IN THE CROSS HAIRS
Any outdoorsman knows the importance of properly positioning his target within the cross hairs. Unfortunately, the golf course industry is frequently in the cross hairs of regulators and public scrutinists. As a superintendent it’s not comfortable being the target. As an industry we should be proactive and responsive in a professional manner. We should be forthright, transparent, support accurate scientific research, recognize our shortcomings and deficiencies, and work toward improvement.
This article is inspired by a personal experience at the 2011 National Groundwater Conference. The conference is attended by a diverse group of people representing the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality, university researchers, engineering and water consultants, natural resource districts, agriculture producers, community representatives, U.S. Geological Survey, public health departments, politicians, public policy centers, and private industry. All of these professionals are brought together by the Groundwater Foundation’s vision of “a world with sustainable, clean groundwater where everyone understands how it impacts their life and acts responsible and responsively on its behalf.”
The three-day conference provided a wealth of information on the latest technologies, scientific facts, and success stories. Attending a conference outside the strict parameters of your own profession creates an opportunity to network and learn from others with a different perspective. Their outlook and point of view may differ from ours. It was shocking for me to hear a panelist representing agriculture make a comment that “golf courses use twice as much water and fertilizers” as he does. These comments need to be backed with hard facts and figures. This is the same industry that the Nebraska GCSA approached last year when they sponsored a radio advertisement with a similar statement. The panelist’s comments are an attempt to justify their industry’s usage at the expense of another.
I could counter his statement and present facts that an average 18-hole golf course uses only slightly more water than it takes to produce 80 acres of their commodity. In addition, turf in Nebraska requires a 7-8 months irrigation season compared to two or three months for his crop. I can also refute his comment concerning fertilizer use. Every geographic location, every crop and commodity and every turf variety and species will have different water and nutrient requirements. The real issue at hand is the efficient use of these inputs. The current trends in golf course design is to reduce highly managed turf with native grassed or natural areas that require reduced or total elimination of resource inputs. At Heritage Hills Golf Course, I have reduced water consumption 30% and nutrient usage 40% in the last fifteen years. And, I am continually striving to do better with new technologies that offer improved strategies and solutions.
My statements are based upon facts and a commitment to continuous improvement. Much of our efforts can be supported by scientific research as well. An important question would be, “how would these conference attendees, media and public know if we didn’t tell them in a proactive and professional manner?” In addition and like the ag producer, I am justifying my own operations.
It’s time for everyone to step back and review their water policies and actions. The golf course industry has support. In 2006 the Environmental Institute for Golf, the philanthropic organization of Golf Course Superintendent’s Association of America, conducted the initial GCSAA Golf Course Environmental Profile survey. This information provides baseline data for documenting environmental practices over time. The data will also help us respond to governmental inquiries and answer the public’s questions about environmental
issues. We can monitor our own operations and the industry’s progress with this information as well.
But it is not just a matter of possessing this scientifically backed knowledge. We also must be our own best advocates and share these facts, as well as our own personal experiences, with the public and the very groups that may question our practices. Whether at our own facilities, through our local media, or in organized platforms like the Groundwater Conference, we have to take an active role in spreading the industry’s message.
Water is a lifeline for all living organisms. There will never be any more of it and the quality will likely never get any better. It is treated as a commodity by many users. The Groundwater Foundation is an organization where all concerned parties can sit at the same table. Everybody who uses water needs to ask hard questions of themselves and not “target” other consumers. The turf industry’s use of water cannot claim to “feed the world”. Nor should golf be considered the number one priority use for water. But, our industry does provide
many benefits to the environment, to the economy and the quality of life.
The future will be a time of transition from the unimpeded water consumption of the past to a fair and reasonable regulated use that protects water resources while still allowing the economy to thrive. Politicians and regulators need to be informed and supplied with accurate and useful facts concerning the environmental and economic benefits of our industry. We need them to create common sense environmental policy. That doesn’t mean water use in the future will be inexpensive or painless, but it does mean that the value and cost of water will increase. Economists will say as the cost of water increases, the importance of water will escalate.
Environmentalists and economists don’t often agree. Environmentalists strive for conservation and protection of a natural resource. Economists study the science of the production, development, consumption, and profit of a commodity. As superintendents, we need to support both philosophies, but how do we achieve both? Everyone will need to compromise, sacrifice, and embrace common sense
regulations.
Like it or not the golf course industry is in competition for an exhaustible water supply. We will need to illustrate and communicate to others outside our industry circle that we are competent and trustworthy. It’s not fun being in the cross hairs. We have several
options. One, we could run and hide to avoid being the target. Two, we could arm ourselves and fight back and create a conflict where nobody wins. Or three, we put on protective armor lined with scientific data, collaborate with our detractors and other users and set
our sights on achieving sustainable and practical water policy for everyone. I choose option three!
Bill Bieck,
CGCS
