Real shame about the Springfield drama, because there really is some great terrain down there.
you're right about that, but it's mostly privately owned. that's part of the reason why it's nearly impossible to put in a top notch in the area. all of the good land is taken. i see little parks all around springfield, but none big enough for a course. everytime i'll think to myself "damn... that would be great for like... 4 holes." tom watkins is the biggest park space i've seen there.
The official number for Tom Watkins is 20 acres, although it seems smaller than that. There are plenty of larger parks in Springfield.
http://www.parkboard.org/information/ci ... index.html
They are currently developing a park that is 145 acres, but as you said...the City of Springfield is not interested in promoting disc golf based on the problems they have had with beer drinking and pot smoking on the courses they do have. Another thing they will mention is trespassing. Springfield courses for some reason use property lines as obstacles. It may be inadvertent due to poor course design, but one of the biggest challenges at Oak Grove is to keep your disc in the park. With the neighbors houses right there, there is no protection to hide the fact that the guy who just jumped your fence and trespassed in your yard was smoking a joint and drinking a beer. So to play Devil's Advocate...with no revenue from admissions being generated by disc golf for the City and a long history of complaints generated by disc golf, why exactly would Springfield want another disc golf course?
We have a long thread about shenanigans on disc golf courses. The bottom line for me as to why I'd like to see the beer drinking and pot smoking end is that if it did, maybe a place like Springfield would want to develop new courses instead of us begging them for one more chance.