Environmental issues facing golf in Europe - by David Stubbs

The De Vere Belfry during the 2001 Ryder Cup major events can be compatible with conservation objectives

I have been interested in the environmental aspects of golf course development for the best part of the last fifteen years. During this time I can say that the golf industry as a whole has become much more aware of environmental issues, it is now more or less a matter of routine that new golf projects provide some form of environmental assessment.

The drivers for this have been pressure groups and legislation. Where there has been opposition to a golf project,developers have had to react.

In some cases,including a number of high profile projects, the professional team has been found wanting, either through complacency or lack of understanding of the issues and the anti-golf lobby have won the day. In the case of legislation, which has tended to follow in the wake of controversies, developers usually do what they have to but more in the spirit of ecological studies being a 'necessary evil', than something they really want to do.

Alongside all this,over the last decade or so, the golf authorities have sponsored a number of golf-ecology programmes -notably the European Golf Association Ecology Unit (from 1994-1999) and subsequently the Committed to Green programme. There is a growing network of national, or regional golf-ecology projects and a fair amount of research underpinning all this.

It is fair to say that today we know a lot more about the environmental impacts of golf and we can be more comfortable in the belief that by and large, golf courses are environmentally beneficial. That is not a view shared by the wider public, not even in countries like England, where one might expect a greater public recognition of golf courses. The official view from public authorities is also poor,especially in continental European countries. Two recent examples highlight the scale of the problems the industry faces.

the golf industry as a whole has become much more aware of environmental issues - it is now more or less a matter of routine that new golf projects provide some form of environmental assessment.

In Flanders,the Environment Minister was prepared to back calls for the region's only two links courses (Royal Zoute and Ostend)to be converted into nature parks and the golf courses relocated to new sites on agricultural land. This was despite the fact that these two golf courses had been in existence for over 100 years and had in fact safeguarded what was effectively the last undeveloped coastal dune habitats in Belgium.

In Catalonia,the regional water authority issued a decree in November 2001,that all golf courses in the region must stop using ground water and can only be irrigated with treated waste water. This was instigated with immediate effect, without any consideration of how the golf courses might instantly equip themselves with the necessary infrastructure. Obviously this could not be achieved and over the next six months 36 warning notices were issued to various golf clubs with the threat of substantial fines.

Montecastillo,Spain home to some rare Ducks Ile aux Cerfs -giving golf a bad name. Ecological monitoring at GC Leverkusen David Stubbs Ecological monitoring at GC Leverkusen Jacques Santer launches Committed to Green

The situation was eased temporarily due to a wet spring and summer, so the decree was suspended, but the warnings have not been rescinded and the likelihood is for the decree to be reinstated as soon as there is another extended dry period. These may seem extreme examples but they are indicative of a wider trend in Europe for tough, uncompromising regulations on golf, especially at regional levels. This is also evidence of a general ignorance of the practicalities of golf course operation.

Attitudes towards new golf courses are often no better. From my perspective, I have had many opportunities to visit new golf courses all over Europe in recent years. These are projects that had been developed during the late 1980s and 1990s,in a period of increasing environmental concern. I have a mixed impression.

At first sight,pretty well every site has revealed an encouraging wealth of ecological interest. Golf courses seem to be good places for wildlife. Furthermore, the impression is that in most cases these sites are supporting more wildlife than before the golf courses were built. On former intensively managed farmland that is almost self-evident,and even on many of the more natural sites, the golf course element does not seem to have had significant impact. But it is not as simple as that. For one thing,I have seen very few examples where the golf courses have fully realised their potential for ecological enhancement, let's consider these missed opportunities,not bad examples,just could be so much better. Also frustrating is the lack of good information on how the present situation compares with the previous land use.

I feel golf has not been very well served by the professional environment sector, and this fuels the myth that being green is expensive. It is important to appreciate the value beyond. This continues to make life difficult for new golf development.

With the notable exception of a couple of sites in the Ruhr District of Germany, I have not seen any detailed site-specific long-term studies on the ecological changes due to golf development. Part of the problem here lies in the fact that planning authorities do not know what questions to ask,nor how to interpret the information provided.

For their art, most environmental consultancies treat golf projects like they do any other development, be they roads, housing or industrial. So we end up with formulaic Environmental Assessments, fulfiling the legal requirements but not really getting to the
core of understanding the ecology of a site and identifying the potential opportunities a golf course may offer.

These are expensive studies to get a planning permit but they rarely have much useful application beyond.This is doubly disappointing because a sound approach to environmental issues should be cost-effective. The long-term benefits in respect of improved management efficiency,lower consumption of resources and a more mature,aesthetic golf course, blended into the surrounding landscape,are potentially substantial. These offer important cost savings in planning,construction and operational management, marketing opportunities and the intangible but significant benefits of better community relations. I feel golf has not been very well served by the professional environment sector,and this fuels the myth that being green is expensive. It is important to appreciate the value beyond. This continues to make life difficult for new golf development.

At the same time, as an industry we have not collectively done enough to dispel the widespread public belief that golf courses damage the environment.We may have convinced ourselves but we have much still to do to win the hearts and minds of the wider community. Clearly there is need for the golf sector to develop and support more effective educational programmes, both internally for golf architects and greenkeepers, and externally for environmental professionals and urban planners.

That is easy to say but a lot more complicated to achieve. It requires cooperation and coordination across the golf sector ,involving the key professional bodies and the golf authorities, significant resources and a long-term commitment.

As the governing body of golf,the R&A has recently set up a new Golf Course Committee, complete with a full time secretariat to take a more active role in golf course technical issues: notably climate change, water, chemicals, ecology, levels of play and planning and development.

This, together with outward looking initiatives such as Committed to Green, has the potential to address many of the problems highlighted above. But it won't happen in isolation. The key to a sustainable future for golf in Europe is to work more in partnership.

Golf, environmental and public authority interests have to learn to understand each other better and to engage in meaningful dialogue. EIGCA has to be part of this picture.Golf architects are often in the front line of the golf-environment arguments and their experience in this field is of great value. I hope the institute will use its collective strength and experience to contribute to the new initiatives taking place in the industry, and be advocates for more environmentally responsible golf development.