Lateral Water Hazard Boundary?

The Rules cover situations where water hazards are not marked.

Look in the Definitions as well as at Rule 26 (and Decisions like 26/3).

And then get the Committee to properly mark the course. Where you play they seem to have a lot of these kinds of problems. :)

See also Decision 33-2a/4

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEfree 

 

 If the posts form something resembling a circle, square, rectangle or other enclosed shape, then it seems easy.  What I am trying to figure out is what happens when the posts are just a line segment?

It's difficult for me to say anything about a particular hole without actually being there, but you can have a lateral hazard with only one side.

See Dec 33-2a/11

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEfree 

 

so this says that you can`t take advantage of a committees error by playing it as casual water...is it the same if the committees error might hurt you?  (i.e. your ball is lost in what should be within the natural margins of the hazard, but the hazard is not marked properly)

I agree that they should do a better job marking the hazards, but there are some stakes, so I am not sure if I can treat it as an "unmarked" hazard??

 

I read rule 26 before posting, but couldn`t find anything covering the direction a hazard is assumed to go based on the posts.  If the posts form something resembling a circle, square, rectangle or other enclosed shape, then it seems easy.  What I am trying to figure out is what happens when the posts are just a line segment?

If the water is a lake or pond then it is reasonable to assume the whole area is a water hazard. That might not be the case where the water is an ocean (eg Pebble Beach where the far side is Hawaii).

Whether it is partially or completely unmarked, it is by definition a water hazard and should be played as such. 26/3 is the authority. Any unmarked margins should be treated as if they had been marked correctly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rulesman 

Whether it is partially or completely unmarked, it is by definition a water hazard and should be played as such. 26/3 is the authority. Any unmarked margins should be treated as if they had been marked correctly.

I think this is correct. I almost posted the above-cited decision as evidence that the incorrect marking took precedence, but I believe that is an incorrect reading of that decision. As someone interpreted above, that ruling says that you don't get to "take advantage" of the error by using the casual water rule for a hazard.

A water hazard has a definition that can't be modified by local rule. In a case where there was a reasonable interpretation under which the stakes were correctly marking the boundary, then I think the stakes would be the deciding factor. If they're plainly wrong under the immutable definition of a water hazard, then I think the definition itself needs to be correctly interpreted and the stakes ignored (except perhaps in deciding whether it was the Committee's intent to mark it as a lateral hazard or not, based on the color of the stake).

Informally, I wonder if it'd be fair to say that a stake can mark a hazard, but it can't "unmark" a hazard. That is, a stake can extend the margin of a hazard to be reasonably larger than the most conservative reasonable interpretation, but it can't reduce the margin to smaller than that. The area outside the stakes would, by definition, have to be included, regardless of the stake. I think this is a natural interpretation---and is the flipside of the concept that a Committee cannot "declare" a water hazard where there is no water.

To continue this, we have a meandering stream which is staked as LWH. Stakes are every 10 - 15 yards. The stream makes tight S curves so that the straight line between stakes may cut the peninsula or the river at certain points. The stakes themselves are normally about a yard from the edge of the water (quite steep slopes). How should I find the correct boundary of the hazard as there is no painted line?

The R&A Guidance includes this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rulesman 

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEfree 

 

so this says that you can`t take advantage of a committees error by playing it as casual water...is it the same if the committees error might hurt you?  (i.e. your ball is lost in what should be within the natural margins of the hazard, but the hazard is not marked properly)

I agree that they should do a better job marking the hazards, but there are some stakes, so I am not sure if I can treat it as an "unmarked" hazard??

 

I read rule 26 before posting, but couldn`t find anything covering the direction a hazard is assumed to go based on the posts.  If the posts form something resembling a circle, square, rectangle or other enclosed shape, then it seems easy.  What I am trying to figure out is what happens when the posts are just a line segment?

If the water is a lake or pond then it is reasonable to assume the whole area is a water hazard. That might not be the case where the water is an ocean (eg Pebble Beach where the far side is Hawaii).

 

Whether it is partially or completely unmarked, it is by definition a water hazard and should be played as such. 26/3 is the authority. Any unmarked margins should be treated as if they had been marked correctly.

Part of the difficulty that MEFree is concerned with is that in the area where he plays a lot there are some wetlands where the natural boundaries can be quite indistinct.  Willows, sedge grasses and the like, along with a network of small streams and sometimes almost bog like conditions make both marking and identification of natural boundaries very difficult.  It's a case where you would almost have to be on the spot to make any sort of definitive ruling.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEfree 

 

2.  The lake I described above- my ball was virtually certain to be in the lake OR the 2 foot long native grass leading into the lake.  If the hazard was marked properly according to USGA guidelines, then I think the long grass should have been included.  Can I make that assumption or was I correct to play another ball from the tee?

The correct answer is to play two balls under rule 3-3.

The pragmatic answer if simply playing under the USGA handicap system, is to play as if the LWH was marked as per the guidelines. But don't quote me 

In the case of a water hazard, whether regular (yellow) or lateral (red) the margin of the water-line and or/any boundary stakes/lines are considered to be in the hazard, and play a ball touching this area per applicable USGA and local rule.  The boundary is found from running a string (imaginary line) between the two nearest outer most points.

In some cases the outermost edge of the water and the nearest stake, if the stakes do not continue, if that was not clear.