Golf courses are not natural areas. They are biological dead zones that are sprayed with pesticides and only hold grasses which do not help pollinators.
All the ones near me are full of trees, conifers so still not helping pollinators but it is food and shelter for native animals. Golf is not intrinsically bad, the sport can exist without being so classist and environmentally destructive, we just need to accept kinda-janky conditions. Like one my friends live by: it’s right by a tidal flat and quite muddy when the water’s high, the grass is dotted with sand patches, and there’s ducks and geese grazing the lawn or rooting around the marshy edges constantly.
Environmentalism is important but so are outdoor recreation spaces. We don’t need to live in Lothlorien. (We do need to stop using so many pesticides)
It’s not ideal, sure. All man-made structures are bad in that sense, and an 18 hole golf course is far from the most efficient user/area recreation facility. Doesn’t mean it’s an evil and irredeemable pastime.
Virtually all outdoor sports are guilty of this but golf is singled out because of the perceived (and sometimes very real) classism association. People aren’t in here calling for the death of elementary school playgrounds or movie theaters or anything else that results in acres of land used for any purpose but native habitat. You know what’s worse than golf courses? Impermeable surfaces. Buildings and parking lots and concrete interrupting the naturally slow seep of water from rainfall to ocean or aquifer, massively accelerating erosion and destroying riparian ecosystems.
I’d much rather see a push for native rooftop gardens and better wetland management and a change in city planning that embraces greenbelts and preserves the watershed.
Golf is singled out because of how much larger that dead zone is. It’s a massive stretch if dead space that requires water, fertilizers and pesticides while offering little benefit for most people.
It doesn’t require these things, that’s just what people are accustomed to. And there’s no need to shout. I studied ecology with a focus on watersheds, I know exactly how bad chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and irrigation can be. I still think your priorities are off.
It depends on where you’re talking. The golf courses around me are often built on land that isn’t good for housing. Ground won’t support even single family homes. That said, returning them to forest or prairie land as a public park is an option. Which is fine by me.
There’s already plenty of urban sprawl. We need more natural areas. Seize the houses of people who own multiple and make them public housing instead.
Golf courses are not natural areas. They are biological dead zones that are sprayed with pesticides and only hold grasses which do not help pollinators.
Golf is bad.
All the ones near me are full of trees, conifers so still not helping pollinators but it is food and shelter for native animals. Golf is not intrinsically bad, the sport can exist without being so classist and environmentally destructive, we just need to accept kinda-janky conditions. Like one my friends live by: it’s right by a tidal flat and quite muddy when the water’s high, the grass is dotted with sand patches, and there’s ducks and geese grazing the lawn or rooting around the marshy edges constantly.
Environmentalism is important but so are outdoor recreation spaces. We don’t need to live in Lothlorien. (We do need to stop using so many pesticides)
That much cut grass is bad in any fashion
It’s not ideal, sure. All man-made structures are bad in that sense, and an 18 hole golf course is far from the most efficient user/area recreation facility. Doesn’t mean it’s an evil and irredeemable pastime.
They are massive ecological dead areas with little to offer anything other than the humans playing golf.
Golf is bad for the environment because lawns and the notion of the English Garden are very bad for the environment.
Virtually all outdoor sports are guilty of this but golf is singled out because of the perceived (and sometimes very real) classism association. People aren’t in here calling for the death of elementary school playgrounds or movie theaters or anything else that results in acres of land used for any purpose but native habitat. You know what’s worse than golf courses? Impermeable surfaces. Buildings and parking lots and concrete interrupting the naturally slow seep of water from rainfall to ocean or aquifer, massively accelerating erosion and destroying riparian ecosystems.
I’d much rather see a push for native rooftop gardens and better wetland management and a change in city planning that embraces greenbelts and preserves the watershed.
Golf is singled out because of how much larger that dead zone is. It’s a massive stretch if dead space that requires water, fertilizers and pesticides while offering little benefit for most people.
GOLF. IS. BAD. FOR. THE. ENVIRONMENT.
It doesn’t require these things, that’s just what people are accustomed to. And there’s no need to shout. I studied ecology with a focus on watersheds, I know exactly how bad chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and irrigation can be. I still think your priorities are off.
Right… Which is why we would turn them into natural areas… Because they don’t have buildings…
It depends on where you’re talking. The golf courses around me are often built on land that isn’t good for housing. Ground won’t support even single family homes. That said, returning them to forest or prairie land as a public park is an option. Which is fine by me.