound. I can see that, take it for what it is and applaud it.
If you're questioning it's environmental impact then let us in on all the details you have on that site and why it needs to be questioned. Otherwise take it for being a cheap mom and pop RV 9 banger that's making an effort to be Eco conscious.
You're kind of all over the map so I'll try to address your comments separately:
1) Call me a cynic but I question a lot of the "environmental" marketing because there simply is no readily ascertainable definition or standard for environmental friendliness. A couple of things come to mind though:
a. My assumption is that these "synthetic" green surfaces are partly, if not mostly, plastic. Plastic is one of the least if not the least environmentally products out there. It has limited recycling capabilities (it can only be recycled 7 times - hence the numbers on the bottom of plastic, thats where it is in the cycle - before its done) and it is a petroleum based product that takes a significant amount of energy to produce.
b. Its a Florida course, near the coast that may or may not be a site naturally habitable for a golf course. Many courses down here sit on land that was drained to provide suitable land for a course disturbing many of the natural habitats and wetlands. This is why the State has made a proactive effort of late to designate hundreds of thousands of acres of land as "preserve" to try and help mitigate the damage caused by development.
c. As a general note, as more research is done it turns out that some efforts to mitigate environmental impact are successful in their focus but end up generating negative externalities. For example, there is a recent article in the New York Times that discusses how the curbing of air pollution from coal factories as negatively affected the water supply in those areas because the pollution is being taken from the air, liquified and put into the ground. Ethanol is another example. It turns out that net environmental impact of Ethanol, when the energy to grow the corn, ship the corn and produce the ethanol is taken into consideration, is actually worse that standard unleaded gasoline. Many claims of "eco-friendliness" dont take into account the environmental impact of the substitute.
The point of the above is that certainly a reduction in fertilizers, chemicals, maintenance is a reduction in impact, but if it is off set by other things that negate that reduction then the course will not be as environmentally friendly as advertised.
2) With respect to the course's environmental friendliness versus "other courses that are worshiped on here," I have no idea and have expressed no opinion on that matter. Additionally, I have made no attempt to differentiate any other course that is not "worshiped on here" and I'm not sure whether a course is "worshiped on here" or not has anything to do with this conversation because I made no mention of any course BUT this one. Moreover, I can assure you that if Tom Doak were to claim he was building [insert state here]'s most "eco-friendly" course, I'd ask him to substantiate it or I'd call it out for being marketing without substance, the same thing I did here.
3) I dont consider you a snob either. Nor do I consider the fact that this is a 9 hole course owned by an RV park relevant to the discussion. Any attempt to twist my comments on the course's environmental friendliness into some indictment on the ownership or customers of this course is ridiculous. Although if you criticize Tiger Woods on this website you are racist, so I guess I should know better.
As an aside, Ronald, the quote in my signature isnt mine. In fact I properly cite the source of the quote. Feel free to take me as a snob if you want to but I'm pretty sure we haven't met. If you want to make a judgment of my personality based upon my reference to a quote made by someone else on this site, well then I guess you are entitled to do that.
And if there was anyone who was a snob on this thread its Hancock. I mean who but the elite of the elite drink guiness every 3 holes? I can only afford bud light....
