When I was a lot younger, I aspired to one day work at a big budget golf course where I could use all the greatest tools and fancy fertilizers and chemicals. Being from an extremely low budget golf course, I often felt bad about my situation as I learned about all the "solutions" to my problems as I read the latest trade magazines but realized that we didn't have the resources to do any of these things. I thought that this brute force tactic was the only way. It wasn't until I learned about "minimalism" that I started to realize that there was a different way to approach my profession that would not only produce great playing conditions for our golfers, but also provide a great deal of personal satisfaction and acceptance from working at a low budget golf course. This was the time I started blogging and the time where I officially became a grass freak!
 |
| Greenkeepers are weird. Just ask my wife, or John's! |
I want to preface anything I'm about to say with this. I AM NOT SAYING that one approach to greenkeeping is better or worse than the other one. Both styles of greenkeeping can produce amazing condition and still require a skilled greenkeeper who is part scientist, part coach and part artist. Yes, I said it. I'm an artist but I use a lot of science to make my art better.
Both styles of greenkeeping can also produce horrible conditions! I would expect that most great superintendents worry more about under-managing the playing surfaces than over-managing. Both are potentially detrimental. Under-managing is likely more detrimental in the short term but over-managing can have a lot of long term negative consequences as well. Things like collar dams from excessive sand applications, build up of fine sand from excessive topdressing with super fine sand, thatch buildup leading to soft playing surfaces and deferred maintenance for some areas of your budget from over spending in other areas.
 |
| Using a limited brute force tactic to correct the symptom of decades of brute force tactics |
Mow it and Grow It!
Out West I've heard of brute force greenkeeping being referred to "Grow it and mow it!" This can produce some great surfaces but costs more money. Fast growing grass can tolerate more traffic, is super green and provides a nice aesthetic with stripes. Fast growing grass needs more fertilizer to get the higher growth rates. It also requires more mowing. I've heard of some courses mowing fairways twice a day! There's no doubt that double cutting fairways will produce a tight dense playing surface but it also costs more in fuel, equipment wear and tear, labor and increases the disruption that mowers have for golfers. For many, this simply isn't possible.
I wouldn't say that brute force greenkeeping uses excess water. If anything, if you have the resources to hand water fairways with the guidance of moisture meters, you can probably maintain a nice green surface with very low water inputs. This also costs a lot more in labor and disrupts play with and increase in golfer/greenkeeper interaction.
Higher growth will likely result in higher thatch production so more sand will need to be applied. This costs a lot of money, disrupts play, and dulls your mowers.
High intensity management might also produce more compaction. This is already likely the case because if you are growing the grass quickly it is likely because of golf cart traffic! This compaction will require more intensive cultivation which can lead to more poa annua and more disruption to the golfers.
All of the "problems" associated with this approach to greenkeeping can be solved with more money. If anything, it might actually require a more skillful superintendent to pull this sort of maintenance strategy off. It is a lot of work with a lot of moving parts and requires an incredible attention to detail. I am still totally in awe of those who manage their courses like this. It is one of the reasons I am not concerned with a certain greenkeeping "syndrome" because I know that those conditions require a lot of hard work and skill and I'm able to communicate to others exactly what that is. You want to have those types of conditions? Show me the money!
Minimalism
I have often joked with my friends that minimalism is "do nothing" greenkeeping. There is an essence of truth to this statement and this comes from the idea that there are many situations where doing nothing is actually better than doing something. One of these situations might be ice removal from greens or needle tine aerifying when the root system is too weak to tolerate that kind of mechanical stress or mowing the greens when a simple roll or dew whip is all that is required to get the desired playing characteristics.
I have always felt that the risk of doing too little was much worse that the risk of over-managing but I also didn't have the resources to over-manage any part of my golf course. I have seen many examples where minimalism was taken too far and conditions suffered as a result. Sure, maybe dry firm surfaces are the goal, but when the grass health begins to suffer to the point where the sward thins and weeds are able to out compete the grass or the playing surface is slow and bumpy more often than not, we might have gone too far.
This is where I started to use data collection as a tool to help me manage my course just right. I also didn't have the resources to brute force minimalism! I had to get it right the first time to avoid costly remedial action from doing too little. I couldn't re-sod greens or throw a ton of seed at areas that thinned out and died. I needed to find the balance that was right in between not enough and too much. Data and access to better information helped me do this.
It's not expensive either. I use free spreadsheets, a bucket to measure clippings, a stimp meter to measure playing characteristics and a moisture meter to measure water. These are all things that even a low budget course can afford and will quickly realize the return on investment with. All of my "crazy" data systems are essentially just good records where I can extract useful data from. You don't need drones or expensive in-ground sensors to elevate your course conditions. The most important thing is a drive to learn more and good records to help you debrief you successes failures with more consistency.
 |
| My turfgrass growth ratio is a powerful tool that requires a bucket with measurements on it, and a spreadsheet but can save me tens of thousands a year at helps be get the growth rate right over and over again. |
Careful management of water and growth on my fairways has reduced the amount of thatch, increased drainage and improved the quality of these playing surfaces without costing us anything extra in sand for topdressing or drainage systems. There are massive risks to both reducing water and fertilizer too much but if you can find ways to get it right the first time, you get great conditions for a lot less money. It's not easy but it's possible.
Careful management of growth rates has allowed me to produce great playing surfaces with less effort while also allowing for a shift in turf species from poa annua to a mixed stand dominated by bentgrass in many cases. This is only possible if you allow the bentgrass the ability to compete by minimizing the "help" you give it without going too far. I've seen just as much poa incursion into bentgrass playing surfaces from not enough water and not enough fertilizer and too much sand topdressing as I have from too much water, too much fertilizer and not enough topdressing! The bentgrass need to be competitive at all times and this is totally possible with a measured, minimalist approach.
I have gone from maintenance strategies where we were essentially guessing at how much water we needed to one where we can manage the moisture with a few percentage points with a digital moisture meter. THIS IS INSANE!
 |
| This might not be impressive today, but 10 years ago it was impossible to maintain such consistent moisture levels for such a long time especially with minimal resources. |
I have also gone too far with water reduction and need playing surfaces suffer as a result. My first instinct when I got my first moisture meter back in 2007 or 2008 was to see how low I could go. This was driven partly by the ability to micro manage the moisture levels but also a misunderstanding of how water worked in our soils. Back then (it's only 14 years ago, jeeze) no one knew what they were doing with these new tools.
 |
| Despite being our most expensive data collection tool, our TDR 350 has a ROI that is quickly realized on any golf course that irrigates as the cost of over-watering is often extreme but not obvious. |
Now, my "minimalist" approach to moisture management isn't about keeping my soils as dry as absolutely possible. Keeping them dry requires more effort and can result in grass that wilts more frequently which can lead to a loss of the quality of the playing surface. Instead, I now understand that I can effectively keep soil moisture levels at a level where the grass likely won't wilt in the afternoon but without applying excessive water that can lead to soft, disease prone conditions. This again, keeps the grass happy without being excessive. You will notice that our moisture levels on the VMC trend above are higher than you might think was acceptable but this green is mostly poa with a shallow root system and requires a slightly higher VMC in the top 2cm to get through the day without supplemental irrigation. This is so much better than anyone could do 20 years ago. It's actually insane how good we are at managing water now.
Crazy!
My approach to disease management is also quite minimalist as well. It is very easy to always jump to the chemical control first, but through careful turf management and an understanding on how you can prevent disease and use disease to make better management decisions, you can drastically reduce the mount of pest control products you need on your golf course.
I have used both styles of greenkeeping over my career and even use both styles on the same course at the same time! My aim is for a more minimalist approach, but because I'm not perfect and mother nature sometimes has other ideas, the brute force tactic is still often required. I think every facility will be somewhere on the spectrum from full on Brute Force to full on Minimalism. I think that important part for me is to be mindful of the benefits and draw backs of both styles and to find the balance that is just right for my budget, my situation and type of facility. This thoughtful approach will ensure that you use the right amount of force when required while avoiding waste and unnecessary expense and disruption to the golf. In the end it is about the conditions that we produce.