In this era of golf course maintenance budget cutting, your job could depend on what gets cut, or stays in your operating budget. I remind you that when every industry-wide survey known to man has asked America’s golfers in recent years what they felt was the single most important factor that kept them coming back to play their “home” golf courses – the universal answer has always been golf course conditioning.

Therefore, it behooves golf course superintendents to honor this player mandate when defunding their coming years’ operating budgets. Accordingly, near future golf course maintenance budgets should focus attention on the following priorities:

Green Quality: Commit to maintaining the highest quality standard for your 18 greens and their surrounds per golf course. Green quality contributes to the playability quality of a golf course more than any other course element; and, furthermore, is a dominant factor in determining what level of pride a golfer develops in his/her golf course. Additionally, green quality is the single biggest factor that earns golf course superintendents professional respect throughout their regional golf communities.

“Once superintendents allow green quality to suffer, they will be voluntarily undermining their job security . . .

If you have earned a reputation for good greens don’t give it away for budget cutting reasons; i.e., protect this well-earned invaluable standing by pinching budget dollars elsewhere. If you have not earned this reputation, commit to doing something about it; i.e., solicit counseling; spend a few more dollars, etc. If and when a decision is made to reduce mowing schedules throughout your golf course, continue a full green mowing schedule because this is imperative to maintaining green speeds/quality. Once superintendents allow green quality to suffer, they will be voluntarily undermining their job security.

“Providing playable, crisp and tidy bunkering is essential to a superintendent’s job security . . .

Bunker Care: Because bunker care is labor intensive and, therefore, relatively expensive – superintendents have a tendency to de-prioritize this program. I strongly recommend against this practice because when golfers see side-by-side high quality green care and low quality green side bunker care the only conclusion they can come to is that the superintendent manages inconsistently and, therefore, poorly. Providing playable, crisp and tidy bunkering is essential to a superintendent’s job security.

Cost: Will it be possible to maintain top quality level greens and bunkers if and when the time comes to cut budgets from 5% to 15+% annually? The answer is “yes” – with the understanding that superintendents will have to go somewhat on-line to monitor and ensure the tightest possible program management; that budget-eating non-essential cultural practices will have to be minimized or shut down thereby reducing labor and related costs; and that expensive to maintain lush green golf courses will be allowed to go “brown” and firm (as they should be) and so on. You know the drill.

Yes, it will be necessary that superintendents be creative, take fiscal control of their programs and to communicate their intended course maintenance priorities to their constituencies to succeed in these above described endeavors in this economy. Is there a better way for golf course superintendents to demonstrate their indispensable management skills? I don’t think so.