This is an interesting perspective on golf courses in todays NYTimes:
I wonder if golf courses are still using gallons of herbicide, pesticide and fertilizers (the stuff that encourages the algal blooms in our Doan Brook for example). I wonder if this would be so for the proposed golf course slated for the lakefront in the City of Cleveland's Lakefront plan.
I also wonder if golf courses have become connected to the green movement as far as conservation easements. Could for example, Shaker or Canterbury Golf Clubs have conservation easements, so that we could be assured that if the owners sold the property, these greenspaces would not be developed with town houses and new urbanist developments. Here's an instructive article:
Conservation Easements: Developers Find Payoff in Preservation [2]
Donors Reap Tax Incentive by Giving to Land Trusts, but Critics Fear Abuse of System [2]
The issue has been studied and addressed by OSU Extension. [2]
from the article above:
Steps to increase wildlife habitat (food, water, and shelter) and maintain a healthy environment:
So who among us knows what is going on at our local golf courses? Are errant golf balls breaking windows? Are leaching chemicals entering our waterways? Are these urban wildlife corridors providing habitat for wildlife or killing them? It is easy to see in the attached google earth snapshot, how crucial these golf courses are as wildlife corridors. Are they with the program of greening our region? If not, how do we encourage them to get on board?
Attachment | Size |
---|---|
green corridor eastside.jpg [3] | 173.54 KB |
Links:
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/24/sports/golf/24golf.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
[2] http://forests.org/articles/reader.asp?linkid=27963
[3] http://66.228.45.157/system/files/green+corridor+eastside.jpg