As a golfer who loves to walk when the weather is conducive (i.e. spring and fall in Arkansas), I wish there were more good, walkable options in the LR area. But the demand is just not there...
The part of this that has always bothered me is that you don't have to have demand to make a course walkable ... you can do it regardless of golfers' preference, and at the start of my career, I never understood why it wasn't just the default position. Over the years, I have identified three reasons:
1. The big one is housing. If you're dealing with a developer who wants to maximize real estate frontage on the course, the next tee has to be laid out PAST the green instead of BESIDE it for safety-boundary issues. (And that's the back tee ... so it's a long walk to the forward tees.) Plus you may have long transitions between houses from one golf corridor to the next (ugh).
2. To make the course function for golfers in carts, it's pretty much necessary to run the cart path between the green and the next tee, so that golfers will get back to the cart to switch clubs instead of having to bring driver with them to the green. But, then the cart path has to be far enough from the green that errant approach shots won't bounce off it ... which generally puts the next tee PAST the green again, or further to the side than it would otherwise need to be. The Old Course has the easiest green-to-tee walks in golf, but imagine where you'd have to put a cart path in, and how much in play that would be.
3. The third factor, unfortunately, is just being lazy with the design. Once the architect knows that his client doesn't care about walkability, the cause is lost unless he cares about it himself enough to insist upon it. There are many architects who don't really care that much about walkability. I think that's especially true in hotter climates, because clients don't walk, and that's why you find even fewer courses there that are reasonable to walk.