"Disc Golf Not as Green as it seems"

[mashnut]

I would argue that a round at Coyote Point could constitute as exercise.

Agreed. Any hilly longer course played at a reasonable pace gets you some exercise. Play multiple rounds in a row at least a couple days a week and you'll definitely see some benefit.

 

[rd.bittle]

I had sent an email along to the posted link here or an associated thread and received the following response.

To Whom it May Concern,

I am prompted to contact you to voice my objections to the effort to remove the disc golf course at Pinto Lake. I live in Dearborn Michigan and have taken two trips out to Northern California exclusively to play disc golf. The last trip as recently as last May. The beautiful scenery, friendly people and unique disc golf opportunities were the primary reasons for making the trips to this area, as opposed to the multitude of other options. Quite obviously, while there, we spent considerable money dining, touring the area and generally donating to the local economies of the Pinto Lake and other disc golf communities. In addition to Pinto Lake we also played the Golden Gate Park, Stafford Lake, Napa Skyline, Delevaga and Black Mouse. We dined near each of these courses.

While nearly all disc golfers are aware that the game has environmental impact, it is my concern that the effects of basically hiking, has been exaggerated to imply that the impact is more than it is. The benefits, I am sure you will be presented by my peers, who also enjoy the game, should be considered before any rash decisions on elimination of public health improvement opportunities are made.

Please do not allow any faction, with self serving personal agendas, propagating misinformation, influence your decision to do the right thing by the area population and natural environment.

Thank you for your time and consideration.


I am Supervisor Friend's County Parks Commissioner and Supervisor Friend has forwarded your thoughtful email to me, which I have read. My positive support and enthusiasm for the disc course at Pinto Lake remains consistent.
Please know you can always write directly to me at my personal email:
Kate Minott [email protected]
Best wishes,
Kate Minott

Well written, well received.

:hfive:

 

[rd.bittle]

Agreed. Any hilly longer course played at a reasonable pace gets you some exercise. Play multiple rounds in a row at least a couple days a week and you'll definitely see some benefit.

Definitely.

 

[zenbot]

Some courses with significant elevation changes would perhaps be the exception. The large majority of the courses in the directory though, not so much. If someone under 50 gets winded playing those, its more a statement of how out of shape they are than how strenuous disc golf is.

We did have a big discussion about this earlier this year...

http://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/showthread.php?t=79504

Fair enough. I got lucky. My course has pretty extreme elevation.

 

[Moify]

Well, most courses probably make you walk about a mile at least per round. Elevation changes add to that, but I think walking 2+ miles a day/round is pretty good exercise. Better than sitting on the couch or being at work for me. The idea is that it is easy exercise. That's why I like it, because I'm lazy, but it gives me a reason to get off my butt.

Especially for older individuals, I imagine having an outdoor activity that doesn't risk injury is pretty helpful. It's "disguised" exercise because you just don't realize you're walking all those miles. It can easily get you in shape if you play enough, just like walking every day can. Pretty much anything can get you in shape if you do it long enough.

...try having sex on the disc golf course... best "disguised" exercise you'll ever have.

 

[hempies]

Now we need to outlaw trees or ban driving in McLaren Park.





Yeah, old thread that still makes me do this :wall:.

 

[zenbot]

Minivans should be outlawed.

 

[hempies]

Minivans should be outlawed.

I'll allow that.

:clap:

 

[beereakfast]

Now we need to outlaw trees or ban driving in McLaren Park.





Yeah, old thread that still makes me do this :wall:.

Like! oh wait that's not right. wrong site.

 

[SirRaph]

Here was my post on that article's site. I encourage everyone else to make their voices heard as well.

The article's claim is that Disc Golf is destructive to the environment.

Okay, relative to what?

If the questions is, "how do we prevent environmental damage to the parks?" Then the answer is simple: close the parks and turn them into forest preserves.

But if the question is, "how to we use the parks to provide the public with recreational opportunities that have minimal impact on the environment?" Then what options are better than Disc Golf?

Yes, the sport of Disc Golf is played, in many cases, through wooded areas. Yes, the point of playing in wooded areas is the added obstacles of the trees themselves. So discs often hit trees. This article overstates the problems associated with that. The governing body of the sport of Disc Golf caps the weight of the discs that are used at 175 - 180 grams in total weight. Does a plastic object that weighs 0.386 lbs damage trees when it hits them...not very much. The article mentions that discs can be thrown at speeds up to 70mph. Saying that is like saying that baseball is dangerous because pitchers can throw at speeds upwards to 105 mph. There are a small handful of players on the planet that can throw a disc golf disc at that speed.

The article mentions that heavy foot traffic on Disc Golf courses causes patches of worn grass, which can lead to erosion. Maybe I'm missing the point here, but it seems counter-productive to lobby for the extinction of a park activity because it's simply so popular that the foot traffic creates erosion. Should we maybe fill our parks with Cricket fields because nobody will use them, thereby preserving the ecosystem?
If you want to alleviate erosion, then do what you'd do to prevent erosion for baseball and soccer fields, golf courses, and every other park activity -- repair and replant the grass. If you think that'd be expensive, try building and maintaining a golf course, soccer field, etc. It has been documented over and over, the construction and maintenance of Disc Golf courses is dwarfed by virtually every other option available.

Disc Golf courses, unlike soccer fields and baseball fields and (ball golf) golf courses, don't require that you strip the area of all the trees and undergrowth. Of all the options, save for maybe reducing the parks to only using hiking trails, Disc Golf has relatively little impact on the environment.

The case made in this article by Mr. McGary reminds me a great deal of the types of arguments made in the late 90's and early 2000's for why skateboarding needed to be made illegal in public areas. You have a small but vocal group of people who see young people wearing baggy clothes, strange haircuts and t-shirts with band names they've never heard of, and label that group as problematic. They then set out to find a series of pieces of evidence riddled with confirmation bias, and hold meetings packed with like-minded people.
Skateboarding in that era spilled into the streets and curbs and storefronts and staircases because the local governments decided that it wasn't worth the funding to maintain the parks designed for the sport. Then they decided to prosecute those same young people for playing their sport anyway. Then they wondered why that sport developed such a strong anarchist, "down-with-the-man" counterculture.

If you take away the Disc Golf courses, do you think these young people will suddenly take up football or polo? Or do you think it's more likely that they'll get into trouble, or sit at home playing video games and collecting calories?

Instead of creating committees to "save" the parks from the sports that bring people to them, why not work with the local disc golf clubs, and provide them the resources to restore and protect the environments where the courses reside? I assure you those local clubs have an army of young, enthusiastic, energetic young people at their fingertips. Whether you decide to use that army to the benefit of the community, or cut them off and release them into the alleys and storefronts is what will decide the success of the community over the long term.

 

[scarpfish]

Now we need to outlaw trees or ban driving in McLaren Park.

I'm sure one of the SMP folks is at the scene right now taking pics of the damaged tree so they can say that hits from golf discs caused that.
:\

 

[DG_Before_Breakfast]

Now we need to outlaw trees or ban driving in McLaren Park..

I bet they were distracted by Patrick Brown throwing a Roc 350 feet.

Or maybe they saw a pretty bird? Kill all the birds to save the Park!

 

[DG_Before_Breakfast]

Here was my post on that article's site. I encourage everyone else to make their voices heard as well.

Fantastic Letter. I've written a few too, for various local DG park issues, but I'm going to use some of the stuff you said in the future.

The article's claim is that Disc Golf is destructive to the environment.

Okay, relative to what?

If the questions is, "how do we prevent environmental damage to the parks?" Then the answer is simple: close the parks and turn them into forest preserves.

But if the question is, "how to we use the parks to provide the public with recreational opportunities that have minimal impact on the environment?" Then what options are better than Disc Golf?

Yes, the sport of Disc Golf is played, in many cases, through wooded areas. Yes, the point of playing in wooded areas is the added obstacles of the trees themselves. So discs often hit trees. This article overstates the problems associated with that. The governing body of the sport of Disc Golf caps the weight of the discs that are used at 175 - 180 grams in total weight. Does a plastic object that weighs 0.386 lbs damage trees when it hits them...not very much. The article mentions that discs can be thrown at speeds up to 70mph. Saying that is like saying that baseball is dangerous because pitchers can throw at speeds upwards to 105 mph. There are a small handful of players on the planet that can throw a disc golf disc at that speed.

The article mentions that heavy foot traffic on Disc Golf courses causes patches of worn grass, which can lead to erosion. Maybe I'm missing the point here, but it seems counter-productive to lobby for the extinction of a park activity because it's simply so popular that the foot traffic creates erosion. Should we maybe fill our parks with Cricket fields because nobody will use them, thereby preserving the ecosystem?
If you want to alleviate erosion, then do what you'd do to prevent erosion for baseball and soccer fields, golf courses, and every other park activity -- repair and replant the grass. If you think that'd be expensive, try building and maintaining a golf course, soccer field, etc. It has been documented over and over, the construction and maintenance of Disc Golf courses is dwarfed by virtually every other option available.

Disc Golf courses, unlike soccer fields and baseball fields and (ball golf) golf courses, don't require that you strip the area of all the trees and undergrowth. Of all the options, save for maybe reducing the parks to only using hiking trails, Disc Golf has relatively little impact on the environment.

The case made in this article by Mr. McGary reminds me a great deal of the types of arguments made in the late 90's and early 2000's for why skateboarding needed to be made illegal in public areas. You have a small but vocal group of people who see young people wearing baggy clothes, strange haircuts and t-shirts with band names they've never heard of, and label that group as problematic. They then set out to find a series of pieces of evidence riddled with confirmation bias, and hold meetings packed with like-minded people.
Skateboarding in that era spilled into the streets and curbs and storefronts and staircases because the local governments decided that it wasn't worth the funding to maintain the parks designed for the sport. Then they decided to prosecute those same young people for playing their sport anyway. Then they wondered why that sport developed such a strong anarchist, "down-with-the-man" counterculture.

If you take away the Disc Golf courses, do you think these young people will suddenly take up football or polo? Or do you think it's more likely that they'll get into trouble, or sit at home playing video games and collecting calories?

Instead of creating committees to "save" the parks from the sports that bring people to them, why not work with the local disc golf clubs, and provide them the resources to restore and protect the environments where the courses reside? I assure you those local clubs have an army of young, enthusiastic, energetic young people at their fingertips. Whether you decide to use that army to the benefit of the community, or cut them off and release them into the alleys and storefronts is what will decide the success of the community over the long term.

 

[hempies]

I'm sure one of the SMP folks is at the scene right now taking pics of the damaged tree so they can say that hits from golf discs caused that.
:\

Most likely.

And to think, they may get 50 free concerts a year in the park with this proposal. Must not sit too well with the NIMBY's.

And then SF itself has identified this same park as being one of the worst for graffiti. Here's a snip-it from the article: "The facilities with the worst graffiti problems are Golden Gate Park, Dolores Park, McLaren Park, Buena Vista Park, St. Mary's Recreation Center, Crocker-Amazon Playground, Glen Canyon Park, Holly Park and Sigmund Stern Grove, according to data compiled by the department."

 

[Peterb]

Here was my post on that article's site. I encourage everyone else to make their voices heard as well.

Very well written. However, the point that Ken et. al. are trying to make is that they want only passive recreation in the park.

 

[Peterb]

Most likely.

And to think, they may get 50 free concerts a year in the park with this proposal. Must not sit too well with the NIMBY's.

And then SF itself has identified this same park as being one of the worst for graffiti. Here's a snip-it from the article: "The facilities with the worst graffiti problems are Golden Gate Park, Dolores Park, McLaren Park, Buena Vista Park, St. Mary's Recreation Center, Crocker-Amazon Playground, Glen Canyon Park, Holly Park and Sigmund Stern Grove, according to data compiled by the department."

not to mention this event which probably produced a million pounds of dogsh*t

 

[beereakfast]

not to mention this event which probably produced a million pounds of dogsh*t

Oddly enough, the folks who attend events like that, tend to also be responsible and clean up after their dogs. I always have a bag in my back pocket for just such an occasion. Locally the largest problem IS mostly the 'passive' park users. Look at the parking lot at Chabot park in San Leandro. The most common thing you see on the ground is wrappers from 'blunt' papers. This is not from the golfers, but from the largest percentage of park users... who never leave their cars. Drop by on a weekday and the lot is full of folks sitting in their cars getting stoned over lunch. Personally I don't care, other than the litter. It's so common that we've thought they should re-name the park Blunt Point...

 

[hempies]

Another article on SFGate about McLaren Park. The lead in from the front page:

S.F.'s huge, unused park
Some call the city's second biggest park 'gorgeous.' But can its rep for crime be overcome?

Here's the link.




It's only 317 acres, I find it amazing some people can't (or won't) share that much space.

:wall: