Peter, you wrote, "As far as I know, none of the artists funded through the WPA's art project went around renovating existing art by other artists." Tilly's PGA Course Consultation Tour wasn't funded by the WPA.
I think what has been missed by everyone who has commented so far is an understanding of the specific constraints under which Tilly conducted the course examinations during this tour. He had to:
1- Only visit a course where they employed a professional who was a member of the PGA of America. As a result there were a number of courses whose professionals joined so that their club could benefit from this resulting in much needed funds being brought into the PGA..
2- That Professional's membership dues must be current and paid up-to-date. If funds were owed he couldn't visit. As a result, many professionals restored and/or brought their membership dues situation up-to-date bringing in much needed funds to the PGA.
3- Tilly could not visit any course even where the PGA professional had his dues up-to-date unless and until the Club/Professional made a request to the PGA for his visit. It would then be "scheduled." This was adjusted after about the first two months when the response and request for visits was already becoming nearly overwhelming. Tilly was then given some latitude to "include" clubs at the last minute but only where they could be properly fit in. On a number of occasions he would have to make arrangements to see these during his "next visit" to the area. This would again be re-adjusted several months later and again, unless there was a very specific reason not to, everything was once again arranged through the PGA.
4- Because his visits were scheduled for him, and in a manner that would enable him to maximize the number of clubs he could see during his visits both daily and the time allotted for the area he would be at, the clubs requesting him had to be specific in exactly what they wanted his consultation on. If it was to be a full-course examination than that is what he would do, but many clubs were only interested in his opinion of one or several holes and so that was all he would look at for them.
5- Any recommended work was not to be done by Tilly but by a local golf course architect and Tilly would provide names to the clubs. A good example of that is Brook Hollow. That is how Perry Maxwell was hired by them to redesign the greens after Tilly's visit.
6- Recommended improvements were specific to the individual courses that he visited.
Why mention all of that? Because the Ken asked three questions, the first being, "With expense dominating course survival discussions, what would a current trip around the country for Tillinghast look like now compared to then?"
Ken's second question was, " Was he on to something with his widespread elimination of bunkers for better playability and cost control?" Just as he did in 1935-37 and conducted his course consultation visits within the framework that he agreed with the PGA to do, so today, if he toured the country on their behalf once again, it would see him staying within the restrictions that were agreed upon. That is why I don't believe that he would participate in a nation-wide tour as set-up by the ASGCA/USGA. For example, his expenses and a small stipend was paid to him and that is something NOT given to any of the architects who will participate in this modern arrangement. I purposefully use the word "arrangement" because it is that and not a "tour" at all. Also, the need for the PGA Tour in the 30s was far more complex than what exists today. Back then the very existence of the organization was being threatened by the Great Depression; today, despite the recent numbers of course closings and loss of players, television revenues will prevent the game from being substantially damaged in the long-term and the majority of today's clubs, and also some new ones as time goes on, will remain for many years to come.
Would Tilly have given his time to visit a few courses under this arrangement? I believe he would as he was a big supporter of those organizations, including the PGA & USGA, of which he was a member.
As for the "duffer's headaches" and Tilly's recommendations for these to be removed, Tilly had written about the need to remove unnecessary bunkers and especially that courses should enable the "lesser" player to be able to play the course and enjoy it for many years prior to this tour. The fact is that there were many courses that he visited where there wasn't any mention of DH bunkers needing removal. That is why I believe that today he would once again be recommending the removal of numerous bunkers whether they be modern DH's or not.
Ken's third question was, "Was he on to something with his widespread elimination of bunkers for better playability and cost control? How would he react to modern maintenance practices, both good and bad?"
Tilly was fluent in almost all areas concerning the design and long-term care of golf courses. For example, he wrote a number of articles about grass types even mentioning what areas of the country where they were best used. He also recognized that others knew more about certain specifics of course construction and maintenance and both used and recommended their use to clubs at which he worked. That is why I believe that he would today have been very well versed in current construction and maintenance practices and would most certainly have freely given his opinions on them.