"Tpaul...you said green and wet was easy, just let the irrigation rip and sit back, there was little need to watch it like a hawk..."
Craig:
Well, that's an interesting point and no doubt true if a course is over saturated all the time from excessive irrigation.
"I was merely pointing out that there`are substaintial costs to green, soft and wet...and one such cost is the constant diligance for disease associated with those conditions...."
I realize that's true particularly if courses are too wet most all the time. That's just beautiful, isn't it? I mean really, how stupid can American courses and clubs get if that's what they're doing---over-irrigating so much, fertilizing, retarding, mowing excessively low, all geared towards disease?
"If there is nothing inexpensive and easy about green, wet and soft why do so many courses embrace it? Because the membership has determined that it is the Ideal Maintinance Meld for their course...."
That's probably the best question yet! Why indeed do so many embrace lush green wet and soft turf all the time with all the problems you just mentioned that can go with it? My feeling is simply because they just don't know any better. And why don't they know any better? Well, we sure did start to lose the ground game in America by over saturating golf courses sometime after WW2. We sure do over irrigate and fertilize the shit out of our turf over here. We fertilize it, then we slap growth retardants on it, we cut it too within an inch of its life and then practically drown it, then apply one chemical remediation after another to it.
Why indeed to we do all that so much over here? If you ask me it's because of the massive scam known as the American agronomic industry and its ancillary support mechanisms---irrigation, fertilizer, retardants, all forms of chemical applications, super sophisticated mowing equipment, and then drown the shit out of it!
Is it any wonder I've been calling American agronomy of this type the "emergency ward" for a few years now? The real irony is that so many Americans actually think grass that looks that lush and soft and wet looks good and is heathy. It isn't. But do you think the American agronomy industry is going to admit that anytime soon? Do you think they're willing to admit that grass that's lightish green and drier, deeper rooted or even browned a bit is healthier? I wouldn't hold my breath that they'll admit that anytime soon unless they want to consider going out of business.
"Thus we are back to the theme of your post..."should we try to actively proselytize."
Yes we are, and that's precisely why I think we should try to convince as many as possible to consider drier and firmer and faster turf that is less dependent on all that crap mentioned above.
I say get American agronomy out of the "emergency ward".
It'll be healthier in the end and it will play a whole lot better. For starters we will get the other half of the game of golf back again after all these decades in America when it basically didn't exist.
Let our American agronomy get reacclimated to the ways of Nature better and it obviously will cost less in the end. But when something costs less it obviously isn't good for somebody's business, is it?
