We should just have forest golf. Plant crap tons of trees and make golf actually strategic
Disc golf does this. I find it to be the superior golf sport by far.
Like big minigolf, where you have to bounce the ball off objects. Maxi-golf
Macrogolf!
Yes! I’ve been saying this for years. Playing in the desert? Better wear your snake boots and bring plenty of water. Swamps? Bring floating balls, bring snake boots again, and watch for gators. Beach? Better get a good tee time to align with low tide. Leave no trace golfing. Extra strokes for disturbing the wildlife. Strokes off for litter and invasive species removal.
Isn’t regular golf forest golf? Or it was at least the last time I played.
If the forests you’ve been to look like fairways, you need to change your forests or your fairways.
I played golf for the first time recently, it’s not as boring as it looks… basically a fun way to be outside with friends and do something challenging.
The course I played on maintained the local geography and incorporated it into its holes. That made for a gorgeous landscape, and, as an example, one hole required a shot over a forested ravine, both a tricky shot, and a nice way to keep the natural landscape, flora, and fauna as intact as possible.
I confirmed that they only use non-drinkable water for irrigation, and there were no vast spans of grass, only patches that used to be empty land beforehand. That only made the course more challenging.
All in all, what I’m trying to say is that this sport can be done in a way that’s overall fine. Sure, replacing native flora with grass isn’t good but it’s ok if done in small patches and responsibly. Golf has become a symbol of classism but it’s something anyone can enjoy if they have access to it, it isn’t even particularly expensive. It isn’t great but, done morally, isn’t bad either.
And there is a risk in making it a symbol in that way: it makes for a wrong target and a waste of resources. Activists filling up holes makes a point but there’s much more important stuff to do. If you’re an environmentalist or an urbanist, cars and oil companies should be pretty much your only concern; golf courses can be dealt with later.
Golf courses actually see pretty frequent use; anybody who has played a public course on the weekend knows what it’s like to be constantly waiting to take your shot because the group in front of you is still putting, and the group behind is waiting to take their tee shot.
A much bigger waste of resources and land are the sterile suburban yards that barely get used at all.
I do wonder how much fertilizer runoff, herbicide use, etc the average golf course is responsible for
only patches that used to be empty land beforehand
There’s no such thing as empty land, it used to be a complex ecosystem
Screw ball golf, disc golf though solves all it’s problems
-
Can play in almost any environment so no habitat destruction needed. Might have to clear a few trees or brush in dense forest but otherwise mostly keeps forests intact
-
No elitism or arrogance. It’s one of the cheapest sports there is, just requires a couple $15 discs and most courses are free and are part of parks. Not much maintenance is needed on the course.
-
Easier to pick up. Most people can at least throw a disc 10 yards or so after a couple tries. Also more forgiving if drunk or high in that way.
-
More interesting to watch /play. Courses usually have obstacles like trees and the flight path of discs has a lot of lateral movement so if your good/lucky you can weave it through the obstacles.
I love disc golf. I haven’t played in a few years, but I have a stack of discs in my garage tempting me to go to a course.
My brother-in-law is so into it that he has one of those chain things you hit as a goal to practice with in his back yard. He got it as a Christmas present a few years ago and he thinks it’s pretty much the best thing he owns.
-
Fishing is a way more boring sport, but at least it takes up literally 0 land.
Yeah fishing is even more boring but I have nothing against it since it relies on a healthy ecosystem. Golf is basically the opposite in that regard
Golf shouldn’t take up land
The whole point was that the Highlands land was too rough for a pitch
The thing about fishing for me is that it’s about exploring the lake and relaxing. It ain’t called “catching” for a reason.
But I don’t really do catch and release. I eat what I catch (provided it’s a legal size/species of course). I feel like catching fish just to catch them is kinda a dick move.
People don’t go out to the woods and shoot a deer in the leg and walk away. So why should we put a hook in a fish’s lip/throat just for giggles?
Fishing is an old way for introverts to be socially acceptable. Want some time alone with your thoughts? Go fishing. Doesn’t matter if you catch anything.
Destroying the land isn’t really the issue, they choose flat terrain to avoid having to do the work. It’s the irrigation cost of keeping the greens functional in environments the grass isn’t suited for that’s the problem.
I don’t play golf but my neighbor does. Here in Appalachia where I am the golf course isn’t even remotely flat. They actually made a pretty interesting setup hidden behind trees.
I’ve seen golfers that really impressed me with their precision. I would imagine that if you’re good at it, it isn’t even remotely boring.
I grew up with Happy Gilmore being my only VHS tape for awhile though, so I’m sure I’m biased haha.
If it’s your game, do it. The people making these memes probably use computers that draw power created with coal and batteries mined in undeveloped and largely exploited nations. Their moral attempt at trying to make golf the one thing that needs to be focused on is just one of convenience because they don’t specifically like it.
Most of their hobbies are just as damaging if your scope of economics goes out a couple of layers.
Their moral attempt at trying to make golf the one thing that needs to be focused on
I must be missing that attempt. Can you please point it out?
Sorry the sentence didn’t really make sense in hindsight.
Essentially people love to point out other people’s hobbies when they’re damaging the environment but conveniently leave out all of the ways their particular hobbies do the same.
It’s easy to say “insert thing here is bad!” When you don’t partake in it, which is why a community of mostly computer nerds bitches about sports. It’s an easy target since they don’t have a personal stake.
Terrible take almost all golf courses run their irrigation in a closed loop system.
IIRC there’s also an issue of fertilizer runoff (or whatever they use on grass, idk lmao) harming the surrounding ecosystem
Even better is when they destroy a bunch of virgin land to make a course when courses are already overbuilt in the area, then close it.
I lived in a city that had a mayor who was elected to a few terms and was going on 10-11 years in office. An out-of-state developer wanted to turn 400 acres of old growth forest by Lake Superior into a golf course, spending about 25 million. For some reason he made this basically the only thing he tried to get to happen in his last 2 years in office. This was also at a time when a lot of courses were struggling or closing because they had built too many in the early 2000s.
Many people were opposed to it but the usual sort of people thought it was great because ‘wow someone is spending money’. One fairly dim guy I knew who worked in construction said “YEAH. Do you know how many jobs that will make??”. The problem is they were going to hire a bunch of people to build it, which would take about 6 months, and then the permanent positions at the course were going to be like 6 people. Finally, they didn’t do it, the mayor left office, and basically nobody ever talked about it again.
had a mayor who was elected to a few terms and was going on 10-11 years in office. An out-of-state developer wanted to turn 400 acres of old growth forest by Lake Superior into a golf course, spending about 25 million. For some reason he made this basically the only thing he tried to get to happen in his last 2 years in office. This was also at a time when a lot of courses were struggling or closing because they had built too many in the early 2000s.
Many people were opposed to it but the usual sort of people thought it was great because ‘wow someone is spending money’. One fairly dim guy I knew who worked in construction said “YEAH. Do you know how many jobs that will make??”. The problem is they were going to hire a bunch of people to build it, which would take about 6 months, and then the permanent positions at the course were going to be like 6 people. Finally, they didn’t do it, the mayor left office, and basi
Thanks for putting that last line in there. I was getting progressively more irate.
Ha, yeah, I guess my intro made it sound like it went through and then was closed. I was so happy when it finally didn’t happen and the obviously corrupt politician was gone.
Any decision made to create or preserve jobs is inherently wasteful. You’re spending money to avoid losing an economic output that the market has decided no longer needs to exist.
Capitalist economics is more complicated than that, though, since there are artificial boom-and-bust cycles. People do deserve employment.
The people really pushing the project were the developers, a few people who stood to make an outiszed portion of the money, and the apparently corrupt mayor who I’m sure was planning on lining his own pocket somehow.
People can be employed in fields where they’re needed. You wouldn’t argue about maintaining coal mining jobs, would you? I’m all for funding a “coal to clean energy” apprenticeship/certification program or something, but refusing to adopt fridges so the milkman doesn’t have to find a new job is a sure fire way to stifle progress and waste taxpayer money on subsidies.
Sure, I agree with that. The idea that once people are making money a certain way it has to continue forever is harmful.
Would be nice if it weren’t lifetime debt inducing to swap career fields, though.
It’s true, the way our capitalist system is set up it’s mainly the workers and less wealthy people in general who get screwed by progress and obsolescence. Wealthy people are very worried about it too of course, since something like phasing out coal could mean bankruptcy for them and they’d have to, oh no, get a job or something. Or you know, there goes the family dynasty… That’s harder to feel sorry for though, and it’s a lot easier for them to transition to something else, with some foresight.
It’s also opportunity cost. Literally anything else could also create jobs. How many jobs would building houses create? Solar or wind farm? A 24/7 orgy playground?
I like golf.
It’s super challenging, which I find fun. I like that I can slowly get better at it and watch myself progress but probably never really master it. Plus, it’s a really great way to get outside and do something with some friends or even some strangers.
I hate the elitist, racist, and sexist origins of the game but, like all bad ideas they’re becoming extinct. Sexism and racism have been pretty much eradicated from the sport compared to the time of it’s inception.
I play on courses that are reasonably priced and open to anyone and I have plenty of options. I’m not even remotely wealthy and neither are any of the people I play with. Equipment can be expensive but it doesn’t have to be.
Almost every passtime requires some space and often some level of infrastructure needs to be built and maintained. Think about swimming pools and hockey rinks, not to mention giant stadiums built for only a few professional teams to play in. Hardly anyone is mad about those things, and the list goes on.
I get hating the rich. I get hating something because it’s perceived as something that only rich people do but that’s not really the reality here. Sure, rich people play golf but only about a quarter of courses are private so maybe there are actually way more poors like me playing. What do you think?
They dont hate on icerinks,etc the same way because the two are not comparable in size. Not even close
Yeah, maybe those weren’t the best examples. Perhaps something like Disneyland or six flags would be a more suitable comparison.
I’ll hate on Disneyland and golf thank you very much. Also, for your stadiums example, many are angry about them
Of course. You’re free to hate whatever you like. The point I’m trying to convey is just that golf is as worthy of a pass time as anything else regardless of how much space it takes up or the fact that some of the people who take part in it might be wealthy.
Disc golf > ball golf. Don’t need a perfectly manicured unnatural lawn for disc golf, in fact that makes it a lot less fun.
Coolest course I’ve ever been to is just through a forest in the mountains of southern Oregon. No chain link baskets, just coffee cans on a stick to shoot at. But man what an amazing place to spend the afternoon. A small river (not deep enough to lose your disc), up and then down a smallish hillside, huge trees trees fairly widely spaced. Maybe that kind of course is common in certain areas but all the ones by me are at manicured parks. Fun but not the same.
There are two courses locally that are at least partially baskets in the woods. There is another a bit farther away that is completely in the woods, and uses old tires for the baskets.
None of them have a golf-course style lawn though. At the most, just grass that gets occasionally mowed.
this made me realise rich people started playing golf because they wanted to flex how much land they have
That’s not true, modern golf originated in Scotland where it’s considered a game for everybody and played a lot on public land. The most famous course in the world is closed every Sunday and becomes a public park for the day. The elitism came later, and fuck those guys.
Yeah. Golf just doesn’t make sense 😕.
Golf is actually fun.
It’s not about fun or not
I fucking hate golf, and golf courses for this reason, HOWEVER they do make a somewhat useful end land use in reclaimed landscapes in urban areas (closed landfills for instance). I don’t get the need for greens etc. the original game started out on some Scottish moorland or glen, with native grasses.
I’m more concerned about how much water they waste. The sprinklers go off on the golf courses here even when it rains.
Just gonna say that golf is fun but I never played the real thing since it’s expensive, just golf videogames, minigolf is the one that I think it’s boring.
I used to think it’s boring. I still do, but not so much ever since I learned it was invented by the Scottish.
The modern game, certainly, but I’d be surprised if they had the original idea. A quick wiki suggests it may have been the Dutch who laid the concept.
I’m no historian, but I’d agree with this out of the fact that I live an hour away from Scotland. The Scottish wouldn’t think up hitting a wee ball with a wee stick. Remember, these people literally throw tree trunks (caber toss) and rocks (stone put) for sport.
I do, however, believe they’d have great fun with the idea of smacking a ball really hard through the Highlands.
Tbf it’d make even more sense if it’s made by Dutch
Yeah, that’s why there’s always a windmill in crazy golf! The other thing that makes it crazy is all that wild elevation change!
I like how we call it miniature golf in the U.S. but you Brits outdid us by calling it crazy golf. Which would you rather play, wimpy miniature golf or awesome crazy golf? Because when I think of miniature, I think of tiny houses, but when I think of crazy, I think of Ozzy’s Crazy Train.
What about a hyperspace bypass?
“You’ve got to build bypasses.” - some earthling
