[PCCraig]

This past summer I took a class on Environmental Geology and much of the class surrounded the idea of the changing of the world's climate and more importantly our effect on the world as over populating human beings...while that is for a different forum, the class did get me thinking.
     
    Golf is a worldwide sport played in hundreds of countries and on thousands of golf courses. While everyone in this forum enjoys golf course architecture and as a walk and interaction with nature, do we realize its affect on nature and the surrounding environment? Is there any definite study into whether or not golf courses positively or negatively affect the environment? Currently, there are just fewer than 17,000 golf courses in the United States alone. With a number as high, the effects can be felt elsewhere, however that may be.

   The development of a golf course sometimes involves clearing of vegetation, cutting of forests, and creating artificial landscapes. While this may form beautiful surroundings, could this lead to water and land erosion? During course maintenance courses demand and use large amount of pesticides, fertilizers, and herbicides. All three can cause health problems among golfers and local residents. Water use and contamination is also a major issue. Many golf courses can go through hundreds of thousands of gallons of water a day, often times contaminating the water when returning it to the source.

   On the other hand Golf Courses can provide a natural buffer between residential and commercial developments and natural areas. They may also be used to top existing EPA superfund sites and landfills. Their economic element cannot be ignored as well; the thousands of jobs created and dollars earned have almost guaranteed the future construction of golf courses all over the world, most notably in areas such as Asia and Mexico.

   Along with the economic push that allows for the construction of golf courses comes an even more prudent question of the future. As land becomes more valuable and environmentally sensitive, where can golf courses are built? Can technology used to cap landfills and previously unusable tracks of land be improved and used to house new courses? How has golf course maintenance changed over the years and how does it still need to change? How can courses be better designed from the ground level to be considered more environmentally friendly?

  I am sorry for all of the questions and so few statements or answers, however I figured this would be the place to be with so many GCA's, Engineers, Golf Businessmen, and Supers activly posting.

 Does anyone in here have any thoughts or experience with this?

[Ken Moum]

We have some pretty specific information re. those questions on the Web at:

http://www.gcsaa.org/resources/facts/default.asp

Here's another article on the subject:

http://www.gcsaa.org/news/releases/2004/june/environment.asp

Ken

[Jim_Kennedy]

you're a brave man Pat.

[paul cowley]

Except for leaving the land in its virgin state, the construction of a golf course is probably the highest and best use that can occur on the land.

Golf courses also provide an excellent remedy for previous poor land uses.

[PCCraig]

Paul,

 I understand that a golf course is a better use for virgin land than say, a rubber factory, however when you factor the use of the chemicals on the ground over the long lifespan of the course can you still say that is better than the rubber factory with stricter guidlines for prevention?

 Maybe the better question is what are we doing now that was not being done twenty years ago universally at golf courses around the world?

 Pat

[Steve Burrows]

I would submit that golf courses have a much smaller impact of the environment than the public actually believe, but possibly a much larger impact on the environment than is actually necessary.  This is to say that designers and developers could find ways to cause less impact on the landscape (and I do believe that this is the trend), but, as Paul Cowley states in an earlier post, a golf course is likely one of the better uses for utilizing otherwise unused grounds.  It may devestate a micro-climate or animal habitat temporarily during construction, but, once completed, the landscape may yet thrive.

[PCCraig]

This is to say that designers and developers could find ways to cause less impact on the landscape (and I do believe that this is the trend),  

Can any Designers comment on this? What exactly can you do from a design perspective other than to use less bulldozers?

[Kalen Braley]

I'm curious as to why lawns in suburbian America never seems to be included in these types of questions.  Doesn't the sq footage of lawns in parks and in peoples yards far far eclipse the areas covered by golf courses??  I observe most of my neighbors using fertilizers/weed spray/bug spray on thier lawns as I do.

On a larger scale though, how in the hell would one ever prove and/or show cause and effect relationships in terms of what effects golf courses have on the enviroment???

[PCCraig]

kmoum,

Thank you for posting those links. Very intersting information! I did find it interesting that the term "well-managed" kept popping up. As in, "a well-managed course will do this, this, or this..." My question is then, what percentage of golf courses do you believe are "well managed?" I have worked at golf courses that I would believe they would be on top of environmental issues...and then there are others that I could tell they couldn't care less.






I should make it clear, (I have gotten a few private e-mails about this), that I WANT golf courses to be proven environmentaly friendly. However I have found so much information on the internet saying how bad they are I would just like my friends here to give me their opinon as to why they believe they are better.

[paul cowley]

I'm curious as to why lawns in suburban America never seems to be included in these types of questions.  Doesn't the sq footage of lawns in parks and in peoples yards far far eclipse the areas covered by golf courses??  I observe most of my neighbors using fertilizers/weed spray/bug spray on their lawns as I do.

On a larger scale though, how in the hell would one ever prove and/or show cause and effect relationships in terms of what effects golf courses have on the environment???

Suburban lawns and homes with their uncontrolled fertilizer and pesticide use, combined with their impervious area runoffs and non point discharges etc.....are much more deleterious than any golf course by comparison.

[Norbert P]

In an article by Patrick White in Turf Magazine (my Dork-o-meter is pegging into the red zone), he sites the work of USDA soil scientist Ronald Follett, and Associate Professor of Turfgrass Science @ Colorado State U, Yaling Qian.  In it they claim that "they've found that each acre of greens and fairways sequesters nearly one ton of carbon every year, removing it from the atmosphere and trapping it in the soil."

It's termite farts that are killing the planet!  (I learned that here at GCA a few years ago.)

[Jim_Kennedy]

Pat,
 I think golf courses have been acquitting themselves remarkably well. After all, they are businesses that produce nothing, no crops, no steel, no gasoline, no home heating oil, no tires, no widgets, etc., etc., etc., yet I've never heard of any golf courses being closed because they are polluting the environment, even in this era of tough regulations.

If 'you' can name one, then I'd like to hear 'you' name two, or three, or four, etc., until 'I' can see a trend.  

[PCCraig]

Hey Jim,

 I see what you are saying, that golf courses are not so bad that they are closed because of polution. The point that I am trying to make is what can we do to ensure that golf courses not only stablize the surrounding environment, but improve on it.

 And sorry for my "quotes"....I have been in school for far too long!

 Pat

[Ron Farris]

Pat, there are a number of golf courses out there that are on a very strong organic kick.  The new Sebonack course designed by Tom Doak and Jack Nicklaus on Long Island comes to mind.  Also, I just met with the super at Rock Creek Cattle Co. golf course in Montana who stated that he is really into the organics for course management.  These are maintenance slants to your question.  

Ironically, I just got off the phone with an Enviro Solutions company that is developing a very comprehensive plan for golf course management.  It includes the obvious use of organic fertilizers, but also soil amendments and the use of special treated seed for new construction and overseeding.  It is based upon Bio-transmutation and balancing the soils, which has been taking place for hundreds of years.  

One of the best efforts that golf course architects can have on the environment is to work closely with consultants who are ecologically sensitive to the environment and recommend and specify the use of products that take an active approach to the long-term management of the courses they design.

[Steve Lang]

 

Sorry,.. sounds like your Environmental Geology class was more soft qualitative propaganda than quantitative science oriented.. don't you have to do hard research on this topic?

Certainly you could research the United States' EPA, USGS, USDA, BLM, AWWA, NSF, WPCF, AWMA, ACS, Audubon etc. type technical journals to answer most if not all of your questions/concerns?  I believe there's some interesting stuff going on in Canada resgarding sustainable development as well, & likely world-wide..

but your global concerns have to be tempered by site -specifics. else wise you're really just parrotting more enviro-geo-politico-philo-hydro-aero-bio spherical platitudes.. maybe directionally correct in debate, but insufficiently supported by local evidence to be persuasive or auditable..


see http://www.audubonintl.org/programs/acss/CACS%20Golf%20list.pdf

[Ken Moum]

kmoum,

Thank you for posting those links. Very intersting information! I did find it interesting that the term "well-managed" kept popping up. As in, "a well-managed course will do this, this, or this..." My question is then, what percentage of golf courses do you believe are "well managed?" I have worked at golf courses that I would believe they would be on top of environmental issues...and then there are others that I could tell they couldn't care less.






I should make it clear, (I have gotten a few private e-mails about this), that I WANT golf courses to be proven environmentaly friendly. However I have found so much information on the internet saying how bad they are I would just like my friends here to give me their opinon as to why they believe they are better.

I believe that the conclusions in those articles I posted apply to nearly all golf courses these days.

There are all sorts of reasons for golf course superintendents to be good environmental stewards.

One of my favorite reasons to be responsible came from Pat Blum the superintendent at Colonial Acres in New York. He said, "I bring my daughter out here with me."

Ken

[Jason McNamara]

I'm curious as to why lawns in suburban America never seems to be included in these types of questions.  Doesn't the sq footage of lawns in parks and in peoples yards far far eclipse the areas covered by golf courses??  I observe most of my neighbors using fertilizers/weed spray/bug spray on their lawns as I do.

On a larger scale though, how in the hell would one ever prove and/or show cause and effect relationships in terms of what effects golf courses have on the environment???

Suburban lawns and homes with their uncontrolled fertilizer and pesticide use, combined with their impervious area runoffs and non point discharges etc.....are much more deleterious than any golf course by comparison.

And they also cover much more space.  Using a rough number of 100 acres per course, no more than 0.1% of the mainland 48 is covered by one golf course or another.  Figure 17,000 courses times 100 = 1.7M acres; total lower 48 (sic*) is 1.9B acres.   I know many courses have larger footprints, but given cultivation limits, nine-hole/exec/par 3 courses, etc., let's go with that number.  (If anything, I suspect that number is still overly generous.)

Total "urbanized" area in the continental US is 3% (60M acres), which basically means cities and their suburbs.  Not much, compared to 31% pasture/range lands, 28% forest/nat'l park, and 23% cropland.  Don't know how much of that is suburban homesteads, but I don't see how it wouldn't overwhelm any golf total.

Any effect from golf is probably a rounding error.  There are much better targets out there (in terms of effecting change rather than scoring political points), for those so inclined.


* The 48 aren't "lower" if you're in Hawaii.

NB:  Figures are from http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/EIB14/eib14a.pdf.  I am happy to look at newer numbers if such exist.

[Michael Dugger]

I read somewhere once Isleworth was awfully hard on some local ponds.

The Honors Club is a shining example of "green" maintenance.

I think the B.S. has just about been squashed when it comes to this notion golf courses are blantant users and abusers of pesticides and fertilizers.

Only the most ardent...and dense....of tree huggers continue to throw out such broad generalizations......usually with next to zero factual data to back it up.

[TEPaul]

"While everyone in this forum enjoys golf course architecture and as a walk and interaction with nature, do we realize its affect on nature and the surrounding environment? Is there any definite study into whether or not golf courses positively or negatively affect the environment? Currently, there are just fewer than 17,000 golf courses in the United States alone. With a number as high, the effects can be felt elsewhere, however that may be."

Pat:

In my opinion, it's not just about the effect on nature of a golf course, it's more about what the effect on nature would be if the land was put to some other use. I think a lot of people would be surprised to learn that a golf course that doesn't overuse chemicals and such stacks up pretty favorably compared to many other alternative uses including some traditonal methods of farming. And of course I'd always rather see land used for a golf course rather than an office park, a shopping mall or a couple of hundred houses.

[astavrides]

However I have found so much information on the internet saying how bad they are I would just like my friends here to give me their opinon as to why they believe they are better.

Can you provide some of the links to the info that says they are bad?

[Mark Dorman]

The development of a golf course sometimes involves clearing of vegetation, cutting of forests, and creating artificial landscapes. While this may form beautiful surroundings, could this lead to water and land erosion? During course maintenance courses demand and use large amount of pesticides, fertilizers, and herbicides. All three can cause health problems among golfers and local residents. Water use and contamination is also a major issue. Many golf courses can go through hundreds of thousands of gallons of water a day, often times contaminating the water when returning it to the source.

Although it would be great for golf courses to be 100% eco-friendly, I think farming crops is more likely to cause trouble in the environment.  The fact that under most crops the soil is bare means more erosion and easier infiltration of water (carrying pesticides, fertilizers with it).

The turf canopy and the thatch act as a barrier. Through ad/absorption little pesticide makes it past the top 10cm of the soil.  Also usually only tees, greens, and sometimes fairways are sprayed with pesticides (although usually wall to wall fertilizer).

An interesting stat I have read is that the total amount of turf that is maintained with pesticides represents only .04% of the total acres of corn and beans planted in the United States. (1)

Also, technically an herbicide is a pesticide.
That's all I wanted to say.  This is, indeed, a can of worms.

(1) “Best Management Practices to Reduce Pesticide Runoff From Turf.”  USGA Green Section Record.  Jan-Feb 2005.  26-30.

[Craig Sweet]

Pat, for the most part golf courses do not "demand" large applications of pesticides and fertilizers.  That said, caution is generally the rule when golf course operators apply anything.  

In this country I do think most people want to believe that golf courses are huge users of very bad chemicals. It's too bad, but the golf business has not done a good job educating the public that this is not the case at all....

If you are so inclined you might check out the BIGGA website (British and International Greenskeepers???) and this months magazine...good article about some American greenskeepers going to GB and working on a golf course...they were surprised by how few imputs are used on a course over there.

[Mark Dorman]

Another great site is the Turfgrass Information Center put on by Michigan State University.  It requires a subscription (which cost money), although I think Michigan residents get free access with a library card.  Students at some schools do as well.

http://tic.msu.edu/

[PCCraig]

Thank you all for your great discussion. I am currently putting together a little write-up as an overall response to my own question. After I finish I will post it on here.

Just out of curiousity...does anyone remember a few years back on the coast in CA when the 18th hole of the then Pete Dye course fell into the water. (I think Trump owns it now.) Is anyone on here familar with the situation, and/or have more information on it?

Thanks.

Pat

[Adam Clayman]

Pat Craig, This deserves further comment.
Steve knows his stuff and is in the field.

Sorry,.. sounds like your Environmental Geology class was more soft qualitative propaganda than quantitative science oriented.. don't you have to do hard research on this topic?

Certainly you could research the United States' EPA, USGS, USDA, BLM, AWWA, NSF, WPCF, AWMA, ACS, Audubon etc. type technical journals to answer most if not all of your questions/concerns?  I believe there's some interesting stuff going on in Canada resgarding sustainable development as well, & likely world-wide..

but your global concerns have to be tempered by site -specifics. else wise you're really just parrotting more enviro-geo-politico-philo-hydro-aero-bio spherical platitudes.. maybe directionally correct in debate, but insufficiently supported by local evidence to be persuasive or auditable..


see http://www.audubonintl.org/programs/acss/CACS%20Golf%20list.pdf

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()