While golf may have originated in Scotland, it’s become emblematic of American elitism and excess. 

We degrade the environment in our aspiration toward luxury in a way that’s derivative of European sensibilities.

If nothing else, this is the American way. 

We overcompensate for our perceived lack with manicured uniform greens, corporate towns and branded castles and other mass-produced, wasteful mock-ups. 

The grass on the other side of the country club gate may be greener, but at what cost? 

This aspiration risks our health, safety and environmental future. Over two million acres of American soil are dedicated to golf courses. 

It’s not even an open secret. It doesn’t take much to understand the gravity of what these courses are doing, yet those in power would rather have their artificial, wasteful networking playgrounds. 

Both their construction and maintenance are detrimental to the environment. For a course to be constructed, the ecosystem that once stood must be destroyed to make space for the putting greens. The machinery that does this emits greenhouse gases. 

In addition, high volumes of pesticides are necessary not only to keep bugs at bay, but also to maintain the artificial turf green we all know. These chemicals seep their way into the water system of the areas they’re surrounded by. 

This is not without consequence to human health. 

The Mayo Clinic published a study in May, finding that living near a golf course correlated with higher instances of Parkinson’s disease. The highest risk was found in individuals living within one to three miles of a course. 

Perhaps most concerning, the study also found that individuals using water services near a golf course had double the risk of getting Parkinson’s disease when compared to those who used sources that didn’t have golf courses in the area. 

It’s interesting to note that the political factions that most frequently feign concern about chemicals in the water, while seemingly advocating for human health, have a frontman with an array of golf courses all over the world. 

It’s almost dystopian when laid out. The sport perhaps most associated with the wealthy is allowed to silently wreak havoc on anyone or anything that dares stand in its way or share its air or water. 

University of Minnesota first-year Cameron Nylander said his experience as a golf course groundskeeper enlightened him to how pervasively and intensively wasteful they are. 

“It requires a lot of work done on the land, a lot of pesticides, chemical treatment and that mixed with the massive amounts of irrigation stuff needed on the golf courses,” Nylander said. 

The water issue is multipronged. Not only is the quality of the water tanked, to use an unfortunate pun, but the sheer volume of water needed to run these courses is absurd. 

In 2021, CNN reported that 30 golf courses in Salt Lake County of Utah alone used up over 13 Olympic-sized swimming pools worth of water daily, or around nine million gallons. 

The article also points out how course closures are increasing in the United States due to air quality issues and rising temperatures. For all of its reputation as an outdoorsy sport, it clashes with the land it’s built on. Golf needs a healthy planet to survive. 

Not only should we be more privy to this problem for the obvious ethical reasons, but in order for golf to continue on in a capacity that we recognize, things need to change. 

Fourth-year Mahawa Keita, studying environmental science and policy management, said courses won’t be held responsible until the public is made more aware of what’s truly going on. 

“If there’s no major care, I feel like people are not going to find reasons to target these golf courses who are contributing to waste,” Keita said. 

Necessary changes are possible and already underway. The industry knows it’s in trouble, and various solutions have been popping up, slowly but surely. 

Hydroponics companies use new irrigation systems for turfgrass. CapillaryFlow in particular purports that their system can reduce water consumption by up to 85%. 

There has also been a particular emphasis on rewilding golf courses, or letting nature reclaim its rightful place on the putting green. Amidst concerns about playability, there is no reason why this shouldn’t be more widely implemented in non-playing areas at the very least. 

Nylander said he has observed that non-playing areas are maintained for aesthetic reasons above all else, and serve no real functional purpose in large quantities. 

Courses shouldn’t be allowed to get away with waste and excess at this scale. Golf doesn’t have to be such a drain. 

How much damage has to be done before the solutions outpace the damage?