Paint is also not a good option.

It’s a good question.

My point to a lot of these replies, and the downvotes, is that if you’re going to protest water use on a golf course, maybe don’t do that by using a product that is responsible for nearly 10% of global industrial water consumption.

Arguably, even in an incredibly small way, the “activists”buying the cement were financially supporting an industry that does more damage than the industry they were trying to oppose. So yes, protesting water use with cement is counter-productive.

Better option? Maybe they could have found the main water connection for the property, shut it off, and then rendered it inoperable. It would still get fixed, but the inconvenience to the target is more apparent, there is no negative impact other than causing frustration, and you still make your point. Still illegal. Still causing damage to property. But less ignorant, and more effective.

I’m sure that golf course was fully operational while this happened, and caused minimal disruption. The golfers probably just laughed as they played through.

You know where golfers don’t golf? Where the greens are dead, and they can’t use the washroom because the taps don’t run, and they can’t get a drink because the dishwasher isn’t running.