Updated

Updated · Fox News · Oct 28

Arizona Golf Remark Ignites Backlash as $6 Billion Industry Enters Final Election Stretch

Updated

Updated · Fox News · Oct 28

Arizona Golf Remark Ignites Backlash as $6 Billion Industry Enters Final Election Stretch

Q: If golf uses only a tiny share of Arizona’s water, why did it become the symbol of the state’s bigger water fight?

Golf became the symbol because it is the most visible and emotionally charged image in Arizona’s water debate, even though it is not the biggest water user. The numbers show golf is a small share of statewide use — roughly 1.6% to 2%, compared with agriculture at about 70% or more. Many Arizona courses also use reclaimed water and have cut irrigation through sensors, weather-based controls and drought-tolerant turf. But lush fairways in a desert are easy for voters to see, unlike groundwater pumping, alfalfa fields, or industrial cooling systems. That makes golf a powerful shorthand for a broader anxiety: who should be asked to conserve in a hotter, drier Arizona. The issue also sits at the intersection of water and identity. Golf is tied to tourism, jobs, tax revenue and Arizona’s brand. So when a statewide official says there may be “too many golf courses,” it lands not just as a conservation argument but as a statement about economic priorities. That is why critics quickly framed it as an attack on business, while supporters of conservation treated it as a blunt way to force attention on outdoor water use. The larger backdrop made the remark more explosive. Arizona is preparing for deeper Colorado River stress after 2026, while also debating growth, data centers, housing and agriculture. In that environment, golf served as a proxy for the real fight: how Arizona balances conservation, development and the economy when the state must use less water overall.

2 articles · Updated · Fox News · Oct 28

Kris Mayes’ comment that Arizona has “too many golf courses” and “way, way too much grass” turned a water-conservation debate into a late-campaign flashpoint days before the midterm election.
Warren Petersen seized on the remark to argue Mayes wants government deciding which industries can thrive, framing golf as a major Arizona employer and tourism draw rather than a water-use problem.
Arizona Chamber figures cited by critics put golf’s state impact at $6 billion, 66,000 jobs, $2.3 billion in wages and $520 million in tax revenue, while saying courses use 2% or less of Arizona’s water.
Mayes later said “nobody’s closing golf courses” and that she was arguing for incentives to replace thirsty grass and capture rainwater, while targeting foreign mega-farms and data centers she says are draining supplies.
The dispute widened a broader fight over water scarcity and economic intervention in Arizona, where Mayes has also warned of a possible Supreme Court clash over Colorado River supplies.