Mike,
I've said it for decades and I'll say it again, the marriage of the PGA Tour and TV and their influence on local clubs are the leading culprits.
Viewers, Memberships, Green Committees and BOD's see the product on TV every week and turn to their Superintendents and tell them, "that's how we want our course to look", not understanding the money and manpower, not to mention the time it takes, to achieve those conditions.
Which club would settle for green speeds of 6 in 2016 ?
Which club would settle for unmaintained bunkers in 2016 ?
For 50 years I've advocated for yellow/brown/green fairways and the limited application of water.
Unfortunately, I can't present the golf world with weekly telecasts of courses with those conditions. So for 50 years, the golf world has been watching lush, green conditions.
That's what they see and that's what they expect or demand.
How do you counter that ?
The only counter that I see is the increased cost of water.
Not long ago I was a guest at a course that had recently undergone some changes.
After the round, 8 of us were sitting around having drinks and one of the members asked me what I thought of the changes. The first thing I said was that the course was too wet. They all said that they had complained about that, spoken to Board members and written letters, but that nobody listened because they want the course to be GREEN.
So here you have 7 members, all complaining that the course is too wet, but those in charge want to keep it that way for appearance sake. So how do you change that mindset when every week golfers see telecasts of lush green courses being played on the PGA Tour ?