Architects support GEO Guidelines for Sustainable Golf
The European Institute of Golf Course Architects (EIGCA) and the American Society of Golf Course Architects (ASGCA) have agreed to support the Golf Environmental Organization’s Guidelines for Sustainable Golf Development.
“We were all impressed with GEO’s achievements to date and the golf course design industry unanimously agreed to support their Guidelines project,” said EIGCA President David Krause and ASGCA President Erik Larsen in a joint statement.
The GEO project, which started in 2009, aims to produce environmental guidelines for the planning, design and construction of golf courses that are “challenging but relevant.”
“We are thrilled to have the opportunity to present this project to such as large and knowledgeable audience, and we are buoyed by the positive feedback we received,” said Jonathan Smith of GEO. “The combination of credible content and international partnership will represent a robust and valuable statement on behalf of golf architects worldwide.”
The sustainability agenda is flexible enough to be applied to any course in any country, ranging from a 6-star resort to a 6-hole children’s course.
GEO is now set up to provide guidance and consultation among selected institutes, and the final version of the Guidelines will be finished by the end of 2010.
“Jonathan Smith and his team are to be congratulated on their work to date and for their Sustainable Golf Development Guidelines,” said Peter Thomson, Patron of the Society of Australian Golf Course Architects. “Golf is and has always been a game with nature and it is time that non-golfers became aware of this fact.”
Email this pageArticle Tools:
Bookmark this post:
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUponIf you enjoyed this article and would like to sign up for a FREE digital subscription, click here!
 |
Recent comments
- Golf is so tradition
12 hours 56 min ago - Wow you Americans are really
1 day 54 min ago - This article is all wrong.
1 day 14 hours ago - After reading all the
1 week 1 day ago - Let them fail. Few clubs
1 week 1 day ago - Still suffering from that
1 week 2 days ago - It's the high debt service
1 week 6 days ago - I cannot agree more....speed
1 week 6 days ago - The world economy adjusts
1 week 6 days ago - Yes, golf is having problems
1 week 6 days ago
Comments
May 09, 2010 9:02 am GMT
What's "challenging but relevent" about the average 6800 - 7,000 yds. course, utilizing 150 - 200 acres of land, 300,000 gals. of water daily, mega chemicals, high maintenance and yet attracts few new golfer's to the game? Better to put the sustainable golf emphasis where it's really needed.... in "practical courses" for the average golfer, that actually grow the game.
Until recently, golf had always been a game of growth and it's time that architects and developers became aware of this fact.
May 04, 2010 6:33 am GMT
Water regardless if it's reclaimed or supplied by outside sources, should be the primary concern here? At present, the average golf course consumes to much water. This is not sustainable! We have to get the requirements down to an acceptable level and the only way to do this is in reeducating the design/build mentality of those responsible.
Although the GEO's environmental guidelines are a step in the right direction, they fall well short when applied to the term "sustainable facilities".
Instead of addressing "sustainable golf" with some topical application fluff, try designing to a more practical growth initiative. With interest in the game waning, fewer courses are needed.
What's sustainable about a golf course with no golfer's?
May 03, 2010 2:15 pm GMT
Dangerous chemicals?? Leach into the environment?? Who uses just "a little" reclaimed water? Organic fertilizers, compost topdressing, IPM, solar, geothermal, wastewater recycling systems, electric carts... Would 100 acres be better served as another parking lot for retail space?? Not a lot of habitat there. What an uninformed view.
May 02, 2010 6:58 am GMT
You mean sustainable facade don't you? A golf course is only sustainable if you have someone to play it. Current studies show cultural changes with fewer & fewer people interested in the sport, so who are you sustaining the course for?
Other than a few cosmetic course effects, like using some native grasses and a little reclaimed water, what has really changed in the overall design? These proposed big and beautiful "natural courses", still use massive amounts of water, require lot's of dangerous chemicals that leach into the environment and occupy far to much land. So what has changed? Not much!
Try a new approach, "thinking inside the box", creating a more practical & appealing venue for the average golfer, then you can honestly use the "sustainable" word and maybe help grow the game.
April 29, 2010 7:25 pm GMT
Since when were shade and ventilation expensive forms of air conditioning? Or rough grass and swales expensive forms of water treatment? Or native vegetation more expensive than exotics? Or minimising amenity turf an added burden on construction and lifecycle management costs? Or as Michael points out, free 'good news' publicity a cost centre for the marketers? It all depends on whether the approach is to patch up impacts with trails of engineering solutions, or design them out from the start.
April 29, 2010 11:09 am GMT
Sustainablity is a new word for the golf industry, but we have been promoting it for some time. In fact we have a proposal to a major resort near Singapore to enable the entire resort, and its two golf courses to become 100% organically maintained. That means no chemical fertilizers and no pesticides. Several of the many benefits beside quality and being Environmentally Green will be it will fit into their budget and they will receive Millions of dollars in free publicity from the Travel and Liesure industry for being the first 100% organically maintained resort in the world.
We have been working in the golf maintenance business for over 25 years and Water Efficiency and Sustainable Landscapes are now being looked at by the Australia and Europe as the future, which is where we work.
Bravo, and let me know how we can help.
Michael Chaplinsky
President - Turf Feeding Systems
April 28, 2010 8:36 pm GMT
While I hope this is a step forward to reduce the impact of development on the environment, but I fear this will only add to the expense and increase the cost for players.
ASGCA & EIGCA should be working with PGA, GCSAA, and CMA to streamline golf operations and make the game more affordable.
Post new comment