|
When In Doubt - Spec It Out
by Patrick J. Gross
Reprinted from the USGA Green Section Record
1997 March/April Vol 35(2): 1-4 Printable Document
It is human nature to make comparisons, and that is especially true
when it comes to golf courses. It seems every golfer has a built-in
rating system of what constitutes a well-maintained golf course.
People often ask if the USGA has any published maintenance standards.
The answer is that while the USGA Green Section agronomists work
closely with course officials and superintendents to improve golfing
conditions, there is no cookie-cutter formula for proper golf course
maintenance. Every golf course is different. Consider the number
of variables inherent in each course, such as differences in microclimate,
course architecture, terrain, amount of play, soils and construction
techniques, water quality and availability, budgets, staff size,
and many other factors. With so many variables, it is next to impossible
to draw an accurate comparison. Instead of comparing your course
to the one down the street, it is much more beneficial to accurately
determine what it takes to make your course the best it can possibly
be.
The corporate world has long recognized the benefit of developing
a comprehensive business plan with specific goals and objectives
for their company and its employees. The plan clearly states the
role of each person in the organization, with specific performance
criteria provided so that there is no misunderstanding about the
expected outcome. How many golf courses can say they have a plan
like this for the routine maintenance of the golf course? Green
committees come and go, superintendents are hired and fired, and
golfers' expectations are raised based on the latest televised tournament.
The actual daily conditions are usually the result of the superintendent's
personal maintenance philosophy and his interpretation of comments
and complaints from the golfers. Who usually suffers, given such
a wide range of opinion and lack of a clear goal? The golf course
and the superintendent. Developing a set of maintenance guidelines
for the golf course will clarify maintenance priorities and keep
the entire organization moving in the right direction.
Why Are Maintenance Guidelines Needed? There are several good reasons
to develop maintenance guidelines for your course. First, it is
a project that requires the superintendent and committee to organize
and analyze the priorities for golf course maintenance instead of
assuming that everyone has the same goals and standards in mind.
Getting it down on paper makes it easier to analyze the situation
and see exactly what it takes to maintain a golf course in the manner
the golfers want it. In the process, the desires and expectations
of the golfers are clarified, and objective standards are set for
the routine maintenance and playing quality of the golf course.
Developing such a document also removes subjectivity and provides
a formula for comparing the desired results with the available resources.
In the end, the guidelines become an objective standard that is
measurable and provides a reference for future decision making.
Another reason in favor of developing maintenance guidelines is
the short tenure of most green committee members and green chairmen.
With only a short time to serve the club, most of the attention
is on quick fixes and addressing personal preferences. The composition
of the committee swings from low handicappers to high handicappers,
and there is never a clearly stated vision regarding the ongoing
maintenance of the golf course. The venerable golf course architect
Dr. Alister Mackenzie summarized it best by stating, "The history
of most golf clubs is that a committee is appointed, they make mistakes,
and just as they are beginning to learn by these mistakes they resign
from office and are replaced by others who make still greater mistakes,
and so it goes on." The maintenance guidelines can be a valuable
tool to speed the learning curve and provide guidance and continuity
for future committees.
Another temptation is for committees to act like golf course architects,
adjusting or altering the course to suit their particular style
of play. In some instances, architectural modifications are necessary
and the maintenance guidelines can provide a framework to analyze
and implement changes.
Finally, the maintenance guidelines are a useful tool to answer
complaints from disgruntled golfers. It is impossible to please
everyone. When a golfer is upset about a particular maintenance
practice on the golf course, it is better to point to the maintenance
guidelines to show that the superintendent is operating according
to the plan. This makes the conversation objective and avoids personal
criticism of the superintendent and maintenance staff.
The development of the maintenance guidelines should be a cooperative
effort between the green committee, superintendent, golf professional,
and general manager. Each of these parties has a particular role
to play.
Green Committee: The main role of the green committee
is to define the expectations for playing quality on the golf course
and offer the necessary support to achieve the desired goal. The
members of the committee should be thoroughly familiar with the
layout of the golf course and the seasonal variations. They should
fairly represent the needs of all levels of players at the course.
The committee should consider several factors, including course
architecture, the average handicap of the golfers at their course,
the available budget, tournament schedules, and the amount of play
the course receives annually. By analyzing this information, the
committee should be able to provide a clear vision regarding the
desired maintenance of the golf course. Then, the committee must
approve a realistic budget that allows for the fulfillment of these
expectations.
Superintendent: The superintendent has the greatest influence on
the playability of the golf course and has the most critical role
to play in the development of the maintenance guidelines. Superintendents
are often in a difficult position in trying to balance the agronomic
needs of the course with the expectations of the golfers. Everyone
wants good quality conditions, but many do not know what they really
are. The superintendent should start by discussing his or her maintenance
philosophy with the committee. The superintendent should then translate
the desired playing conditions into specific programs and maintenance
practices based on the agronomic needs of the golf course. The superintendent
should provide the committee with the necessary details about the
maintenance operation, including agronomic conditions, equipment,
materials, and labor. It is then possible to guide the discussion
toward realistic expectations based on the prevailing agronomic
conditions on the golf course. The superintendent then formulates
a realistic maintenance plan and a budget that reflects what is
needed to accomplish the desired results.
Golf Professional: The golf professional should
offer constructive criticism about playing quality as it relates
to the various abilities of the golfers who play the course. Since
the golf professional probably has the most contact with the golfers,
he or she can pass along comments and concerns about maintenance
issues. Familiarity with the strengths and weaknesses of the golf
course is important, as is a good knowledge of the Rules of Golf
and course marking. The golf professional also can offer feedback
on maintenance issues that affect the pace of play.
General Manager: The general manager should participate
in all discussions, providing an overview of the golf course maintenance
operation in relation to other functions at the course. The general
manager should provide information and support regarding budget
resources. Like the golf professional, the general manager has frequent
contact with golfers and should pass along any constructive criticism
that can add to the development of the maintenance guidelines.
Since each course is different, the maintenance guidelines should
reflect the specific needs of your golf course. There should be
a general listing of the day-to-day maintenance practices that detail
the who, what, and when of golf course maintenance. It is important
to be realistic and flexible with the development of the guidelines
since there is no way to account for every whim of nature. Keep
the guidelines as brief as possible; there is no need to go into
great detail about specific products or equipment specifications.
Your regional Green Section agronomist can help with the process
by offering advice and recommendations on maintenance issues to
determine what is right for your course. The following is a sample
list of items that should be addressed as part of the maintenance
guidelines. This is only a partial list, and you may wish to add
topics based on the particular needs at your course.
Cutting heights and mowing frequencies: Since quality
turf conditions are dependent on mowing frequencies, the committee
and superintendent should agree on how often each area should be
mowed, considering the available labor and equipment. A range of
acceptable cutting heights should be prepared for all areas of the
golf course that protects the agronomic condition of the turf while
providing acceptable playing quality for the majority of golfers.
Important factors to consider include: turf variety, height of the
rough, including or excluding an intermediate rough, and mowing
heights for greens, tees, and fairways.
Cultivation programs: The timing and frequency
of core aeration and topdressing should be mentioned in the guidelines.
Details are not necessary as long as there is basic information
presented to let the golfers know when cultivation practices are
scheduled and what to expect.
Green speed: Much has been written on the subject
of green speed, but many courses go about determining the proper
speed for their greens in the wrong way. It is best to first determine
the proper mowing height for healthy turf, and then translate that
information into relative green speeds for regular and championship
play. Due to advances in equipment technology, it is now possible
to mow the greens below 1/8", but just because you can mow the greens
low does not mean you should push the limit. As noted in the following
table, there are times during the year when you may not want to
mow the greens too low or schedule championships since this would
compromise the health of the turf. As an example, you may wish to
present the information in a manner similar to the accompanying
sample table of putting green mowing heights and green speeds.
Sample Putting Green Mowing Height and Green Speed
| |
Mowing
Height |
Speed
for Regular Play |
Speed
for Championships |
| Jan. |
9/64" to 5/32" |
Fast |
Medium Fast |
| Feb. |
9/64" to 5/32" |
Fast |
Medium Fast |
| Mar. |
9/64" to 5/32" |
Fast |
Medium Fast |
| Apr. |
1/8" to 9/64" |
Fast |
Fast |
| May |
1/8" to 9/64" |
Fast |
Fast |
| Jun. |
5/32" to 3/16" |
Medium Fast |
Medium |
| Jul. |
3/16" |
Medium Fast |
(not recommended) |
| Aug. |
3/16" |
Medium Fast |
(not recommended) |
| Sep. |
5/32" to 3/16" |
Medium Fast |
Medium |
| Oct. |
9/64" to 5/32" |
Fast |
Medium Fast |
| Nov. |
9/64" to 5/32" |
Fast |
Medium Fast |
| Dec. |
9/64" to 5/32" |
Fast |
Medium Fast |
Color versus playing quality: This is where a meeting
of the minds is essential. The green committee, superintendent,
golf professional, and general manager must come to an agreement
on whether the maintenance priority is on promoting lush green turf
or optimum playing quality. To the superintendent, this indicates
the type of fertility and irrigation practices that must be implemented
to achieve the desired results.
Course setup: There should be some general policy
on how the course should be set up each morning, including the positioning
of tee markers and rotation of hole locations.
Course marking: This includes guidelines for marking
ground under repair, the position of out-of-bounds and hazards on
the golf course as well as how these areas are to be maintained.
Bunker maintenance: In addition to the frequency
of raking and trimming operations, it is good to mention other factors,
such as the desired firmness and playing quality of the bunker sand,
how often sand is added to the bunkers, thickness of the grass lips,
and other factors.
Golf cart policy: The damage caused by golf carts
directly impacts course maintenance and playing quality. Any golf
cart restrictions should be included in the guidelines as a reminder
to the golfers and as a guideline to the maintenance staff for course
setup.
Course closure for rain, frost, and winter play policy:
Policies and procedures for closing the course due to inclement
weather should be included in the guidelines, along with who is
responsible for making the determination.
Environmental issues/IPM thresholds: Special environmental issues
that affect the maintenance of the golf course should be noted.
Depending on state or local laws, there may be specific restrictions
on re-entry periods after a pesticide application. Any general comments
regarding IPM thresholds for weeds, insects, and diseases also are
worthy of including so that the golfers are aware of the goals for
your pest control program.
Fairway widths and mowing contours: The total acreage
and width of the fairways influences the maintenance and playing
quality of the golf course. The larger the fairway, the more time
and labor necessary for mowing and maintenance. Fairway widths and
mowing contours also are a function of course architecture and can
influence the pace of play.
Tree maintenance: Tree maintenance, or the lack
of it, affects the appearance and strategy of playing the golf course.
Consideration should be given to the frequency of tree pruning,
how it is to be performed, and what effect it will have on playability.
Guidelines for tree planting and the architectural significance
of specific trees on the golf course also should be noted.
Winter overseeding: For many courses in the southern
part of the United States, the question of whether or not to overseed
can have serious financial impacts. It also may be a controversial
topic among golfers or club members. If winter overseeding is practiced
at your course, guidelines should be developed concerning when seeding
will be performed, how the grow-in period will be managed, and a
description of transition programs in the spring.
To begin the process, the Green Committee may wish to formulate
a questionnaire to get a representative idea of how golfers like
to see the course maintained. After analyzing the responses, the
Green Committee should meet with the superintendent, golf professional,
and general manager to gather more information. Any specific problems
or unusual site conditions that affect maintenance should be discussed.
The committee should carefully consider all aspects of the golf
course and its maintenance, including architecture, agronomic requirements
of the turf, the average ability of the golfers at your course,
pace of play, labor and equipment resources, seasonal variations,
tournament schedules, and other such items. For the purposes of
the guidelines, it is important to focus on maintenance issues and
separate any long-range planning items. The group can then collectively
work on development of the maintenance guidelines.
The next step is for the superintendent to take the guidelines and
formulate a maintenance plan and budget that accurately reflects
the desired maintenance level. This will require listing the required
tasks and doing a detailed analysis of the labor, equipment, and
supplies necessary to complete the work. The superintendent may
wish to list different options to accomplish the goals and include
information on more efficient equipment or methods. It is important
to be as detailed as possible when performing the analysis in order
to provide realistic budget estimates. Providing a breakdown of
the cost per job or per unit-area would also be useful so that any
changes to the maintenance program can be quickly calculated.
After the budget is developed, another meeting should be held to
compare the budget to the maintenance guidelines. This is where
the rubber meets the road. Many committee members are shocked when
they learn exactly what it takes to provide top-quality golfing
conditions. At this point, some negotiation and adjustments may
be in order to bring the desired maintenance level in line with
the available budget resources.
Once the guidelines are finalized, they should be approved by the
board of directors and put to a vote of the membership. This insures
stability and continuity regardless of changes in the committee
or maintenance personnel.
Everyone who plays golf has an opinion and philosophy on how a golf
course should be maintained. These subjective expectations are often
at odds with the available resources to maintain the course. The
real benefit of developing maintenance guidelines is that it allows
for an objective comparison between the desired level of maintenance
and the available budget resources. Many courses want champagne
and caviar but are only willing to pay for Kool-Aid and beer nuts.
The exercise of developing the maintenance guidelines also becomes
an eye-opening experience for the green committee, superintendent,
golf professional, general manager, and golfers by demonstrating
the many factors that go into maintaining a top-quality golf course
on a consistent basis. Once the maintenance guidelines are developed,
the green committee possesses an important tool to communicate with
golfers regarding the acceptable standards for daily maintenance
and a way to respond to complaints. What is more important, the
maintenance guidelines clarify the goals of the maintenance program
and provide an objective standard to evaluate the golf course. It
is always dangerous to assume that everyone has the same goal in
mind when it comes to the conditioning of the golf course. So whenever
there is any doubt, it is always better to spec it out.
Patrick J. Gross is an agronomist in the Green Section's Western
Region.
|
|
|
|
