Artificial Drainage Ditch?

[mdl]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Unless those ditches have some sort of concrete or other lining, the rules do not allow the course to call them anything but water hazards.  Courses do not have unlimited power to modify the Rules of Golf.  The only designation they might be able to get away with is to call them ground under repair, but if there is no damage or construction under way, then such loose interpretation is also frowned upon.  I'm aware that some golf courses try to play fast and loose with some rules, but when push comes to shove, they lose the battle if they want any legitimate recognition in the game.

The ditches I'm talking about are lined with concrete, so I suppose that means they're fine but it's less applicable to the OP than I thought.  Though if a drainage ditch isn't lined with concrete but is designed to just carry storm runoff and on most days are dry(ish) and balls in the ditch are playable (even if the shot is difficult), couldn't it be considered casual water on the occasions when there is standing water in the boggier sections of the ditch, still allowing free relief at least when your ball's underwater?

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by mdl

The ditches I'm talking about are lined with concrete, so I suppose that means they're fine but it's less applicable to the OP than I thought.  Though if a drainage ditch isn't lined with concrete but is designed to just carry storm runoff and on most days are dry(ish) and balls in the ditch are playable (even if the shot is difficult), couldn't it be considered casual water on the occasions when there is standing water in the boggier sections of the ditch, still allowing free relief at least when your ball's underwater?

No, a water hazard is always a water hazard, regardless of whether it contains water or whether the water is flowing.  The hazard is defined by it's purpose and by how it is marked, not by the presence of water.

[mdl]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

No, a water hazard is always a water hazard, regardless of whether it contains water or whether the water is flowing.  The hazard is defined by it's purpose and by how it is marked, not by the presence of water.

Wait.  That's exactly my point.  If a drainage ditch was not meant to be a hazard and is not marked as one, then why would water in the ditch not count as casual water with free relief?  What if it's even explicitly stated on the scorecard that the (unlined) drainage ditch is not a hazard?  That seems a perfectly legitimate local ruling.  If certain hills and valleys were made for the design of the course and caused some low spots in the rough to sometimes pool a bit after rain storms, those weren't meant to be hazards and are played as casual water.  Why can't a ditch be ruled not a hazard in exactly the same way so you get a free drop when your ball lies in water at the bottom of it?

[Ignorant]

Originally Posted by mdl

Wait.  That's exactly my point.  If a drainage ditch was not meant to be a hazard and is not marked as one, then why would water in the ditch not count as casual water with free relief?  What if it's even explicitly stated on the scorecard that the (unlined) drainage ditch is not a hazard?  That seems a perfectly legitimate local ruling.  If certain hills and valleys were made for the design of the course and caused some low spots in the rough to sometimes pool a bit after rain storms, those weren't meant to be hazards and are played as casual water.  Why can't a ditch be ruled not a hazard in exactly the same way so you get a free drop when your ball lies in water at the bottom of it?

First, why would one build a drainage ditch for nothing? The purpose of a drainage ditch is to take water from one place to another and thus it is a water hazard by definition.

Second, a Local Rule cannot override Rules of Golf. Thus a drainage ditch cannot be be declared as through the green, this is contrary to the RoG.

Third, in a water hazard there is no casual water.

[Fourputt]

This is just one of the problems you run into when the course starts creating its own rules.  People always complain about why this rule or that one is written like it is.  The rules are so interconnected that messing with one often affects one or more other rules.  This is a sterling example.  All the course manages to do by inventing its own rule here is to create confusion where the rules are quite clear.

Under the rules, drainage ditches are water hazards.  Rule 26 covers water hazards.  No confusion.  Course tries to make special rules which conflict with the rules of golf.  Total confusion.  'Nuff said.

[zeg]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

This is just one of the problems you run into when the course starts creating its own rules.  People always complain about why this rule or that one is written like it is.  The rules are so interconnected that messing with one often affects one or more other rules.  This is a sterling example.  All the course manages to do by inventing its own rule here is to create confusion where the rules are quite clear.

Under the rules, drainage ditches are water hazards.  Rule 26 covers water hazards.  No confusion.  Course tries to make special rules which conflict with the rules of golf.  Total confusion.  'Nuff said.

Exactly.  I can't help but think that rather than inventing rules, what the course should do is spend a few bucks on some yellow stakes to mark a drainage ditch to avoid confusion.