What's the correct ruling on this one? I pulled my drive into the left dormant rough. When I get to my ball, I find that my ball is about a foot outside of a huge ant hill about 4' in diameter. So I look down and I don't see any ants. I take my normal stance addressing the ball and my right/rear foot is on the ant hill and my left/front foot is not. After taking my stance I step back and look down and still no ants. I noticed while taking my stance the ground was not stable under my right foot from the undermining of the ground the ants had done. Sure enough during my swing at transition the ground under my right foot gave way and caused me to smoother the ball up behind a tree and I walked away with a big score. I should have played a provisional and got a ruling from the club pro after the round but since it was just a friendly round I didn't bother. For future applications I would like to know the correct ruling. To clarify, the vacated ant hill being 4' in diameter was only about 1" high. I would assume from being smoothed over by the mower. So it wasn't too much of an unlevel lie just weak footing.

Ant hills are treated as loose impediments in the rules.

3/5 Ant Hill
Q. Is an ant hill a loose impediment?

A. Yes. A player is entitled to remove an ant hill under Rule 23-1.


In addition, if a course has trouble with fire ants, the following local rule for relief is suggested.

33-8/22 Local Rule Treating Ant Hills as Ground Under Repair
Q. An ant hill is a loose impediment and may be removed, but there is no other relief without penalty. Some ant hills are conical in shape and hard, and removal is not possible, but relief under Rule 25-1b is not available since an ant is not a burrowing animal. If such ant hills interfere with the proper playing of the game, would a Local Rule providing relief be authorized?

A. Yes. A Local Rule stating that such ant hills are to be treated as ground under repair would be justified.

Such a Local Rule is also justified on courses where fire ants exist. A fire ants’ mound or hill is removable, but its removal will cause the fire ants to swarm out of the ground. When this occurs, anyone in the vicinity is in danger of being bitten by the ants, and the bite of a fire ant can cause serious illness.

If a Local Rule giving relief from fire ants has not been adopted and a ball is so close to a fire ants’ mound that the player is in danger, the player is, in equity, entitled to relief as prescribed in Decision 1-4/10.


Also, it is important that you learn the difference between "Provisional Ball" and "Second Ball." Get to know rule 3-3 to save yourself future problems with this interpretation.

3-3. Doubt as to Procedure

a. Procedure
In stroke play, if a competitor is doubtful of his rights or the correct procedure during the play of a hole, he may, without penalty, complete the hole with two balls.

After the doubtful situation has arisen and before taking further action, the competitor must announce to his marker or a fellow-competitor that he intends to play two balls and which ball he wishes to count if the Rules permit.

The competitor must report the facts of the situation to the Committee before returning his score card. If he fails to do so, he is disqualified.

Note: If the competitor takes further action before dealing with the doubtful situation, Rule 3-3 is not applicable. The score with the original ball counts or, if the original ball is not one of the balls being played, the score with the first ball put into play counts, even if the Rules do not allow the procedure adopted for that ball. However, the competitor incurs no penalty for having played a second ball, and any penalty strokes incurred solely by playing that ball do not count in his score.

b. Determination of Score for Hole

(i) If the ball that the competitor selected in advance to count has been played in accordance with the Rules, the score with that ball is the competitor's score for the hole. Otherwise, the score with the other ball counts if the Rules allow the procedure adopted for that ball.

(ii) If the competitor fails to announce in advance his decision to complete the hole with two balls, or which ball he wishes to count, the score with the original ball counts, provided it has been played in accordance with the Rules. If the original ball is not one of the balls being played, the first ball put into play counts, provided it has been played in accordance with the Rules. Otherwise, the score with the other ball counts if the Rules allow the procedure adopted for that ball.

Note 1: If a competitor plays a second ball under Rule 3-3, the strokes made after this Rule has been invoked with the ball ruled not to count and penalty strokes incurred solely by playing that ball are disregarded.

Note 2: A second ball played under Rule 3-3 is not a provisional ball under Rule 27-2.

Thanks for the terminology clarification between provisional ball and second ball. Based on the rules you listed, since there were no ants present I was not entitled to any stance relief. With ant hills being deemed loose impediments, how do you remove an ant hill? Not that it would have mattered in my situation since my issue was with unstable footing.

Here you go, rule 23 and it's associated decisions:

http://www.usga.org/playing/rules/books/ru...uleFrame23.html

Kevin

It does not make any difference if there are ants present or not. Both ants and ant hills are loose impediments.
There's no free relief from an ordinary ant hill, but you may remove the ant hill or part of the ant hill in any way you like.

golfismygame,

XLSDRAW gets it, his post was correct. He meant he does NOT get relief from his stance as he would if the ant hill was an obstruction, but it may be removed as a loose impediment. You are correct in saying it doesn't matter whether ants are present or not, an anthill is a loose impediment. Perhaps I confused the issue in introducing the decision on fire ants being a dangerous situation.

Kevin

Kevin (and XLSDRAW),

The sentence "...since there were no ants present I was not entitled to any stance relief..." had to commented on, because it seemed to indicate that the Ruling would have been different if there had been ants swarming around.

GIMG

Agreed. That is where I think I confused things by bringing the dangerous situation decision into the equation instead of just leaving it at explaining loose impediment.

Kevin

Kevin or one of y'all other rule experts,would you explain the dangerous sitation rule please. I play in Florida and all ant hills are are fire ants,plus we have snakes,bee's and gators. I am still learning about all the rules so thanks in advance. Todd

Here are two decisions found under 1-4:

1-4/10 Dangerous Situation; Rattlesnake or Bees Interfere with Play
Q. A player’s ball comes to rest in a situation dangerous to the player, e.g., near a live rattlesnake or a bees’ nest. Does the player have any options in addition to playing the ball as it lies or, if applicable, proceeding under Rule 26 or 28?

A. Yes. It is unreasonable to expect the player to play from such a dangerous situation and unfair to require the player to incur a penalty under Rule 26 (Water Hazards) or Rule 28 (Ball Unplayable).

In equity (Rule 1-4), as an additional option the player may, without penalty, drop a ball on the nearest spot not nearer the hole that is not dangerous.

If the ball lay in a hazard, it should be dropped, if possible, in the same hazard and, if not, in a similar nearby hazard, but in either case not nearer the hole. If it is not possible for the player to drop the ball in a hazard, he may drop it, under penalty of one stroke, outside the hazard, keeping the point where the original ball lay between the hole and the spot on which the ball is dropped.

If it is clearly unreasonable for the player to make a stroke because of interference by anything other than the dangerous situation or if the situation would be dangerous only through the use of an unnecessarily abnormal stance, swing, or direction of play, he may not take relief as prescribed above, but he is not precluded from proceeding under Rule 26 or 28 if applicable. (Revised)

Danger from Fire Ants — See 33-8/22.

1-4/11 Meaning of “Dangerous Situation”
Q. According to Decision 1-4/10, a ball lying near a live rattlesnake or bees’ nest is a “dangerous situation” and relief should be granted in equity.

If a player’s ball comes to rest in or near an area of plants such as poison ivy, cacti or stinging nettles, should the provisions of Decision 1-4/10 apply?

A. No. The player must either play the ball as it lies or, if applicable, proceed under Rule 26 (Water Hazards) or Rule 28 (Ball Unplayable).

Decision 1-4/10 contemplates a situation which is unrelated to conditions normally encountered on the course. Unpleasant lies are a common occurrence which players must accept.

So ants would fall under the same rule correct. Thanks for the help Kev. Todd

Not exactly skinny. Same procedures, but the local rule 33-8/22 needs to be in effect. If I were the golf professional at a club where fire ants were ever a problem, a short version of the local rule would be perpetually in effect and listed on the scorecard.

Kevin

It should be that way at every course in Florida. Thanks Kev. Todd

I'm in Alabama where all we seem to have is fire ants. And the scorecards wherever I play always have a rule that give you relief from ant beds.

I found this post interesting as I've never heard of ant beds as a loose impediment to be moved. I guess it's hard for me to imagine an ant that doesn't bite.

Reminds me of a rules workshop many years ago. I forget who the instructor was, a Tour Official. We were discussing dangerous situations.

The question asked was:

How do we know if the snake is a dangerous species so we get relief?

The Tour Official answered:

You want me for your official. I believe ALL snakes are dangerous!



Kevin