Should Bandon Allow Limited Cart Play?

[Mac Plumart]

I am a bit confused on what is going on here.

I thought Terry asked our opinions if Bandon should allow carts for everyone.  He said in his opening post how great it would be to ride your last 18 of the day.

But then we launch into a food fight over people with disabilities, ADA, on all that stuff.  Well, I am officially disabled.  Car sticker, doctors notes, all the "official" stuff.  I've contacted Bandon about playing there when my issues were at their worst, 2009.  Here is their response...

Dear Mr. Plumart,
 
Thank you for your interest in Bandon Dunes Golf Resort and your email inquire. Yes all of our courses are walking only, we have a couple of carts for guests who have disabilities that are recognized by the Amercian Disabilities Act only, prior approval is needed. It is usually wise to book your tee times and then contact XXX at XXX-XXX-XXXX for information & procedures on cart approvals.
 
Thank You
Bandon Dunes Golf Resort
888-345-6008

Doesn't this fit into Terry's idea of being a walking only resort and allowing riding?

Dan King/Melvyn/and all people on that side of the argument should be happy.

And all disabled people should be happy and served as well.

If you aren't fully disabled, but experience pain while playing...there are answers for that as well.  See your doctor.

I see this as Bandon being perfect, again.  Walking only, but allows carts as needed.

[Tim Pitner]

Doesn't this fit into Terry's idea of being a walking only resort and allowing riding?

Mac,

No, Terry's idea (floated for amateur research purposes) was for Bandon to allow riding for non-disabled persons.  If I read Terry correctly, one of the main reasons in favor of allowing riding would be to cater to the aging babyboomer population of golfers.  I find much of generalizing about generations to be pop psychology fluff, but this is consistent with the critique of babyboomers--they always want to change the rules for their own selfish interests.  

I sympathize with those who have difficulty walking, while not being officially disabled, but Bandon (if it's going to remain walking-only) has to draw a line somewhere.  I have no idea how they administer their rules.  One hopes they are reasonable, without being too permissive.

[Dan King]

Mac Plumart writes:
Dan King/Melvyn/and all people on that side of the argument should be happy.

I can't speak for Melvyn, but I'm happy. I just want Bandon's policy left alone. That's why I jumped into this topic, too many people wanting Bandon to change their policy.

If you aren't fully disabled, but experience pain while playing...there are answers for that as well.  See your doctor.

Or your dispensary. Or if in a non-medical cannabis state, your dealer. 

Cheers,
Dan King

If the words "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" don't include the right to experiment with your own consciousness, then the Declaration of Independence isn't worth the hemp it was written on.
 --Terence McKenna

[Kalen Braley]

Indeed, a lot of different stuff being flung around in this thread.

Perhaps the one I disagree with the most is the whole "if you don't like it, then move along buddy".  Perhaps if we were talking about joe blow course down the street, where there are thousands of other courses just like it that would be one thing.  But we're not talking about that, we're talking about Bandon.....arguably the greatest golf destination on the planet for those who don't have access to privates.  For most it'll be the best chance to play truly epic courses and to just say "go elsewhere" is complete BS.

Sure some may argue that its greatness is tied to "walking only" but I'm calling BS on that too.  I rode at MPCC shore, cause it was my 2nd round of the day..and it took nothing away, that course is nothing short of fantastic.  I rode at Rock Creek, once again, absolutely amazing course and experience.  Ditto for Gozzer Ranch, Black Mesa, etc, etc.

P.S.  I've never once had to "fight cartballers" as has been suggested on another post.  I only fight stupid people on the course and more often than not its been walkers not people in carts.

[Jud_T]

Terry,

I think the simple answer to your original question is:  Not until they're bleeding a bunch of red ink.  Yes there will be a demographic shift.  Yes places like Streamsong may take some golfers from them.  But walking is integral to the product Bandon is selling.  They were first and arguably best at what they offer, as perhaps Sand Hills was.  All of their courses are considered among the best in the world.  It is a premium unique niche product they are selling.  To mess with the formula that is working so well would be very foolish and possibly disastrous IMHO.  My guess is that of the younger generation, while there may be fewer golfers, many will want to make the pilgrimage to Mecca.  If it ain't broke, don't fix it till it is....

[Dan King]

Kalen Braley writes:
Sure some may argue that its greatness is tied to "walking only" but I'm calling BS on that too.

Au contrair, mon ami. I hate the look of golf carts and golf paths. Almost every golf course in the U.S. has been totally taken over by golf carts, golf paths and cartballers.

As a cartballer you have far more choices in the U.S. than I as a dedicated walker have. There are numerous golf courses that either forbid walking, or where designed with cartball in mind. Why is it so hard for cartballers to leave one freakin' resort alone?

Call it BS, but if Bandon allows for cartball, I will not bother making the trip.

I rode at MPCC shore, cause it was my 2nd round of the day..and it took nothing away, that course is nothing short of fantastic.  I rode at Rock Creek, once again, absolutely amazing course and experience.  Ditto for Gozzer Ranch, Black Mesa, etc, etc.

You do understand your experience might not translate to every other golfer in the world, right?

I only fight stupid people on the course and more often than not its been walkers not people in carts.

And we have had opposite experiences. Why not have you continue to have courses where you and your ilk can congregate, and leave Bandon for me and my ilk?

Right here can't you see the difference? We have given up on keeping golf a walking game in the U.S. and just want this one little oasis left alone.  Cartballers apparently will not be happy until they have 100 percent compliance with what they want.

Cheers,
Dan King

Walking also enables us to watch a hole unfold in front of us. To walk a course is analogous to driving a long distance rather than flying. While driving, we see the country instead of racing over it. There's a human scale that flying cannot offer.
 --Lorne Rubenstein

[Jud_T]

Call it BS, but if Bandon allows for cartball, I will not bother making the trip.

Dan,

I agree with this and nobody with a straight face would call me a dedicated walker...

[Garland Bayley]

Kalen Braley writes:
Sure some may argue that its greatness is tied to "walking only" but I'm calling BS on that too.

Au contrair, mon ami. I hate the look of golf carts and golf paths. Almost every golf course in the U.S. has been totally taken over by golf carts, golf paths and cartballers.

etc...

Dan,

Don't bother. It's Kalen.

[Brent Hutto]

Dan can sometimes state a rather extreme version of certain ideas but in this case there's nothing extreme about it. Telling me to just pretend that being built and maintained for an optimal walking experience without regard to carts is not a part of what makes Bandon desirable is silly.

I'm telling you right now that is a major, huge, big deal to me. Not asking you to share my preference, just pointing out that for me and maybe a few thousand like-minded golfers that no other aspect of Bandon is more important than being as good a walking-golf experience as it is humanly possible to create. That quality was brought about largely by removing consideration of golf carts from the design equation entirely as a conscious choice.

If I said "Well hell, I don't ride in a cart so you don't need one either" I'd correctly be shouted down as imposing my own preferences rather than respecting the rights of others to have their own. It is precisely the same thing to say to me, "What's the B.F.D.? I don't care if there are carts on the course, you shouldn't care either". I do care and you can take your own preferences and exercise them elsewhere.

Take a minute to think about what we're discussing. We're discussing whether it's OK to have a GOLF COURSE that must be played by WALKING. Golf course. Walking. Walking golfers playing golf on a golf course. While walking. In a country where there are thousands of golf courses with an absolutely full-time prohibition against WALKING WHILE PLAYING GOLF we are somehow having a debate as to whether it's proper have four golf courses with a full-time prohibition on riding in a cart while playing golf.

[SL_Solow]

I already spoke to the principal issues raised in this thread.  However, as usual we are getting off track and most of us have abandoned any connection this thread may have to architecture.  Note that Terry's thread posited as the reason for allowing carts the desire to enable visitors to play 36 hole days for several days.  Given the difficulty of travelling to Bandon, the variety of courses, and the expense, the desire to play multiple rounds is understandable.  To date it appears that most who want 36 find a way to walk, hence the crowded tee sheet.  Buy Terry suggests that as my generation of boomers gets older, it will become increasingly difficult.

Architecturally, there has not been a single argument that suggests that allowing carts will be beneficial.  To the contrary, no one can suggest that the introduction of cart paths is anything but negative, particularly given the natural setting.  The courses were not designed to hide paths.  Notwithstanding some examples to the contrary, carts make maintenance more difficult and expensive, particularly where fescue is involved.

So the balance is whether the desire to make it easier for golfers to complete mutiple rounds in a day is sufficient justification to tamper with the architectural integrity of 4 magnificent courses.  Each to his own but if the architecture is your priority, the answer appears to be a simple no.

[Carl Nichols]

Architecturally, there has not been a single argument that suggests that allowing carts will be beneficial.  To the contrary, no one can suggest that the introduction of cart paths is anything but negative, particularly given the natural setting.  The courses were not designed to hide paths.  Notwithstanding some examples to the contrary, carts make maintenance more difficult and expensive, particularly where fescue is involved.

I agree that there is no architectural benefit to allowing carts, but that doesn't necessarily mean that there will be a significant architectural or maintenance cost to allowing limited cart use.  [I understand there are other reasons, well articulated by Dan and others, not to allow carts at all, but I'm focusing only on maintenance/architecture here.]  Is it definitely the case that (hypothetically) allowing carts after 2pm on just one course per day would (a) require the addition of cart paths and/or (b) cause significant maintenance issues?  Or are these things that could be worked around?

[Kalen Braley]

Dan,

You know I feel compelled to point out the irony of you claiming a course to be "yours" that you've never even been to.     (That is unless I got my facts wrong on this one).

As for cart paths and likewise, you need to see a place like Rock Creek because the cart paths intrude zero on that course.  So it can be done.  I would agree that when I look at other examples of courses with ill-placed cart paths it could be vomit inducing, like that course Richard Choi just did a review on.

As for various types of ilk, I don't think its an either/or kind of scenario.  I'm not drawing any absolute lines in the sand just for the sake of drawing a line, and ruling out compromise.  But I am surprised to see you pulling a "Republican" move by doing so.   

I guess Terry, Bob, Cliff, and I will continue to remain the voices of reason on this topic.   

[Garland Bayley]

...
I guess Terry, Bob, Cliff, and I will continue to remain the voices of reason on this topic.   

Best laugh I've had in awhile.

[William_G]

every generation in the US can ruin something for the next generation except Bandon Dunes

[Dan King]

Kalen Braley writes:
You know I feel compelled to point out the irony of you claiming a course to be "yours" that you've never even been to.   Grin  (That is unless I got my facts wrong on this one).

I don't believe I ever called Bandon "mine" but perhaps I did. Can you quote were I called it "mine"?

And yes, you have your facts wrong.  I've been to Bandon perhaps a dozen times over the years, with the first time prior to the opening of Bandon Dunes. I haven't been there since Old Macdonald opened, partially because I've been golfing much less, partially because I'm in terrible shape and would not be able to walk as much as I would like. Hopefully it will encourage me to get in better shape to play the courses sometime soon.

Others might prefer to not get in shape and just insist Bandon become a cartball course for their convenience.

As for cart paths and likewise, you need to see a place like Rock Creek because the cart paths intrude zero on that course.  So it can be done.

I'm betting they are much less successful hiding the carts and the cartballers.

As for various types of ilk, I don't think its an either/or kind of scenario.  I'm not drawing any absolute lines in the sand just for the sake of drawing a line, and ruling out compromise.  But I am surprised to see you pulling a "Republican" move by doing so.  

You don't see it as either or because you want the entire world to compromise in your direction. You want every golf course in the world to be a cartball course so you can play whenever you want. I think my compromise works much better. I've given up on ridding the world of carts. The market has spoken, and golfers would rather ride than walk. I accept that.

You want the world to go cartball. I want a little corner of Oregon to stay the same. Sure looks like you are the one unwilling to compromise. You want your way or the highway.   I have no idea which one of us has a "Republican" position.

I guess Terry, Bob, Cliff, and I will continue to remain the voices of reason on this topic.

I know Cliff shows all sorts of reason saying carts should be available at all times for him and people like him, but not for people unlike him. You must be so proud to stand beside him.

Cheers,
Dan King

Hitting things with a stick is the cornerstone of civilization. Consider all the things that can be improved by hitting them with a stick: veal, the TV, Woody Allen. Having a dozen good sticks at hand, all of them well balanced and expertly made, is one of the reasons I took up golf.
 --P.J. O'Rourke

[Dan King]

Carl Nichols writes:
[I understand there are other reasons, well articulated by Dan and others, not to allow carts at all, but I'm focusing only on maintenance/architecture here.]

I'm reasonably confident I never once argued for no carts at Bandon. I want the way it is today to be the way it is in the future. I know they have carts at Bandon, they just restrict how you can get them and once you get them what you can do with them.  That works for me.

Cheers,
Dan King

It will always be a battle a day between those who want maximum change and those who want to maintain the status quo.
 --Gerry Adams

[Carl Nichols]

Carl Nichols writes:
[I understand there are other reasons, well articulated by Dan and others, not to allow carts at all, but I'm focusing only on maintenance/architecture here.]

I'm reasonably confident I never once argued for no carts at Bandon. I want the way it is today to be the way it is in the future. I know they have carts at Bandon, they just restrict how you can get them and once you get them what you can do with them.  That works for me.

Cheers,
Dan King

It will always be a battle a day between those who want maximum change and those who want to maintain the status quo.
 --Gerry Adams

Fair point -- my phrsasing was shorthand for not allowing carts more than is currently allowed.

[Melvyn Morrow]

If you call yourself a Golfer then you have no business riding or using outside aids.

Long may Bandon ban the cart for able bodied players, these Judas's of the golfing world. 

[Pete Lavallee]

I know Cliff has stopped posting; perhaps he is still reading. If you do take a cart at Bandon via the medical exemption the CADDY will drive the cart. I certainly don't think he does it for free. I don't know if there is a cart fee in adition to the cady fee. Again, you will not be allowed behind the wheel.

[Mike Hendren]

If you call yourself a Golfer then you have no business riding or using outside aids.

I'm suddenly reminded that we haven't had a good "Bite Me" thread in some time.

Bogey

[Jason Thurman]

Architecturally, there has not been a single argument that suggests that allowing carts will be beneficial.  To the contrary, no one can suggest that the introduction of cart paths is anything but negative, particularly given the natural setting.  The courses were not designed to hide paths.  Notwithstanding some examples to the contrary, carts make maintenance more difficult and expensive, particularly where fescue is involved.

I agree that there is no architectural benefit to allowing carts, but that doesn't necessarily mean that there will be a significant architectural or maintenance cost to allowing limited cart use.  [I understand there are other reasons, well articulated by Dan and others, not to allow carts at all, but I'm focusing only on maintenance/architecture here.]  Is it definitely the case that (hypothetically) allowing carts after 2pm on just one course per day would (a) require the addition of cart paths and/or (b) cause significant maintenance issues?  Or are these things that could be worked around?

From an architectural standpoint, aesthetics make a big difference in the experience to me. I also like to take photos of destination courses and review the course through them. Even without paths, the tracks left by even a single cart really stand out on the course and in those photos later.

I haven't been to Bandon, but a huge part of the draw is the natural setting. Would I lose all my desire to visit if they allowed carts under the terms you desire? Probably not. But, I still have no idea why they would want to, and I do think even limited cart play would negatively affect the courses aesthetically. I can't speak to agronomics, but hopefully someone else can.

Bandon costs a lot of money, so people save to visit it. It's hard to reach, so they get on a plane and secure a rental car. It's also physically demanding, so what's the big deal about going to the gym to get ready? In my opinion, there aren't nearly enough incentives left for people to get in some semblance of physical condition.

[Carl Nichols]

Architecturally, there has not been a single argument that suggests that allowing carts will be beneficial.  To the contrary, no one can suggest that the introduction of cart paths is anything but negative, particularly given the natural setting.  The courses were not designed to hide paths.  Notwithstanding some examples to the contrary, carts make maintenance more difficult and expensive, particularly where fescue is involved.

I agree that there is no architectural benefit to allowing carts, but that doesn't necessarily mean that there will be a significant architectural or maintenance cost to allowing limited cart use.  [I understand there are other reasons, well articulated by Dan and others, not to allow carts at all, but I'm focusing only on maintenance/architecture here.]  Is it definitely the case that (hypothetically) allowing carts after 2pm on just one course per day would (a) require the addition of cart paths and/or (b) cause significant maintenance issues?  Or are these things that could be worked around?

From an architectural standpoint, aesthetics make a big difference in the experience to me. I also like to take photos of destination courses and review the course through them. Even without paths, the tracks left by even a single cart really stand out on the course and in those photos later.

I haven't been to Bandon, but a huge part of the draw is the natural setting. Would I lose all my desire to visit if they allowed carts under the terms you desire? Probably not. But, I still have no idea why they would want to, and I do think even limited cart play would negatively affect the courses aesthetically. I can't speak to agronomics, but hopefully someone else can.

Bandon costs a lot of money, so people save to visit it. It's hard to reach, so they get on a plane and secure a rental car. It's also physically demanding, so what's the big deal about going to the gym to get ready? In my opinion, there aren't nearly enough incentives left for people to get in some semblance of physical condition.

I get that carts leave cart tracks, and that might be enough of a negative for some people on the aesthetics front. But others on here seem to think that more significant changes, like cart paths and worse turf, might result from having carts--and I agree that the former would be a big deal.  But I haven't seen anyone answer the question -- would Bandon need to install cart paths if it allowed more (but still somewhat limited) cart use? 

[John Kavanaugh]

It is well documented that I felt letting people bring their own personal push carts was a bad idea. I believe that one of the dedicated walkers on this site also ignored the rules of the resort by pushing his personal cart across the green.  A rental is $5 for God's sake and made for green transgression. That was the camel's nose so don't blame me when carts soon follow.

[Garland Bayley]

It is well documented that I felt letting people bring their own personal push carts was a bad idea. I believe that one of the dedicated walkers on this site also ignored the rules of the resort by pushing his personal cart across the green.  A rental is $5 for God's sake and made for green transgression. That was the camel's nose so don't blame me when carts soon follow.

Since there is, and was at the time no such a rule, then it isn't, and wasn't ignored.
Some of the employees at the resort are simply misinformed. When you get them to check with the authorities, they learn their mistake.

[Tim Leahy]

F carts! nuf said

Now that's an intelligent response. Must be an OU guy.