Does Surrey need a 142nd golf course?

[Digging a hole for myself]

May have already been covered, but interesting story on the BBC news today:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24378868

Speaking as someone who came to golf late in life (and has a very love/hate relationship with it) I can't possibly say that it gives me a shortcut to the countryside, fishing shooting and other activities (e.g. walking) do far better on that score.

One of the things I noticed most on my first round was that people didn't stop to watch a woodpecker/deer/whatever, the focus was on the ball. Much is also made of "slow play", and the rush to get around without holding anyone up is something which I find particularly frustrating.

Does Surrey need another golf course? No. Will it get one? Almost certainly - money talks.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

Yes it gets you into the countryside (fresh air etc) but it isn't an "outdoor pursuit" as such it's a sport (or game depending on your personal view). The aim isn't to look at the birds and smell the flowers, it's to get a ball in the hole.

Does Surry need a new course, I don't know, I've never been there!

PS - slow play is very frustrating, you don't need to rush, but don't keep stopping to look at the flora & fauna.

 

[chrisd]

I, for one, always watch for the wildlife and don't feel it slows the game up. We have lots of green woodpeckers, squirrels and other wildlife and I have to admit to spending a bit too long watching an albino squirrel a week or so back. It isn't necessary to slow up play to smell the flowers!

 

[car.crash]

From working alongside 2 golf courses which have sprung up on opposite sides of the road to each other by the same owner the goal seems to be the same for both.
To get as many tipping lorries in and start the landfill and coin in on the lack of room to dump mud and rubble in certain areas.
Once complete throw some soil on top and coin in on the golfers.
Obviously there is far more to it and with the plans etc but ultimately its the mud which seems to be the key.

Ten years back my boss had 750.000.00 lorries dump on his land to make a bund at around £100 a load when a certain main road near by needed widening.

 

[Blue in Munich]

And another, rather enjoyed watching the kestrel at work at Littlestone the other week, and watching the green woodbeckers at Cuddington.

Does Surrey need a 142nd golf course? Probably not. But as it appears to be on a huge private estate that doesn't seem to do an awful lot else for the local economy, is there really a problem if Surrey gets a 142nd course, which may well provide some employment for local people and generate some revenue for local suppliers. It isn't as though this would leave Surrey without any publicly accessible countryside at all.

Slight aside from the OP, but does anyone recognise the two courses in the first two photographs in the linked BBC article? Both look worth a visit.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Got a feeling this will get rebuffed despite the Mole Valley appeal. As someone who has lived all my life in the Surrey vicinity there is definitely a golf course to suit all tastes and all budgets available and don't really think there is a need for another one, even at the top end