I been away for a few days doing what we’ve determined is the best long-term economic solution for the future of our course. Ironically, it is all about creating an alternative revenue stream to subsidize our money-losing golf course. Purely in our case, our location, our resources, our market, our golfers, and all of our other LOCAL issues, our solution is to generate additional revenues by growing fish on an intensive commercial scale. I run a golf course, but for the last year or so my efforts have been focused on wearing my other hat as a fish farmer. Over simplified, we decided it was easier to grow more fish than to grow or find more golfers to generate the revenue we need.
This gets weird commenting on this thread from such a totally unique perspective. So, perhaps I should bring up a few more points about why you should skip the rest of my comments. Obviously, water quantity is not our problem. We need approximately 20X the water to grow fish than we do to irrigate the golf course. In our state, Idaho, mostly arid high desert and mountains, water rights keep the lawyers employed so agriculture can consume most of the water. Ag drives the economy. Fish farming is agriculture, raising animals for food, but the water usage is legislated as “non consumptive,” meaning it can be reused for other purposes (mostly agricultural) after it has passed through the fish gills. In our case, we use a small portion of it for the “consumptive” use of growing turf. By necessity, if one is both a fish farmer and golf course owner, you have to know a lot about water, water chemistry, and water law (including the EPA and the Clean Water Act). Everyone in this part of the West understands the old Mark Twain saw that out here “water is for fighting and whiskey is for drinking.” Excuse the paraphrase.
So, when I see thread about golf courses and water, I figure that the topic falls into my area of expertise and I read it. Unfortunately, there is not much more to add than what has already been said. I can only confirm, based on my experience, that speaking up about the virtues of “lean and mean” golf has not been good for our golf business. I personally think our course plays beautifully fast and firm and more “links like” because I have played and love that kind of golf. I have tried to educate our golfers about the differences. The majority of our golfers disagree with my views because that’s what they know or believe based on their experience. Believe me when I tell you that these golfers vote most emphatically with their wallets. They like green, lush, soft, and even wet, no matter how illogical it is to the game and, more importantly, to their games. My attempts at educating our golfers are largely viewed as excuses for brown spots or not doing our jobs properly.
We’ve learned the hard way to give our golfers what they think they want. First and foremost, affordable golf because we have more courses for fewer golfers than most areas. Again, a market driven reality. In terms of water and conditioning, we try (given our market and economic factors) to give our golfers, to paraphrase the good Dr. Mackenzie, the greatest amount of pleasure to the greatest number of golfers. For us that means growing as much grass as we can in the spring and early summer, maintaining it as well as we can during the hot days of summer, hitting a sort of perfection of lush conditions in the fall, and wearing it all out over the winter. Repeat again next year. From a playing/conditioning point of view, we go from f&f to lush and plush (over watered/fertilized) and back to f&f according to our climate. It’s not ideal, but in some ways, it satisfies a variety of tastes. We pour on the water when we can because we can and because that is what our golfers want.
Also learned the hard way, just do it and shut up about many of the opinions discussed here. Not saying who’s right or wrong, although my own views tend to fall more in line with the practicing pros, the guys in the golf business. We’re a small, for profit (in theory), golf course and have to make it work however we can. “Educating” our golfers hasn’t helped us. Keeping them informed and communicating with them about what we are trying to do and conditions, yes. “Converting” them to another approach or view of the game, no. I guess that, for us, we’re knuckling under to our customers (the market) and not demonstrating much leadership by preaching about what we know and believe. As I see it, our golfers and market have a long way to go before they begin to understand this discussion. I’d rather stay in the golf business than being right, a leader, and going broke. Big world theories make more sense for our situation.
Thank you, Don, for starting this thread, and thanks to all the Supers and knowledgeable folks who joined in. Tons of practical wisdom applied to a noble cause, restoring and sustaining this great game.