Yes F those mutha fuckas, starting with golf, it’s the social utility maximizing approach to policy we have all been waiting for.
You take people down a peg when they need it by changing systems, incentives, and punishments. Not cherry picking some particular “thing” you don’t like. Things like pesticide use, cost of land, water supply, and environmental disruption can all be regulated by a combination of government rules and market forces.
An amusement park does not take up tons of land, use more resources, destroy the environment more? I can think of much bigger contributors to pesticides and environmental disruption than a municipal golf course on the outskirts of a city. Why is water (not scarce in some places) and land (no scarcity of land) so important that we need to ban golf? And again why not ban things like paintball (some outdoor paces are pretty big), horse riding ranches, massive public parks, convention centers (can be massive), and all homes over a certain size? I mean what’s the per foot per person per increment of time land use ratio we are coming up with here to single out golf for being in particular need of banning as a form of entertainment?
Anyway we don’t ban these other thing because some people want these things and are willing to bear the cost of having them. If a local municipality or even a private community wants to pay all the costs of having one big park with 18 holes on it, so be it.
Btw I get that there are probably some travesty of golf courses out there that have disrupted ecology, are in drought areas, propped up by govt dollars and only get used by a few. Those are legit beefs but could be said about many kinds of developments.
Still not a sport though.