With the recent demise of ASC and the constant additions to the NELSAP list, I was wondering why we don't see more "lost" golf courses. I have no idea about the money involved, but to build and maintain them must be a huge expense. Why do ski areas go under more often than golf courses? Is it because huge (profitable) real estate developments surrounding a golf club are more acceptable than at a ski resort or because you can generally play golf a good portion of the year whereas the ski season is limited by the season and the availability of snow?
Just like ski areas back east are much more dependent on snowmaking, I can only guess at how much it must cost in water alone to keep golf courses out west from turning back into sand. When I lived in Albuquerque, I used to play at a fantastic championship course (UNM South) that the university built not far from where I lived. Every time I was there, I'd think about what the course would look like if it weren't being blasted nightly by water from the city's steadily diminishing aquifer (it'd basically look like a big sand dune)... and it's like that at most of the courses in the western third of the continent.
Sorry if this is a dumb question, but it's summer so why not...
Just like ski areas back east are much more dependent on snowmaking, I can only guess at how much it must cost in water alone to keep golf courses out west from turning back into sand. When I lived in Albuquerque, I used to play at a fantastic championship course (UNM South) that the university built not far from where I lived. Every time I was there, I'd think about what the course would look like if it weren't being blasted nightly by water from the city's steadily diminishing aquifer (it'd basically look like a big sand dune)... and it's like that at most of the courses in the western third of the continent.
Sorry if this is a dumb question, but it's summer so why not...