Water hazard boundary

Obni

A question on water hazards.

Picture a water hazard in the shape of a rectangle with rounded edges.
There are red stakes around the hazard (although yellow stakes would make no difference in this case).
There is no coloured line painted on the ground to indicate the boundary.
There are two stakes at approx. 5 metres from one 'corner' of the hazard, one along each side that meet at the 'corner'. This means that if you take the boundary as being the outside edge of the stakes at ground level, then you are left with a section of the pond that is outside the defined area of the hazard.

As far as I'm concerned, if you're in the pond - you're in the hazard, but under the R&A rules it appears that the ball is in play, outside a defined hazard, so you can ground the club, remove loose impediments, etc...

Does anyone know of any rulings on this sort of matter?

Anyone answering "Put another stake in the corner." will get a virtual smack in the gob.

[This is based on a row last year when someone claimed that the corner section wasn't part of the hazard as defined by the stakes, (incorrectly) claimed it was 'casual water' and took relief without penalty.]

Su Campu

I would take it that in that case, the ball was outside the hazard and had to be played as it lied, or an unplayable declared. He had no right to declare it casual water.

From the Rules of Golf, Section 42 - Definitions...

Water Hazard

A “water hazard’’ is any sea, lake, pond, river, ditch, surface drainage
ditch or other open water course (whether or not containing water)
and anything of a similar nature on the course. All ground and water
within the margin of a water hazard are part of the water hazard.

When the margin of a water hazard is defined by stakes, the stakes are
inside the water hazard, and the margin of the hazard is defined by the

nearest outside points of the stakes at ground level. When both stakes
and lines are used to indicate a water hazard, the stakes identify the

hazard and the lines define the hazard margin. When the margin of a

water hazard is defined by a line on the ground, the line itself is in the

water hazard. The margin of a water hazard extends vertically upwards
and downwards.
A ball is in a water hazard when it lies in or any part of it touches the

water hazard.

Stakes used to define the margin of or identify a water hazard are

obstructions.

Note 1: Stakes or lines used to define the margin of or identify a

water hazard must be yellow.

Note 2: The Committee may make a Local Rule prohibiting play from
an environmentally-sensitive area defined as a water hazard.

PhilipMarlowe

Decision 26/2
Ball Within Natural Margin of Water Hazard But Outside Stakes Defining Margin

Question - Stakes defining the margin of a water hazard were improperly installed. As a result, an area which clearly was part of the water hazard was outside the stakes and, thus, technically was outside the hazard. A player's ball came to rest in water in this area. The player claimed that, in view of the alignment of the stakes, his ball was in casual water through the green. Was the claim valid?

Answer - No. The Committee erred in not properly defining the margin of the hazard as required by Rule 33-2a, but a player is not entitled to take advantage of such an error. Since it was clear that the place where the player's ball lay was within the natural boundaries of the water hazard, the claim should not be upheld.

Jasonw

it's a very good question. The ball as described by the OP is in the hazzard. Give me a few mins and I'll look for the ruling. I think it's in the decisions book. I know because I came accross the same thing last year myself.

Jasonw

never mind Licksy beat me to it.

Obni

Licksy wrote: »

Decision 26/2
Ball Within Natural Margin of Water Hazard But Outside Stakes Defining Margin

Thanks, that's exactly what I was looking for.

On a follow-up, can you throw decisions at competitors during a round, or must you use the R&A rulebook where applicable and refer the matter to the committee for all other problems.

ShriekingSheet

So what's the actual resolution? You just take usual unplayable penalty relief?

Jasonw

It's the same as if you ball was in the hazzard. play it if you want but you can't ground the club or take a penalty drop in accordance on whether it is a Lateral water hazzard or not.

FlutterinBantam

Casual water is what is says on the tin...casual.

Don't know how any one could consider a pond 'casual'

billy3sheets

I had a similar thread about OOB stakes some time back...
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055453427

carnsoreboxer

I had a similiar situation in a match a couple of years ago, stakes placed too far apart and very difficult to define hazard line. Opposition, their home course, claimed ball was not in a hazard, however as ball was lying in casual water under lift and drop rule they were getting a huge advantage. After much discussion, I suggested that as it was their home course, think what decision they'd make if playing a major and I'd be happy with that! Decision was, ball not in a hazard, lying in casual water, so took their shot after taking relief and promptly put it into the lake - loss of hole!

Paulusmaximus

i was always of the opinion that a water hazard starts at were the breaking ground to the hazard is.I'm sure i'd read that either in the decisions book or the rules book but i cannot be sure...i'd nearly always go on that basis, as i feel you can't stray too wrong

Jasonw

Obni wrote: »

On a follow-up, can you throw decisions at competitors during a round, or must you use the R&A rulebook where applicable and refer the matter to the committee for all other problems.

You can tell them the rules as you know them. There are provisions in the rules to play a second ball if there is a doubt as to the ruling and the matter can be settled by comp committee afterwards.

Personaly I've given up telling non-single figure handicappers the rules unless asked since an incident where I called a guy up who was constantly marking underneath his ball and replacing it 2 inches ahead. We haven't exchanged a word since and that was 3 years ago.

Su Campu

OK, another scenario. Say after a period of rain a lake overflows its margins, so that there is now water this side of the line. Would I be right to assume that this extra water can be deemed casual water up as far as the line?

Obni

ShriekingSheet wrote: »

So what's the actual resolution? You just take usual unplayable penalty relief?

I think the R&A decision suggests that although the committee erred in failing to mark the boundary so that all of the pond was within the area defined by the stakes, the water hazard was clearly intended to incorporate the entire pond, and should be treated as a hazard whether the stakes were properly placed or not.

More importantly it is also simply unfair to claim that a ball in a permanent water feature is not 'in' the hazard because of poorly placed stakes, missing stakes, or maliciously moved stakes.

Su Campu, as casual water is defined as [“Casual water’’ is any temporary accumulation of water on the course...] then I would think that only the water outside the normal boundary of the hazard is casual.

fullstop

Su Campu wrote: »

OK, another scenario. Say after a period of rain a lake overflows its margins, so that there is now water this side of the line. Would I be right to assume that this extra water can be deemed casual water up as far as the line?

Yes, but I'd imagine the course would be closed anyway due to flooding so it wouldn't matter

Obni

Su Campu wrote: »

OK, another scenario. Say after a period of rain a lake overflows its margins, so that there is now water this side of the line. Would I be right to assume that this extra water can be deemed casual water up as far as the line?

My earlier guess was wrong.
There are two ways to proceed, depending on whether the ball is lost or not:

R&A decision 1-4/7
Ball Lost in Either Water Hazard or Casual Water Overflowing Hazard
Q: A ball is lost. It is either in a water hazard or in casual water overflowing the hazard. What is the proper procedure?
A: In equity (Rule 1-4), the player must proceed under the water hazard Rule.

R&A decision 1-4/7
Q: If a pond (water hazard) has overflowed, is the overflow casual water?
A: Yes. Any overflow of water from a water hazard which is outside the margin of the hazard is casual water.

Davd

Another scenario: The pond/lake has receded. There is no line visible between the stakes although the ball is outside an invisible straight line between the stakes and where there would normally be water present. Is this counted as a hazard or can the club be grounded? If the ball is plugged in this spot, is it a free drop if the local rule is free drop for plugged ball?