GolfClubAtlas.com > Golf Course Architecture
Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
Niall C:
Jerry
If you mean will it be good for the Scots in a general golfing sense as opposed to some sort of wider financial or economic sense then I suppose the quick answer would be that it won’t do any harm assuming it doesn’t detract from other clubs or courses in the area.
If however you mean will it lead to Scotland having a much bigger representation in the world top 100, which seems to be what that article was focused on, then I suppose having some big modern course for elite players to play the odd event at, also wouldn’t do any harm.
However I’ve got to ask, does it really matter ? Is the number of players in the top 100 the best way to judge the health of the game ? Does it make any difference to the club golfer ? I recall it wasn’t that long ago when England didn’t have any players in the top 100 and then a few short years later they had one at no. 1 and several more in the top 20 or whatever. I’m not sure it meant the average club was doing any better.
Niall
Ian Mackenzie:
--- Quote from: Jerry Kluger on November 12, 2018, 08:30:48 AM ---Does anyone believe that another expensive golf course will be good for golf in Scotland so far as the Scots themselves?
http://www.golfwrx.com/529176/the-endangered-state-of-scottish-golf/
--- End quote ---
Well, the article does not support the thesis of the thread or the issue at hand or the one you may want to put forth.
The article is about golf participation by younger/millennial Scots in general - an issue facing every golf market in the world including the US.
Debatable issues surrounding Coul Links focus on: 1) the environment 2) overall Scottish golf tourism 3) the economy in east Sutherland 4) capacity of golf tourism in Dornoch, etc.
Millennials arent buying homes either.
Millennial participation in our game has been covered extensively here.
Sadly, like many things - including real estate, there is a bifurcation occurring that underscores the widening wealth gap in the US and in the world. Coul Links will be targeted at higher end golf tourism and is designed to create a "hub" for golf tourism in Dornoch. If the Scottish Govt's studies support this thesis, and if the course treats the environment with respect, then the project may well be approved.
Lou_Duran:
Balancing the pros and cons of the CL project, I can't see much of a downside- can't hurt Scottish golf participation rates, foreign capital comes in, positive impact on golf tourism, little if any cannibalization of rounds from second and third tier courses, more money in the local economy=higher employment, more income, maybe even higher participation among the locals?, likely ancillary development, etc.
And if the project fails due to insufficient demand? A site which has been marginally cared-for and deteriorating for decades is stabilized, its local owners have cash in their pockets, and perhaps the course can be re-capitalized at a much smaller basis to better serve the local and regional communities. Worse case: the site returns to nature with the indigenous flora dominating once again.
As noted in another thread, let's not allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good. It is not like the status quo is much good.
Brian_Ewen:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/scotland/tiny-fly-ready-to-stymie-tycoons-golf-links-plan-nr5x9nnt9
Tiny fly ready to stymie tycoons’ golf links plan
Shingi Mararike
November 18 2018, 12:01am,
The Sunday Times
Plans for a 450-acre golf course in the Highlands bankrolled by two US tycoons could be scuppered by an endangered species of fly.
Fonseca’s seed fly (Botanophila fonsecai), which is the focus of efforts to block the Coul Links development in Sutherland, has now officially been declared a species at risk of extinction.
The fly is found only in the north of Scotland, including the sand dunes near Dornoch that Todd Warnock and Mike Keiser have earmarked for their project. Keiser, who owns several courses around the world, is often described as President Trump’s greatest rival in the golf business.
The International Union for Conservation of Nature says the species is likely to die out if threats to its survival are not removed or avoided. A petition begun by the charity Buglife to save the fly has reached more than 3,600 signatures. Craig Macadam, Buglife conservation director said: “The endangered assessment places Fonseca’s seed fly in the same category as the Asian elephant, tigers and the blue whale. We must do everything we can to ensure threats to this unique Scottish species are avoided.
“We can start by throwing out damaging plans for a golf course at Coul Links that will see this species lost from a third of its global range.”
Earlier this year Aedán Smith, head of development at the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, said: “The permanent destruction of these rare and irreplaceable dune habitats is unthinkable.”
Stuart Brooks, the National Trust for Scotland’s head of natural heritage policy, has said there are many places in Scotland where a golf course could be built without harming the environment, but “one of the last intact sand dune systems is not one of them”.
Tom_Doak:
(sigh)
--- Quote from: Brian_Ewen on November 18, 2018, 03:54:43 AM ---
Fonseca’s seed fly (Botanophila fonsecai), which is the focus of efforts to block the Coul Links development in Sutherland, has now officially been declared a species at risk of extinction.
The fly is found only in the north of Scotland, including the sand dunes near Dornoch that Todd Warnock and Mike Keiser have earmarked for their project.
. . .
Earlier this year Aedán Smith, head of development at the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, said: “The permanent destruction of these rare and irreplaceable dune habitats is unthinkable.”
Stuart Brooks, the National Trust for Scotland’s head of natural heritage policy, has said there are many places in Scotland where a golf course could be built without harming the environment, but “one of the last intact sand dune systems is not one of them”.
--- End quote ---
I've not weighed in on this debate much, because it's generally seen as self-serving when golf course architects are pro-development, and someone would accuse me of having a beef with the developer or architect if I said anything anti-development.
However I look at this latest release and I have two thoughts:
1. The opposition must be pretty well-connected to get a certain species of fly declared endangered just as it becomes the centerpiece of opposition to this development; and
2. It would be nice if someone in the environmental movement understood what the "natural habitat" for golfers was.
It seems to me if this land were closer to a population center, and had been grazed for years, you would likely be able to play golf on it without constructing much of anything or destroying much of anything habitat-wise, just as the evolution of Prestwick and Dornoch and North Berwick. [Maybe the environmentalists would also object to opening the land up for grazing, but I doubt it.] The National Trust guy quoted above needs to brush up on his history.
It's possible if the land had been grazed, then some of the dunes would be too raw for animals without causing erosion, and perhaps that's the line at which no further development should be allowed. It would be nice if planning limitations were based more on actual environmental issues, instead of the arbitrary 100-meter setbacks we often encounter, which take extra land because they can.
Somehow I do not see the Fonseca's seed fly in the same category as the Asian elephant, tigers and the blue whale though. If one of them landed on that guy's neck you know he would swat it. :D
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version