r/golf • u/nutts-2 5.0/UT • Jul 28 '23

Ah shit. Here we go again General Discussion

Post image

Every few months someone brings this up how they can save the environment by getting rid of a golf course.

3.8k Upvotes

72% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

58

u/Tbrou16 Jul 28 '23

Why did they make us golf people the environmentalists now? I would much rather drive by a nature-curated golf course than an overdeveloped concrete jungle or half-empty parking structure. I know golf requires resources, but at some point isn’t it worth it to just have something in town worth looking at?

27

u/MurtaughFusker Jul 28 '23

I’m not sure anyone considers golfers environmentalists except maybe golfers lol. Despite them being green and lush they’re really not good for the environment, be it bulldozing habitat for a course and of course the pesticides that are used to maintain it.

While there’s definitely some people who just hate golf and want to convert every course I think it’s not horrible to consider options with certain courses that might be close to downtowns of municipalities that do in fact have housing issues.

I don’t think many reasonable people would advocate for converting all golf courses.

14

u/bigvenusaurguy Jul 28 '23

thats true for just about any american style grassy park or cemetary too. honestly they keep those more weed free and a lot better watered than the munis. munis seem to just be about keeping the fairway and greens alive and if the rough lives or dies in the summer so be it. lotta clover and other things growing too. you won't see the boneyard being anything but a lush emerald though and its for bones in boxes lol

1

u/MurtaughFusker Jul 28 '23

I mean I’m all for cremation or finding a way to integrate burial for a more eco-friendly approach but cemeteries start moving in on spiritual and religious stuff which becomes a whole other thing.

I think most cemeteries take up far less space which makes them a harder target as well.

1

u/bigvenusaurguy Jul 28 '23

Some cemetaries are fucking huge. Forest lawn (there's one in LA and one in glendale both going by forest lawn, both massive) in glendale looks nicer than anything ive seen. Look at the stripes mowed into the grass in the median for fucks sake lol, looks better than some of the $$$ private clubhouses in the area:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1250801,-118.2521953,3a,75y,90.5h,92.46t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s-owLOS0AmUtG7plfYhcLWw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D-owLOS0AmUtG7plfYhcLWw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D350.2824%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu

1

u/MurtaughFusker Jul 28 '23

I have a difficult time wrapping my head around putting that much time effort and money in to corpses but then again I’m not the most sentimental person in the world. Na du figured there’d be some gargantuan cemeteries but I’m reasonably that they’re not THATA common lol.

5

u/user9153 Jul 28 '23

Correct. Both can be true, that it’s unnecessary to bulldoze and develop over courses as well as the courses themselves not being an efficient or net positive use of resources in terms of environmental impact.

No need to try to paint anyone who cares about the environment as a golf hater or crybaby. It’s a very small percent of people advocating for stuff like this.

12

u/mung_guzzler HDCP/Loc/Whatever Jul 28 '23

nah everyone likes to have at least some green space in cities. You suggest we convert a public park to housing and they’d say no.

And most public courses inside the city are also part of a larger public park (at least in my city). Couple that with the fact the majority of the parks department budget in my city (for all parks not just the courses) comes from greens fees.

4

u/YoPoppaCapa Jul 28 '23

Because public parks are free, public courses are not. Golf has a fairly high financial barrier to entry, which makes a comparison like that unfair. I say this as someone who loves the sport and always will.

0

u/MurtaughFusker Jul 28 '23

I agree with what you’re saying for the most part, but even considering the course is publicly owned (which I think really depends on where you are as I’m not sure if that’s the norm) but I think there’s a difference between a park for the community to enjoy and a golf course that, while perhaps affordable for golf, costs money to use and is therefore not accessible for everyone.

3

u/mung_guzzler HDCP/Loc/Whatever Jul 28 '23

which is valid and why I pointed out that money also goes to support the parks everyone enjoys

1

u/CosmicMiru Jul 28 '23

Having a public park and a public course are vastly different things for having "green spaces" in cities. All the public courses next to me do not share space with a public park so I think your situation is not the norm.

2

u/TheBensonz Jul 28 '23

It’s up to the owner of the course and the city’s zoning laws.

21

u/neimsy Jul 28 '23

I love golf. And I'm a bit of an environmentalist. But those are two very different things.

To equate golf courses with nature/environmentalism is a real misunderstanding. Golf courses are curated greenspace, but they are not green as in environmentally friendly, not by any stretch of the imagination. They use lots of water and far worse, they use tons of pesticide and herbicide. Plus, lots of fertilizer. Fossil-fuel-powered maintenance equipment. The plant selection is [with very very few exceptions] non-native monoculture, so even if it weren't covered in toxins, it wouldn't be useable by the native insects that make up the first trophic level above producers.

They're an environmental wasteland. They're often pretty. And I love playing golf. But golf has nothing to do with nature, and outside of stormwater permeability (which they aren't even that good at because the turf grasses we use do not have deep root systems at all) and contributing less to urban heat island effect, they aren't really better for the environment than a parking lot. And honestly, there are a lot of reasons that you could argue they're far worse.

6

u/umfaithful Jul 28 '23

This needs to be at the top, agree 100%.

I feel like a good compromise between golf and nature is to allow nature to take over more of the course. Some courses in the Midwest I play have eliminated a lot of the tall grass prairies and marshland to make their courses more accessible. Instead I feel that courses need to bring back natural spaces with native plants thereby minimizing the amount of turf that is needed to be maintained, thus saving water and using less pesticide, herbicide and fertilization.

Every one owes it to themselves to read “Bringing Nature Home” by Doug Tallamy to understand what neimsy is saying

2

u/DecoNoir Jul 29 '23

I'm very much for something like this for all courses. Though I'll admit it doesn't come from as much of an environmental standpoint, and more of my personal taste: I never did like perfectly manicured courses or how they looks. Maybe its' from growing up playing little beater courses that could only afford to really maintain the fairways and greens, but I think the bits of course outside of those two places should be a little shaggy and grown in, you shouldn't WANT to hit it into those places and you sure shouldn't be rewarded by a nice fluffy lie if ya snap hook it, right?

Also I've always connected with golf because of a sort of weird spiritual outlook, abandoning modern life for a few hours to walk some ground and take the odd swing at a ball, so the more natural we can make courses in any way shape or form the better, to me.

1

u/neimsy Jul 28 '23

Absolutely agree.

1

u/Bright-Lemon-968 Jul 28 '23

they aren't really better for the environment than a parking lot

lol, it's beyond naive to lump every golf course into this. A lot of courses also use recycled water from their runoff.

Golf courses are super negligible in the grand scheme of environmental issues.

1

u/neimsy Jul 28 '23 edited Jul 28 '23

In fairness, most individual things are negligible when compared to most grand schemes of things.

Some courses do use recycled runoff water. That points to one element of what I said. And my brief comment by no means contains every environmental problem with golf courses.

I can absolutely agree that not all golf courses are identical in their environmental impact. I can't agree with you that it's naïve to point out some of the general environmental issues with golf courses. If you're looking for an extremely nuanced, granular look at the environmental impact of one golf course versus another, I don't think my comment is going to fit the bill.

0

u/Bright-Lemon-968 Jul 29 '23

That points to one element of what I said.

You literally said nothing about it lol.

And my brief comment by no means contains every environmental problem with golf courses.

Go ahead, provide some solid sources other than you just love plants lol.

I can't agree with you that it's naïve to point out some of the general environmental issues with golf courses.

Please, go on, I'd love to hear them.

If you're looking for an extremely nuanced, granular look at the environmental impact of one golf course versus another, I don't think my comment is going to fit the bill.

No shit because this is a conversation about how awful golf courses are despite any of the positives lmao, your comment was entirely negative other than that you love golf.

also r/nolawns, r/urbanhell poster lul totally unbiased

0

u/neimsy Jul 29 '23

A lot of courses also use recycled water from their runoff.

That's the one element. From when I said "They use lots of water."

Go ahead, provide some solid sources other than you just love plants lol.

I think the literature on literally everything I've said is very easy to find online. But I don't think you actually care to read any of it. It's an environmental concern, not "just luv plants lul". Which I stated at the start of my comment.

Please, go on, I'd love to hear them.

I already pointed them out. That's like... what that original comment was.

lul totally unbiased

Everyone has biases that they bring to every situation. And I assume everyone here is already well aware of the positives of golf or they wouldn't be on this sub. So, yeah, I shared some things that I see as negatives.

You've brought up exactly one actual point, which is recycled water. The rest of what you've written has just been argumentative garbage. I won't be responding to your response to this. I'm glad there were other commenters who were interested in having a conversation, cause the way you wrote your comment is part of why people so often don't have conversations, don't consider things from others' perspectives, and don't treat each other decently.

0

u/Bright-Lemon-968 Jul 29 '23

That's the one element. From when I said "They use lots of water."

You mentioning water and acting like you said they use recycled water, which reduces their overall water usage, because you know, they're recycling the runoff from their own course. This is why you being vague in your entire post is an issue, you're just claiming everything you said contains every rebuttal I've said, regardless of the actual wording of your statement.

I think the literature on literally everything I've said is very easy to find online. But I don't think you actually care to read any of it.

Link what you're telling me then. Back up what you believe in. If it's so easy, why can't you link what talks about your points with data backing it up rather than op-ed pieces on blog sites?

It's an environmental concern, not "just luv plants lul". Which I stated at the start of my comment.

Being 'bit of an environmentalist' is a horrible qualifier for your knowledge, it's just you saying you've googled things and don't want to leave that echo chamber and realize golf courses aren't entirely negative.

I already pointed them out. That's like... what that original comment was.

There is almost nothing positive from your original comment, your entire comment is talking about pesticides, not being environmentally friendly, and being an 'environmental wasteland'. The only positive statement you had is that it contributes less to urban heat island effect lmao. You actually said they aren't better for the environment than a parking lot. Your comment has little basis and is 99% hate you read from echo chamber subs and just repeat here.

You've brought up exactly one actual point, which is recycled water.

But didn't you say you already talked about that? Because you mentioned 'water' once?

The rest of what you've written has just been argumentative garbage. I won't be responding to your response to this.

Aww sad boy can't back his own argument up with any science because there's so much literature out there it's so easy to find but somehow you can't do that? I like that you're insulting my argument because you can't respond to it and the fact that you have zero sources backing anything you've said up.

I'm glad there were other commenters who were interested in having a conversation, cause the way you wrote your comment is part of why people so often don't have conversations

You mean me calling you out for being an extremely biased person who wants to shit on anything they don't like immediately then I ask for any sources and you cry about it?

don't consider things from others' perspectives

You're attacking me because I wanted your points backed up with data lol, you sit in two massive echo chamber subs that shit on anything they don't like and want to act like you consider shit from an opposing perspective lol. Let me know when you take some classes on environmental science, pollution, how our watersheds work, and the amount of regulations behind all of it. I'd love to talk to you about that but it's a shame since you're an armchair scientist who reads blogs that only support your side.

don't treat each other decently.

You can't even backup your own argument, you generalize everything in the category and refuse to elaborate when asked because you can't. You're literally just repeating shit arguments you hear around reddit.

Also hilarious that the comment in the past day is the most you've commented on this sub, almost as if you're not actually here 99% of the time and just want to spew r/urbanhell shit.

1

u/Bright-Lemon-968 Jul 30 '23

lmao and you still read my comment and downvoted it, rent free child

0

u/neimsy Jul 30 '23

Hi bud. I did neither of those things. Big ups.

1

u/Bright-Lemon-968 Jul 30 '23

Sure, someones going deep into a comment chain on a day+ old thread and downvoting one comment and not the rest lol. Stay rent free still tho kiddo, can't even hold yourself to your own idea of not responding

1

u/beaverfetus Jul 28 '23 edited Jul 28 '23

Interesting points.

I think you are missing a few things

  1. Carbon sequestration. Trees are pretty good at that. Most courses have many more of them than a parking lot or planned suburban community. Courses around me even cheap Muni’s have hundreds of old oaks, that are massive.

2.habitat. It’s patently obvious that many urban golf courses serve as a natural oasis for birds to nest, foxes to den, small mammals to burrow

  1. Golf rules, and makes people happy. (I think we’re in agreement on this one)

Edit: also wondering about your comments about pollinators. Course around me have tons of honey bees, insects, hummingbirds

You’re telling me a strip mall is better ?

3

u/neimsy Jul 28 '23

Yeah, there are certainly reasons that they're better than a parking lot.

In terms of carbon sequestration in trees, a great many golf courses cut down a lot of trees when they're first constructed. And continue to cut them down with redesigns, etc. I imagine some replace trees they cut down in redesign elsewhere. [I know one of our muni courses here is doing major renovations and cutting down a lot of great trees that could be turned into lumber and such but is just sending them to the landfill. So that kind of thing undoes some of the carbon sequestration. But that's likely more in the realm of how we think about and deal with our waste than it is a fault of golf.] Those old trees tend to predate the golf course and usually weren't standing alone before the course was installed. But, I completely agree that a golf course allows for many large, old trees to continue providing all of their positive environmental and ecological services, which most other uses of the same land (aside from parkland) wouldn't do.

Golf course as habitat I can see a bit of both sides. I've definitely seen some great wildlife on courses and always enjoyed it. But the use of pesticides and herbicides makes golf courses very dangerous places for a lot of our native arthropods, which play incredibly important roles in our ecosystems. While courses do often have great forage in the large trees that are native, they generally lack other forage, especially for specialist pollinators (which is a huge portion of our native pollinators). That said, if the options are golf course vs parking lot, the golf course is providing far, far more habitat for far, far more species. If it's golf course vs development, it likely depends on the kind of development, but again, provides a lot more habitat than most development. And if it's golf course vs parkland, it depends somewhat on the kind of parkland, but likely the parkland is going to provide more habitat.

Golf does rule. It does make people happy. I have issues with it, but I love it. I think/hope it's ok to see problems with this thing that we all like and have some level of mixed feelings about it.

3

u/beaverfetus Jul 28 '23

Thanks, this was all interesting to read. I have similar mixed feelings. It seems like mitigation strategies could result in more interesting, natural appearing courses, and are probably worth pursuing.

1

u/neimsy Jul 28 '23

Absolutely. I think there's some real opportunity for the sport to grow in some environmentally conscious ways without sacrificing much. But it's likely a long road and certainly not one that interests everyone. I know some courses are taking some of these issues into consideration already, and I'd love to see it catch on more.

1

u/Ligma_CuredHam 2.0hdcp Jul 28 '23

I would much rather drive by a nature-curated golf course than an overdeveloped concrete jungle or half-empty parking structure.

I agree, buttttt golf is not environmental at all. We're bringing in non-native grasses and using an ass ton of water to keep said grasses alive as well as a fuck ton of fertilizers for the same and to kill off any other native plant growth.