Bath golfers are campaigning to save two loss-making golf courses after Bath and North East Somerset Council revealed that each round played costs taxpayers £8. One golfer complained that a consultation on the future of the Entry Hill site was taken over by a ‘cycling lobby on steroids’ after 78 per cent of respondents expressed support for turning it into a cycling centre.
Somerset Live reports that the consultation, run at the start of the year, revealed huge support for transforming Entry Hill into a family cycle centre and mountain bike park.
60 per cent of respondents also expressed support for an alternative plan where the site would become a park with a cafe.
Only 19 per cent of responses said the golf course should be retained and run under a different management model.
Entry Hill has had a continued decline in visitors for more than a decade and now operates at a loss to the council of around £80,000 per year.
Councillor Paul Crossley, cabinet member for Community Services, commented: “As noted in a survey by Sport England, usage of golf courses has sadly been in decline nationally for many years and that is certainly something we’ve seen at both our golfing sites.
“We acknowledge that the idea of changing Entry Hill to a different use is opposed by residents who still enjoy playing golf there, but that the consultation results also show strong opinions from thousands of members of the community who wish to use it differently.”
Golfer Elizabeth Hallam complained that the consultation had been weighted against the sport and targeted by a “cycling lobby on steroids”.
Hallam claims there are hundreds of “latent golfers” in the city if the Entry Hill and Approach courses could find a new operator.
Crossley said there had been lobbying from golfers as well as cyclists and that a decision had no yet been made.
“It is not right that public money has continued to support the current model of operation at these two sites. I assure everyone that as we go through this process there is not a predetermined outcome.”
Crossley said the 18-hole course at another site, Approach, would remain but that the 12-hole course there could instead be used for “golf-derived sports” like frisbee golf or foot golf.
In October, we reported how Leeds City Council were planning to close Temple Newsam Golf Club and replace it with a cycling centre.
That course had been costing the taxpayer £200,000 a year.
The council has since decided to merely reduce the size of the club from 27 to 18 holes.
Final proposals are expected to go before the council’s decision-making executive committee later this year.
44 thoughts on “Bath golfers outraged that loss-making course could be turned into cycling centre”
39 clubs near bath https://en
39 clubs near bath https://en.leadingcourses.com/europe+united-kingdom+england+somerset/bath-golf-club/clubs.html
so hardly a lack of choice.
All local authorities are looking to cut spending, so it is no surprise that this non statutory service is looking to be cut.
Perhaps if these “latent
Perhaps if these “latent golfers” paid the correct price for their membership/rounds they would get to keep their facility.
How many cyclists could you get using a 200M+ fairway at the same time compared to golfers?
Oh dear, they get subsidised
Oh dear, they get subsidised by taxpayers but don’t offer to pay enough to make the course profitable. Why should other people pay for their game?
Latent gophers?
Latent gophers?
Swindon Council is
Swindon Council is redeveloping a loss making 9 hole municipal golf course into a cycling circuit, BMX pump track plus football/cricket/croquet!! facilities. A bit like Odd Down…..
https://www.swindon.gov.uk/news/article/142/state-of-the-art_sports_facility_will_be_built_in_swindon
Croquet does not have pitches
Croquet does not have pitches ! They are lawns or courts.
Preston council turned an old
Preston council turned an old running track into Preston Pirates BMX track. It used to regularly get taken over by the Pikeys who would stay for a while so they could dump their shit there whilst raising the crime rate around Preston, then move on. It has become very popular now, some riders have been targetted by British Cycling for the next Olympics. It does get used regularly, and appears very popular.
Whatever your experiences and
Whatever your experiences and concerns, I’m surprised to see racist terms being used in polite conversation by civilised people
The ‘each round costs
The ‘each round costs taxpayers £8’ line is a bit disingenuous. It implies that if twice as many people played it would cost twice as much to run, and conversely that if no-one played there would be no costs at all, which is plainly nonsense. It would be more honest to say that x rounds more would need to be played for it to break even.
It depends on how you think
mdavdford – It depends on how you think the statement through, I read it as more users, less subsidy because the costs on a golf course are fixed to maintainance and staff. not a golfer are you?
I’m not a golfer. And I’m not
I’m not a golfer. And I’m not particularly in favour of keeping the golf course. I’m just against the misuse and abuse of figures and statistics.
If they’d said it was currently having to be subsidised to the tune of £8 per round played I’d be fine with that. But ‘every round costs the taxpayer £8’ just isn’t true.
Seems a bit of a pedantic
Seems a bit of a pedantic objection, to me. The taxpayer is in effect paying £8 towards each round currently played. Personally I’d rather they used that to subsidise something other than golf.
But maybe the kind of people who play golf have more political clout than those (younger?) people who prefer some other kind of physical activity.
I wouldnt want to see this or
I wouldnt want to see this or any council run facility closed purely because we felt the politics of it only favoured in our view the rich and elitist, its perfectly reasonable for a council to make all aspects of sport more accessible to everyone in this way, if it gets old retired people out walking just a few miles every week,having that social contact with each other, its overall a good thing.
and those people arent going to replace their golf with hopping on MTBs,so be mindful of that impact.
where I question the councils decision to support this place,and it would be the same were it an all singing/dancing cycle park, is the size of the subsidy to keep it going, if the place is losing so much money, you have to question if its really financially viable, and that aspect rather than whether I like golf or not, or whether Id prefer something completely different should be the only deciding factor.
Awavey wrote:
Minor point, but those rich and elitist are often more than happy to close council run facilities which only help the poor … It only encourages them, allegedly.
and that may well be the case
and that may well be the case, no one said the human race was perfect, I just think we are skirting abit close to some classical English class system snobbery here on golf because of our preconceptions about it, and just because we are mostly pro cycling in our outlook, so of course a bike park looks a fantastic idea to us vs some rubbish golf course.
It’s a question of how it
It’s a question of how it frames the issue, though. For instance, the council could choose to try to increase the number of people playing (by advertising, running promotions, etc.). If ‘every round costs the taxpayer £8’, then on the face of it that would appear to be a foolish thing to do – each time you encourage someone to play when they wouldn’t have before is going to end up costing you even more money (on top of what the promotion costs you). In reality though, it’s likely that most of the fees from each person that walks through the door go towards reducing the amount of the subsidy. In fact, if you managed to encourage people to turn out by offering them free rounds it’s unlikely to much increase the cost base, and so the subsidy per round played would go down, and maybe approach something more justifiable.
“Councillor Paul Crossley,
“Councillor Paul Crossley, cabinet member for Community Services, commented: “As noted in a survey by Sport England, usage of golf courses has sadly been in decline nationally for many years and that is certainly something we’ve seen at both our golfing sites.”
…meanwhile check out the pent up demand for MTB / BMX pump / Jump parks….people out and about building stuff in whatever locations they can find….ever come across a stealth golf course in your local woods? ….or heard that an “illegal” golf course was going to be destroyed? Time moves on
Mark Twain supposedly
Mark Twain supposedly described golf as, “A good walk spoiled.” I’ve never understood the appeal. Many of my colleagues play but it just seems boring to me. I’d much rather walk the dog.
There are so many golf courses in the UK and there’s more demand for cycling facilities. It sounds to me like the council is making the right decision. A BMX track and mountain bike trails would be easy to construct on an old golf course.
I think theres quite a big
I think theres quite a big social aspect to it,its a way for people to meet friends,chat, enjoy the fresh air, do a bit of walking,its better than sitting on a couch, so whilst it bores me to tears as a sport, as would walking a dog quite frankly, I appreciate some people like it and may feel exactly the same way that cycling is boring, we are all different. Whether a council should fund a golf course to the tune of 80k per year is another debate though, that seems a ridiculous situation for them to have got into
Very few council services
Very few council services generate income. Parking, land charges, planning and building control would.
Sports centres are subsidised, so depending on your local mix, a golf course subsidy made sense for a long time.
I’d expect a lot of councils to remove non statutory functions over the next 6 months or charge extra for providing them.
A lot of business deals used
A lot of business deals used to be done whilst playing a round of golf, hence why the golf club car parks were usually filled with BMWs, Range Rovers, Mercs, Bentleys etc.
it wasn’t Mark Twain…
it wasn’t Mark Twain…
kevvjj wrote:
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/05/28/golf-good-walk/
4 times as much land in the
4 times as much land in the UK is decidated to golf clubs than to housing.
This country is in desperate need of re-assessing and addressing it’s priorities.
That’s some stat, have you
That’s some stat, have you got link to source?
Doesn’t seem to be correct
Doesn’t seem to be correct
https://www.ft.com/content/79772697-54e4-32c9-96d7-5c1110270eb2
Just looking at google earth,
Just looking at google earth, or more prosaically a map, suggests this is very unlikely.
Not quite true.
Not quite true.
Roughly 5.3% of land is for housing, 0.6% for golf courses in the UK.
More or Less did a good review of this a few years back after the Shelter report which claimed more land used for golf courses than housing.
Listen from 11:30
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/b044jh75
Still, that is a huge amount of land devoted to knocking a small ball around a field.
Well this seems to support
Well this seems to support your assertion:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/apr/26/why-surrey-has-more-golf-courses-land-than-homes
That claim has already been
That claim has already been critiqued in the thread by later articles.
A Cycle park and/or cafe
A Cycle park and/or cafe sounds like a much better solution than trying to flog the course for housing which is what one of the (private) loss making courses round here is doing.
There is no moral or health
There is no moral or health reason to support golf- it’s entirely useless as exercise and about as interesting as cricket on TV- for many people. Therefore, it’s a commercial decision. Some cycling facility would be much better on health grounds, if it can be made to pay on money or health benefit terms. Many people like me would be unlikely to use it, as we just quietly use the roads trying to avoid being hit by drivers.
The only good thing with
The only good thing with ‘golf’ in the name was made by VW and had a GTI badge on it between 1977 and 1992.
Rick_Rude wrote:
And that turned out to be made by a company that was involved in an organised global fraud. Not to mention it’s war time reparation history.
How about some sort of
How about some sort of compromise solution, involving the invention of ‘cycle golf’? Why should it only be good walks that golf spoils? With a bit of imagination it could be spoiling good cycle rides also.
The problem with golf is not
The problem with golf is not whether or not it’s considered elitist etc., but the amount of space/resources it takes up. For one golf course, you can have multiple other sports/games in the same space (e.g. lawn bowls which can provide similar benefits to an older population), so it does make sense to me to re-purpose golf courses if there’s not enough demand for them.
What with all the coronavirus, social distancing and business meetings taking place virtually, I’d like to see golf move into the virtual world. Rather than take up acres of space, you’d just need an old shed and a few VR headsets and then you’ve got all-weather golfing at any of the best courses in the world.
Conversely, what with all the
Conversely, what with all the coronavirus, social distancing, golf seems a good way to play something you enjoy plus some basic exercise and with others but reducing the risks to extremely low.
Where I live, bowls clubs are reducing. Maybe the median age is a bit lower than Bristol.
Yeah, I’m not anti-golf and I
Yeah, I’m not anti-golf and I’d prefer a nice green golf course rather than high-density concrete buildings. However, planting a few trees and turning it into a forest walking/activity park seems like it’d be even greener and would provide a home for tree-dwelling species.
Took the words straight out
Took the words straight out of my mouth.
Had a similar thing in
Had a similar thing in Farnborough where I live. The council supported course was losing £40,000 a year in a time where budgets are being stretched like never before. The big thing is with these courses is the membership & joining fees. The annual membership including green fees for the course was under £500 PA, while membership for most non-Council owned ones is at least £1,500 + £500 joining fee. Sorry but golf isn’t a cheap sport to play and the numbers playing it have been falling considerably since its 80’s boom and it uses vast quantities of natural resources such as water, fertilizers etc. Turning the courses into nature parks which can be used by a lot more people for several types of sporting activities is a much better use of council resources and has the potential to generate revenue through cafes, adventure areas such as GoApe and other things. Then there’s the positive impact on the environment with wild vegetation actively encouraged rather than destroyed.
Looks like there are plenty
Looks like there are plenty of private sector golf courses nearby.
No need to waste taxpayers money subsidising a failing state owned one.
i live in bath and i do a lot
i live in bath and i do a lot of cycling, i also play a bit of golf. i used to play at the entry hill course quite regularly, and 15 years ago it was pretty well kept and good fun. it’s been allowed to fall into a state where i wouldn’t even consider playing there, and like other people have said on this thread, we’re not short of golf courses round here. the opportunity to turn it into something else should certainly be taken. what almost certainly won’t be taken is the opportunity to properly join up the entry hill and odd down sites. it’ll be a fudge because the precious wellsway obviously *must* be kept as a pointless 30mph dual carriageway with a central reservation, with one downhill lane for free parking and one uphill lane as a half-mile filter. so we’ll get a crappy crossing with long waiting times, when what we should get is a reclaim of that space for active travel and a land bridge to create a useful traffic free route.
I’m (just) old enough to
I’m (just) old enough to remember the land before it was a golf course. Between being a rubbish tip and a walk-spoiler, it was used by motorcycle scramblers and some BMX riders. Would be quite neat to see it revert to the latter, and the hill could make it a pretty decent facility. I think the golfers need to move on – that game’s boom is over.
And yes, Wellsway is somewhat pointless and nasty. Though it has good points – riding up there on a 3 speed Sturmey Archer equipped bike was a lot easier than going up Entry Hill instead, and I’m glad I was driving down the former than the much steeper latter when the brakes failed on my dad’s mk 2 Escort…
We’ve got something similar
We’ve got something similar been happening over the past couple of years.. the 2nd private golf company trying couldn’t make a public golf space work financially.. so it’s been dormant for a bit.
After a couple of years of planning it looks like that despite objections there will still be a 9 hole pitch and putt put back into the ‘comyn’… alongside a go ape thing, cafe and some more wildland… it’s not a bad proposal to be fair, the council are simply taking the lowest cost options available to them for them by whoreing out parts of the area as commercial. We had campaigned for a bike park of some sort, (my club runs kids sessions from there usually on the weekend anyway) the council even took a day trip with a rep for British Cycling to show them how it could be done (there’s funding from BC for our area available) but the council didn’t take them up on it. The good news is that they’ve agreed we can have/keep the bike trails which have ‘mysteriously cropped up’ and developed over the past couple of years.. to which end is good news. https://www.warwickdc.gov.uk/info/20820/the_future_of_newbold_comyn/1560/draft_masterplan_interactive_map