by Chuck
"Al Gore," "plant puffers." "PC-brainwashed," "loonies," "someone channeling Greenpeace," "Sean Penn" and "self-righteous busy body."
Sure sounds like this columnist has traded in his "critical, objective eye" for a set of blinders.
I'll read and thoughtfully consider any columnist's opinion, whether from the left, right or middle, as long as his or her views are presented in a manner that respects the reader as well as the opposing side.
I'd like to continue subscribing to TravelGolf.com's newsletter, but there is far too much quality content available out there to waste time on columns like this.

by Windy Gordon
Like many readers I am pretty offended by the cavalier tone and intentionally one sided approach of this article. Of course, it wasn't placed as a "news" piece and therefore the writer can take whatever stance he wants. However, there is a simple truth that will settle this matter. Over time will consumers choose green?
Some golfers, including me, want to enjoy the game without contributing to environmental degradation. We will look for green courses.
Further, even those who could care less about "greening" the game will tire of paying astronomical fees to cover the cost of ever more expensive water and agri-chemicals.
Let the market answer the question. Not very long ago no one thought America could break its addiction to the SUV...yet the big auto companies sure moved over to match a new consumer preference and SUV lanquish on dealer's lots everywhere while hybrids are backordered.
Is Augusta magnificient...absolutely! Do we need thousands of Augustas...absolutely not!
I don't need Wimbleton for tennis or Churchill Downs for a horseback ride. I sure don't need Pebble Beach for a weekly round of golf.
Nice enough, environmentally neutral and affordable will be just fine.

by Brit
Chris, you are sorely misinformed about your subject matter. Most aggregiously about the condition of the Audubon Certified courses that you speak of. Perhaps if you had researched your article you would know that one of the (and no doubt on of your) golf heroes, Greg Norman, has taken his name and attached it to over 60 (with 60 more on the way) "green" courses that are well maintained, beautiful and sustainable. I am a golfer and a person who cares about the sustainability of the sport. Mr. Norman has proven that there is room for both good conditions and good stewardship and you have chosen to overlook that for your loose and selfish argument that you don't want to be preached to.
And just so you know, a lot of what makes golf green in color is what makes it an environmental catastrophe to the land that it occupies. Pesticides, insecticides, fertilizers, oil and gas for the daily mowing of greens, excessive watering and loss of water due to poorly designed irrigation systems, non-native introduction of grasses and plants are not only bad for the earth but they are probably poisoning you too.
Maybe you should research your article bit more next time. You would have found out that you are not only ignorant to what the "green" movement is (not just thinking about "recycling on trash day"), means, and how it could benefit you, but ignorant to the future of the sport you so love. Golf (and our way of life for that matter) are not sustainable. Your article would have been much more intelligent if you realized that your "escape" could be the maker of it's own demise.

by Chris Baldwin
I have interviewed Greg Norman, earlier this year in fact, and played one of his newest courses in the Bahamas, Blue Shark Golf Club. I stand by my premise that much of what Norman is doing with the "green movement" as well can be chalked up to smart marketing.
Interesting that you would bring up Norman too who's one of the most brilliant marketers sports has ever seen. Try one of his steaks or one of his restaurants or one of his wines or one of his ...

by Gary
Chris, your reply to the first comment was most disappointing in that you have attacked Greg Norman while ignoring the veracity of your reader's statements. You should take your reader's comments and criticisms far more seriously as your article does not appear to have even a semblance of journalistic balance or professionalism. Most disappointing!