Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)

[Thomas Dai]

To expand on a comment by Ryan on another thread and David above, is there an opportunity to significantly upgrade the Struie and the land around it and leave the Embo site as it is?
Atb

[Jon Wiggett]

Thomas,


but what would be the difference between developing the dunes south of Dornoch? Yes, it would be possible and there is some great land there for this but it is no more or less special than the Embo site.


The one point where I do agree with Kris is that impact on a SSSI should be kept to an absolute minimum, indeed avoised if at all possible which with the Embo site is the case and the impact on SSI should have mitigation built into any project. Where I do not agree with Kris is his apparent opposition to any development in the Dornoch area. In the end it will be for the people living in that area to decide upon this project as it is them that it effects on a day to day basis.


Where the Trump's Balmiedie project process went wrong was that the locals voted against it only to have outsiders (in this case the Scottish government) step in and over rule them.


Jon

[Ally Mcintosh]

In the case of Balmedie, the majority of locals were actually for the project but true, Aberdeen Council cast it down by the deciding vote....

It's a difficult one when you feel emotionally connected to a course or area - it heightens your sense of injustice against any decision made that you don't agree with. For Balmedie, I was excited by the prospect of the course (though vehemently opposed to the level of infrastructure planned with it). Only when I found out the second course was planned to encroach on the more public dunes where I played as a kid did I start to get upset about those plans.... At Portmarnock, my stomach turns every time they make the smallest of tweaks that disturbs the natural ground and that I disagree with...

There are SAC's and natural areas of beauty that I would hate to see turned in to a golf course... And then there are others where the prospect would excite me. Almost always, those preferences are not based on the small environmental differentials (for I don't know them) but on some connection to the memories I have with that particular piece of land.... So for me, it's pretty subjective.

As for Embo, contrary to what Peter said before, a municipal pitch and putt wouldn't be a bad idea. If a golf course eventually gets built there, then I hope all semblance or smell of "international development" is a million miles away. Like Kris States, I would like to see a Mach Dunes level of disturbance, mowing out fairways rather than stripping and starting again (even in the minimalist vein). Only then will the golf course truly feel "of the land".

[Thomas Dai]

Fair points Jon.


If the width of the sand-dunes-land is growing it raises an interesting question about ownership. Not sure about Scotland, but in England and Wales I believe the area below the high-tide mark is owned by the Crown while the area above the high-tide mark is owned by whoever owns the adjacent land. So if a course owns the adjacent land and the beach area expands over time.........more golf space? And vice-versa unfortunately.


Interesting comment from Ally for when I drove past Embo a year or so ago I pondered, as I usually do when I see a potentially good looking area for golf, a very minimalist approach, ie a couple of men with hand rakes, maybe a scythe and hatchet, and mowing out fairways and with one day a wooden hut for a clubhouse.


Atb

[Niall C]

Kalen,
What startling revelations are in that information? It is a reclusive, mixed cover, edge hunter.
It's historical range has been compressed greatly to where it now struggles for it's very existence.
I assume that bold text was meant to convey significance.
What..that its avoids heavily urbanized areas...what did you expect to it be stalking the streets of Inverness?
C'mon, where the context?

Kris


I suspect the bit Kalen intended to highlight was the bit about the wildcat avoiding exposed coasts. Do you see Embo being a typical wildcat habitat if left undeveloped ?


Niall

[Kalen Braley]

Kalen,
What startling revelations are in that information? It is a reclusive, mixed cover, edge hunter.
It's historical range has been compressed greatly to where it now struggles for it's very existence.
I assume that bold text was meant to convey significance.
What..that its avoids heavily urbanized areas...what did you expect to it be stalking the streets of Inverness?
C'mon, where the context?

Kris


I suspect the bit Kalen intended to highlight was the bit about the wildcat avoiding exposed coasts. Do you see Embo being a typical wildcat habitat if left undeveloped ?


Niall

Niall,

Thank you.  I was a bit surprised given Kris' claimed background in these matters that he didn't put 2 and 2 together.  To boot not only is Embo on exposed Coast, from what I can see on Google Maps, its surrounded by a large agricultural area, also places they avoid.

So given where these cats typically roam and hunt, Embo is one of the last places you would expect to find them...aka the potential impact would be beyond minimal.

[Kris Shreiner]

Hey gang, it's  a protected area primarily for birdlife. I'm NOT asserting it is prime Scottish Wildcat territory.
I'm  not dead set against any new golf in that area. I personally believe that better marketing what is already there would suffice.  But anything new certainly should be placed in a responsible site.
That Embo site is the LAST place it should be going. For the numerous reasons stated.
Thomas raised a solid point. The Struie is an excellent opportunity to craft an arrangement that could deliver an efficient, tasteful new clubhouse, and a superb second course.
 I believe there still are the several older holes ŕemaining, not currently in play by the Struie, which could serve as a quick spin for juniors, seniors, or those looking for a chance to quickly knock around a few holes.
The club would retain ownership, Mike and his group would get a cut, C&C get a great site. The footprint is already there. There's loads of sand right down the beach there.
With some compromise and collaboration, something great could emerge and that Embo site can remain the special place it is.
The club, of course has the final say, but they should be just as eager on that effort, as they are to broker support for the Embo site.
Otherwise, they are the really the NIMBY crowd.
Another option. That ocean of sand on the beach, again working properly with the oversight responsible, could be trucked to a more appropriate site to augment or cap what would be needed.
There are a lot of ways to skin the cat...and I don't mean the Scottish Wildcat. There are plenty of sharp people in the loop,  that can craft a way to deliver an exceptional links course, without altering one of that area's most special places.
If the Balmedie charade was doable, sure as hell this is! It takes common sense and a collective will to do something great, responsibly, for it to become reality.
Cheers,
Kris

[Dave McCollum]

Just took a quick look at the land south of the Struie.  In addition to sandy stretches, there looks to also be a caravan park, an airstip, and the town shitter, so not without complications.

[David_Tepper]

"Just took a quick look at the land south of the Struie.  In addition to sandy stretches, there looks to also be a caravan park, an airstip, and the town shitter, so not without complications."

Dave M. -

My mention of the dunes/links land developing south of the Struie as a possible site for a course was not meant to be taken 100% seriously. I really don't know how large the area is. My guess is it would take decades for that land to mature/stabilize before it was suitable for a course.

On the other hand, it is likely that it could provide a suitable habitat for any birds that might be displaced from the possible construction of a course the Coul Links site.

DT     

[Dave McCollum]

Mine wasn’t entirely serious, either, David.  I’ve only been there once, so I was just being a satellite tourist and having a look around.  I agree, there seems to be quite a lot of non-golf linksland along the coast besides the Coul property.  Maybe not so much for golf development, willing landowners, and so on, but I doubt the birds will care.

Kris, I don’t have a dog in this fight, so no need to respond.  I’m only interested because I happen to own some scenic wild ground, with a golf course (next to a town shitter!) and will have to go through this process if ever I were to develop the native ground that makes up the majority of our property.  I’m sure there will be many who feel as you do that such development should not be allowed.  Ironically, I expect the most vocal opposition will come from developments on the Canyon rim that were built because the views we provide, the NIMBY factor.  Views, of course, go both ways and ours used to be totally natural and pristine.  It’s complicated, of course, with many passionate views.  At the very least, I hope you understand my interest and bias.

[David_Tepper]

More pics of the property here:

http://www.linkshousedornoch.com/page.php?coul-links-63

FYI, my understanding is the golf course would not occupy much more than 50% of the entire property.

[Dave McCollum]

David,

From my satellite tour, I used Google Earth's measurement tool and did a quick and dirty estimate that the entire property is +/- 350 acres, so your understanding seems about right. 

[Ian Mackenzie]

More pics of the property here:

http://www.linkshousedornoch.com/page.php?coul-links-63

FYI, my understanding is the golf course would not occupy much more than 50% of the entire property.

I believe the property is almost 450 acres.
Course, practice and facilities would take what....150 acres tops?


Leaves 2/3 of Coul Links untouched.
Sounds like there can be "peaceful coexistence. Yes?

[Kalen Braley]

You guys are heartless....think about the sad kitties you'd displace.

[Ian Mackenzie]

Great interview and story on Mike Keiser done by Matt Ginella.


Worth watching. Should be its own thread entirely but appropriate here given the context.
It's mostly about Cabot Links/Cliffs and the impact on Inverness, NS.


http://www.golfchannel.com/media/keisers-golf-course-saves-nova-scotia-town/

[Kris Shreiner]

Cabot is a whole different animal.
First course on a largely degraded mining site, with a town on the ropes. Hardly a Not Coul Links near Dornoch scenario...at all.
Half joking about using the Struie site? Why, that's where it should be going!
 If everyone is so hot for it...you know, all the townsfolk, members  and such, why not the most responsible place?  Existing footprint, historical use no-brainer. Steps from RD, not one ounce of petrol for shuttles or the need for them.
Tie in a funding deal for that tasteful, new club house the posh crowd has been lusting for...you know, a win-win for everybody.
You really would need to use the current Struie footprint, because below that is too low.  Tidal storm surges already nip at the edges of a few of the newer holes of the existing Struie. The extra, older holes could provide those not wanting a fulmonte their place. Member times could be part of the new course model.
There are all sorts of options for a group, and a club that really wanted to do the most responsible project to benefit the community.

On the...well the not Coul Links course would only take up a third of that Embo property.  It floods in a fair few places.  A sizeable portion of it is that dune slack scenario, which probably would need a good bit of it to stay as a coastal buffer. Then there is the SSSI.
 So until you really have all the constraint requirements nailed down, it's difficult to know what is actually even viable.
 That proximity disturbance doesn't just go away because you only use a third of the property. It's complicated...that is why you stay away from it and let it function beautifully....as it has for a very long time.

While it's easy to just joke about, or brush aside concerns for that Scottish Wildcat; it's fate is in serious question.
I find it rather shocking that so little has /is being done in Scotland to do some
comprehensve research and determine how best to stabilize/restore the population.
 It basically is the equivalent of the Bald Eagle in significance to Scotland. In some ways it transcends that comparison. It's found no where else on earth and it's current range is tiny in totality.
There is a great opportunity here for the club ( it is the subject of the logo after all) AND Mr. Keiser to forge a way to draw attention to helping the MOST threatened member of that Highland area community ...the Scottish Wildcat.
Why not actually take the lead on something that both golfers, and non- golfers would appreciate and support?
 When does golf do that. Almost never. And that's why so many out there look at golf as the sport of the uncaring elite and somewhat selfish.
What if both his project(wherever it would be built besides that Embo site)  AND the club agreed to donate a couple of quid per round, to a fund established to aid respected Scottish Wildcat research and preservation efforts?
Now THAT would a story to tell. The press coverage that storyline angle could  generate would be off the charts.
It would blow away any Top 50 whatever squalk that only a miniscule fraction of the world cares about.
Think about that. GOLF stepping up to do it's share, to save one of the planet's most endangered species. In Scotland, the real home of golf where it all began. It gets no better than that.
That story, with Keiser's new Wildcat Lnks on a responsible site, and a RD club, with the very species on it's logo, teaming up to make a difference.
That story would leave a not Coul Links in the dust. No matter how high it was ranked!
And who's to say something of equal stature couldn't be crafted at a more responsible site. With the talent of that team, it most certainly could.
Yeh, really nailing it in the way I've described is just a stupid pipe dream from some pie in the sky caddie from America.
It's too big an idea for most to grasp... that we can actually do the right thing.
I should just shut up and wait for the good people of the Highlands to implode their own superb way of life, with outside influence, chasing all that economic gain, that ends up exterminating the very symbol of their unique region.

I'm done. And sadly, so is the Dornoch I fell in love with...barring divine intervention.

No cheers,
Kris

[Jon Wiggett]

Ally,


I found very few people in favor of Balmiedie and none of the people with a view of the property were.


Kris,


the Dornoch you fell in love was always going to disappear that is the way of the world, tings, place and people change. Dornoch has altered quite a bit in the time that I have known it and you cannot expect that not to happen just to suit your purposes. The area is in need of every job and developement it can get as long as it is justified and is sustainable. I know exactly what protection is in place to prevent ill suited projects from going ahead (unless the Scottish executive sticks its nose in) and so have no real worries that this project would go ahead if it were to have a significant impact.


DT,


if you go along the back coast road towards the driving range there is plenty of land out there though north of Dornoch does seem to offer more interesting oportunities.


Jon

[Kris Shreiner]

No Jon, I  never felt that Dornoch specialness was always going to disappear. It doesn' have to, and that's the point.
There are places that continue to get it right in the modern era. The key is a solid respecting of what has provided that specialness and not selling out!
It's been a fantastic place to visit for golf, or do about anything on offer up there, since the 1880's!
  But when you blow something up, out of scale from that which is practical, that's where it all goes wrong.
As to being confident iabout the protections in place...you MUST be joking.
Balmedie was a poster child for gross abuse of any legitimate
 " process " at all.
And all you need to do is look at that Scottish Wildcat's plight to recognize your confidence in that purported protection is laughable.
You are not alone. Most folks hit the jobs  justification button every time.
So in the end, the need to make money trumps all.
Case closed. Before it even started.
Three cheers for progress,
Kris

[Ian Mackenzie]

.

[BHoover]

I have been watching Ken Burns' film series on the history of the National Parks, which has been re-airing this past week on PBS here in the USA. This discussion reminds me that it's ironic or perhaps symbolic that John Muir, a Scotsman in American, was so influential in getting Yosemite protected as one of the first national parks.

The point is that there are indeed areas of special interest that do need to be protected against economic development and preserved for posterity. I don't know whether this particular area is one of those, but Kris certainly seems to be suggesting that. If that is the case, then I hope the people of Scotland and their government will do the right thing and preserve this area. Economic development sometimes does need to take a backseat to the greater good. Unfortunately, however, that all too often does not seem to be the route we take.

[Jon Wiggett]

No Jon, I  never felt that Dornoch specialness was always going to disappear. It doesn' have to, and that's the point.
There are places that continue to get it right in the modern era. The key is a solid respecting of what has provided that specialness and not selling out!
It's been a fantastic place to visit for golf, or do about anything on offer up there, since the 1880's!
  But when you blow something up, out of scale from that which is practical, that's where it all goes wrong.
As to there being confident in protections in place...you MUST be joking.
Balmedie was a poster child for gross abuse of any legitimate
 " process " at all.
And all you need to do is look at that Scottish Wildcat's plight to recognize your confidence in that purported protection is laughable.
You are not alone. Most folks hit the jobs  justification button every time.
So in the end, the need to make money trumps all.
Case closed. Before it even started.
Three cheers for progress,
Kris

Kris,


really, that is so lame to even try that. If you bothered to read what I have written then you might give a balanced and appropriate response.


Jon

[Kris Shreiner]

Brian
Thanks for injecting a very salient point when referencing Mr. Muir. He was basically a naturalist nomad. He spoke of preserving places he visited! He wasn't even ever a member. Imagine the howls he'd get on here....impudent Scot!

Ian,
It's not a question of the development team. They are great.
It's the wrong site! On a couple of scores. But as Balmedie proved, with the mouldy carrot of economic gain...they found a way to part the dunes.
And what is the chalice being held up at Coul Links. The same mouldy carrot of economic gain. See, it doesn't matter if the hand holding it is divine, a way is always found to see it approved. The verdict is preordained before the process even starts. It's bogus.

As to Pebble Beach, nice try. You don't know squat about what went on when I was there. But I'll share...I lived it.
That was about my 5th stop as a full-time caddie. It was the best, and ONLY place in the world when I started there, that a caddie could make a living YEAR round without seasonal moving.
Your claim I could work at 50 other courses really takes the cake. You are now telling me where I could have worked. Are you me sir? I believe that is about the most clueless statement I have ever read on GCA. And that is really saying something!
The quality of life there, given my outdoor pursuits, was superb.
I'm a bit of a foodie, and like a solid bottle of wine when the spirit moves me.
There isn't another area on the planet that can touch the concentration of either better than the Monterey Bay.
That coastal area is stunning and still very wild in most places.
They have mountain lions moving thru that Del Monte Forest. And everything else.
You can dis it all you want. Sure it's over the top, but they haven't destroyed their environment.
Big Sur is as far from Pebble Beach as Embo is from Dornoch. You couldn't dare put a course there. They get it...you don't!

When I first got there,  PB  wasn"t cheap, but it was not extortionate either. The round was $275.00 and the caddie rate, with a good tip, was $60.00 per bag. Hardly a savage bite.
Remember also, California has one of the highest cost of living in the world. Gas, even then, was not far off $4 per gallon.
My early years there,  the place still had a cool vibe. Busy, but
having a relaxed, low key feel.
But then, you guessed it, the beancounters got mercenary, with ownership changing a couple of times, finishing with the current American owners who took the kill and bill mentality to really offensive levels.
You have NO idea how diffiicult it was for me to stomach what I saw happen there.
They ruined it, and much to the absolute amazement of my fellow caddies, I left!
But I hung in there as long as I did, because I loved taking players around the courses, especially Spyglass, which was my home course. It STiLL has a private, understated rightness. Totally different setting than PB.

I was one of the top guys there. No one had more repeat clients, or request work. I took care of my players.  For me it was all about the golf. And well paid for my efforts.

 I spoke up more than most. I certainly did NOT hide my feelings. Believe it or not, you can have a strong constitution and still keep your job.

Actually got some positive things done there with some other engaged caddies.
By 2002, I'd had enough. Yes. Ian....2002! They made the terrible call to bring in the wretched outsource outfit, and there was no way I was working for them.
So I left, and returned to doing more landscape design work back East.
I find your associating my time on the Peninsula with this thread about as convoluted as it gets. Pebble opened in 1919.
What role could I possibly have had in the evolution of that course and area.
Because I worked at a place once that wasn't some model you identify as acceptable for me, I'm a hypocrite?
By the way, there is plenty of golf in California. And it is quite dry there frequently. It would be irresponsible to put more golf on the coast, except on a redo, or  repurposed site from my view.
So you can call me a hypocrite if you wish. It doesn't change the fact that Embo site is the last place the not Coul Links should be going.
Three cheers for hypocrisy!
Kris

[Niall C]

But as Balmedie proved, with the mouldy carrot of economic gain...they found a way to part the dunes.
And what is the chalice being held up at Coul Links. The same mouldy carrot of economic gain. See, it doesn't matter if the hand holding it is divine, a way is always found to see it approved. The verdict is preordained before the process even starts. It's bogus.

Kris

As someone who was against the Balmedie project in the form it took, and also someone who is involved in the property business in Scotland I have to say your comment above about it being preordained is bollocks. The project may well get planning permission, and judging by the way they seem to be going about it, I'd be surprised if they didn't, but to suggest that its already a done deal just shows ignorance of the system. Either that or a lack of respect for those involved that does you no credit.

Niall

[Kris Shreiner]

Niall,
I want to respect the process. When do they ever say no when that economic gain is in play?

Cheers,
Kris

[Niall C]

Kris

While not strictly a planning consideration (as far as I'm aware) plenty of developers will promote the economic case. Sometimes it will be the focal point of their case, at least in terms of how they present in public, but it doesn't follow that planning will be granted because of perceived or alleged economic benefits to the community at large.

That said, each local planning authority publishes periodically a local development plan that links in with central government planning guidelines. The local development plan will be in plan form with planning guidelines/policy attached. I haven't seen the local plan for this site (it's a published document so should be on line somewhere) but imagine that the land might be zoned as being safeguarded for Open Space (or something similar) with at least part designated as SSSI.

That does not mean you can't develop the land but there are guidelines/policy as to how you might go about it (subject to being granted planning permission).

As an example I'm looking at a site at present that sits on a river as it meets the sea and is part links and part rolling countryside with a wetlands area that is a haven for birds and other wildlife. From my very early initial discussions with the planners they have expressed a level of support for the idea of two golf courses. One skirting and effectively circling the wetlands area and the other on the links. The planners are broadly supportive because they recognise that a minimalist style (ie. limited earth moving, no tree planting) course would help protect and compliment the wetlands area while the links land is in some ways less sensitive and a course could be accommodated without touching any sensitive areas. Will this development go ahead ? Not without a developer it won't (any interested developers please contact me  ) and certainly not without planning permission.

The reason why you are perhaps not aware of planning authorities saying no to development is because firstly a lot of these things fly under the radar and secondly it is costly to pursue a planning application and not many take it forward if they are unlikely to succeed.

Niall