Greening the Greens --The Non-Polluting Golf Course

Environmental groups accuse the mushrooming number of golf courses of using large quantities of agrochemicals, thereby creating water pollution and so jeopardizing future generations. But Japan, Asia's top golfing country with its 2000 golf courses, already has "biocide-free golf courses."

Proper action must be taken to protect the soil and water in the area around the golf course, and the work should be rigorously inspected before construction is allowed to go ahead. Otherwise, damage may occur which threatens even the water and soil conservation works themselves. Pictured here is a slope at the edge of Laoyeh golf course. A rainstorm has swept away part of the retaining structure.

Biocide-free golf courses

Professor Chang Shih-chiao of Taiwan University's Geography Department, who spent three years researching golf courses' impact on the environment, says that Japan's Chiba Prefecture now has courses which do completely without pesticides and herbicides, instead using biological controls and manual methods to combat weeds and even insect pests.

The running costs for the biocide-free golf courses are higher than for ordinary courses. But golf is a leisure activity, and so the use of chemicals on golf courses cannot be compared with their use to grow food for human beings. Thus some Japanese golf-course operators and golfers agree that despite the higher cost of running and using biocide-free golf courses, they are more in keeping with social justice.

Outside Japan, many countries including the United States and New Zealand encourage an approach whereby grass areas outside the greens are left to grow more naturally, and weeds and insects tolerated. In fact this approach does not affect the game, and can reduce the need for chemicals; but in Taiwan, a newcomer to the field, the golf courses all make a point of advertising their green and carpet-like grass and boast that "we are the sculptors of nature, green grass is our lifeblood." So far, they have not been able to accept the notion that a golf course can have a few weeds.

Licensed grass managers

One can say that in Taiwan, the golf course operators are still on a learning curve as regards the actual management of their grass areas. Because such large areas of grass monoculture are prone to pests and diseases, it is not hard to imagine how potent and fast-acting chemicals may be used in large quantities, or how this may engender such consequences as the death of fish stocks or unpleasanttasting water supplies downstream of the courses.

In New Zealand, golf course green and fairway managers must hold a license and be skilled in the correct use of agricultural chemicals, and they are subject to expert supervision. But in the ROC, as yet there is no effective system to manage the use of chemicals by golf courses, local agricultural departments lack skills such as water testing techniques, and there are no very good information units. County-level environmental protection offices are not even able to say how many different chemicals golf courses in their area are actually using, or what action they would take if problems were to arise.

One expert expresses the view that it is not hard to find out the difference between the chemicals used on grass and those used on paddy fields, and in fact one can calculate which chemicals have come into use or increased in use throughout Taiwan since 1988, when large numbers of applications to develop golf courses were filed. If the golf courses are not willing to publish specific figures on their use of chemicals, environmental protection offices have the power to investigate. However, those charged with exercising public authority often put forward all sorts of excuses, and this is why the Council of Agriculture has indicated that only three types of chemicals are approved for use on golf courses. But a survey by Taiwan Agricultural Chemicals and Toxic Substances Research Institute identified 41 chemicals in current use.

Moving up

Because of the many problems caused by the development of golf courses, recently the Control Yuan has begun to show concern over the damage caused to the environment by unapproved courses, and the National Property Bureau is conducting a survey of courses occupying state-owned land. The Ministry of Justice has given notice to all its departments that playing golf is not permitted during working hours; and the Council of Agriculture has stated that it will ask scholars to research further which chemicals are relatively safe for use on golf courses.

Construction planning authorities also suggest that golf courses can be developed in phases in order to reduce their environmental impact. But Chang Shih-chiao points out that as golf is played as a game over 18 holes, golf course designers must map out the shape of the full 18-hole course before they can fill in the fine details. "Separating the course into zones would be very difficult, and is unnecessary," says Chang. What is more important is to require developers to take steps to prevent damage downstream of the golf course before starting work on its construction.

Chang Shih-chiao explains that as many of the golf courses in the ROC are on hillsides, and often span several watercourses, discarded sand and soil flow down the rivers, damaging irrigation systems and endangering residential housing. One way to deal with this is to leave a green belt around the development to absorb some of the damage. In Japan, regulations require the original woodland to be left untouched to a width of 20 meters around each fairway, and for engineering work to be done in advance to prevent damage to areas outside the golf course. Only when this work has been inspected and approved by the authorities is construction of the course itself allowed to go ahead.

Send them back

But the construction method currently practiced in the ROC, once the land has been acquired, is that operators start pushing the soil down from the top of the site, only concerning themselves with whether the soil stability and watercourses within the golf course itself are in order. If soil conservation measures are only put in hand after problems arise during large-scale construction work, it is too late to reverse the damage completely.

Some scholars believe that the best way forward would be for the golf courses to come down from the mountains and return to the sea shore, "back where they came from." chang Shih-chiao says that 700 years ago when golf courses first made their appearance in Scotland, it was on grassy dunes by the sea shore. Today, when one tries to move golf courses to the plains or onto steep mountainsides, one has to artificially recreate the dune terrain, and this is a crucial reason for the ecological and physical damage which golf course developments cause to the environment.

Due to coastal defense considerations, Taiwan has not allowed golf courses along its coasts. The regulations governing golf courses issued in 1982 prohibited their construction on high-yield farmland, but placed no restriction on private woodland, and this pushed the golf courses up the hillsides. But woodland often plays a role in water and soil conservation, and its destruction naturally leads to severe erosion. This is why the latest revised regulations have relaxed the restriction on farmland, and have prohibited golf course construction on woodland.

But the question which environmentalists would surely like to raise is whether the small island of Taiwan really is a suitable place at all for building golf courses which can only be used by 200 people a day.

Local people should have the right to say no

"In fact, it is not necessary to prohibit any kind of land resource development, on condition that it does not threaten public welfare, impair the quality of the environment, or infringe on other people's interests," says Chang Shih-chiao. Questions of local and individual interests can be settled by mutually-agreed compensation, but no concessions should be made on the first two conditions. lf these three conditions can be fulfilled, then the people of Taiwan can themselves decide whether or not they want golf courses.

The problem is that at present, local governments have no right of decision on the construction of golf courses. For instance, the mayor of Kuanhsi Township in Hsinchu County, which has eight golf courses, complains that the courses were all approved by the county government and the people of Kuanhsi had no right to say no, even though they are the ones directly affected by the golf courses. In Japan, the first hurdle to be passed by an application to build a golf course is the approval of the local council, or even a local referendum. If local approval is not forthcoming, the applicants can only try again somewhere else.

In the past, Japan relaxed restrictions on use of woodland and farmland, and this led to disastrous over development of golf courses. The almost 2000 golf courses nationwide have swallowed up the nation's vital farming, forestry and water resources to an extent which many people find alarming, and which has aroused the attention of the central government. Nonetheless, many of Japan's golf courses can now be held up as an example to other nations.

Even though Taiwan has not been able to ward off this danger, with the interest that the government is now taking in the social and environmental impact of golf courses, is it possible for Taiwan's golf courses in the near future to become "biocide-free"?

[Picture Caption]

p.44

The finished golf course presents a charming scene, but who notices the effects on the surrounding area?

p.46

Proper action must be taken to protect the soil and water in the area around the golf course, and the work should be rigorously inspected before construction is allowed to go ahead. Otherwise, damage may occur which threatens even the water and soil conservation works themselves. Pictured here is a slope at the edge of Laoyeh golf course. A rainstorm has swept away part of the retaining structure.