Old Tom Morris’ Hierarchy of Needs Of Northern Golf Courses: A proposed categorizing of golf course classifications.

 In my lifetime of being on golf courses; working since fifteen years of age and playing golf even longer,  I have spent much time observing a fascinating industry.  In my travels, I see individuals who excel at building a culture, solving difficult problems, and navigating the good and bad of human nature.  I also see a bit of anxiety and depression.  You might think that the golf course superintendent is a carefree and happy-go-lucky life, but the reality is that often times the superintendent works without a working definition of what it is that they can actually produce.  The possible reasons and rationale for the failure to define the quality, appearance, and future of a golf course is too complex for the scope of this post, however it is responsible for much unnecessary anguish.  I believe we can do better to provide the characteristics of golf courses that give them true meaning instead of nebulous concepts like "we want to take it to the next level."  Comments like the former are rarely ever backed up with any concrete examples of what that even means.  So let's take a dive in.....

What I have observed is that the superintendents who lack a clearly defined, realistic golf course that considers the resources allocated, are the ones who suffer the most.  Interestingly enough, our brain reacts to ambiguity with anxiety.  Establishing an agreed upon definition for a golf course, setting realistic expectations, and establishing maintenance standards based upon resources allocated can reduce the anxiety and frustration for golfers and managers alike.  With this in mind, I set out to try and make some sense regarding the classification of different golf courses.  Below is an introduction to many hours of observing, questioning, listening, and thoroughly enjoying the golf business and my attempt to classify golf courses, reduce ambiguity, and create a happy working environment where employees are not chasing unicorns. 

Tier I Plant Protectant Applications

Many years ago my good friend Brian Baker shared with me an idea of a hierarchy of plant protectant applications as a facility progressed from low maintenance budgets to high budgets as seen in the blue pyramid above.  This tiered system made a ton of sense to me and since I spend a lot of time behind the wheel, I get what we call "mower thoughts" in this industry.  Mower thoughts are the ideas that pop in your head while doing the mundane practice of mowing large areas of turf, or in this case windshield time.  These thoughts churned inside my head for many years and eventually led me to develop a series of diagrams with the different plant protectant applications necessary at each tier of golf course.

Tier V Plant Protectant Applications

I was pretty proud of my visual aids, they added clarity to the differences between courses of differing calibers, but I felt something was missing.  Plant protectant applications alone cannot produce a quality Turfgrass surface.  I maintain that the plant protectant hierarchy works in conjunction with cultural and operational practices.  For instance, if resources are limited, the biggest priority for establishing quality turf would be to have sharp mowers.  Cutting the grass cleanly saves a lot of problems, like a ton of them.  Well..........think about it, if you could chose the knife you had to cut yourself with, would you chose a sharp smooth one or a jagged dull one?  Think death by Zero or a chopping up by Freddy Kruger.  The best plant protectant program that is applied to poorly cut and shredded turf produces a sub optimal surface.  (Sidenote: quality of cut inspections happen at the individual plant level and requires prism, macroscope, close up photography, and other such means.)  

Considering the importance of well maintained cutting units led me down the path of organic matter.  Well, this led to more "mower thoughts," expanded into a series of diagrams like the one below, then another pyramid, and then more diagrams.  I have created more of these diagrams which include other defining inputs like labor tasks necessary and equipment needed.  For now, let's discuss organic matter.

Organic matter is what I consider to be the greatest contributor to the quality of the playing surface.  Controlling the accumulation of organic matter and the intensity in which it is managed determines to a large extent, the quality of the playing surfaces on a golf course.  

Tier I Cultural Practice Focus

Organic matter is the organic component of the soil and can be subdivided into the living and nonliving fractions.  Organic matter and microorganism population contribute greatly to Turfgrass growth and development even though they constitute small fractions of the overall soil complex (Beard 1973).

Golf courses vary greatly in their conditioning of playing surfaces.  Factors such as abiotic site specific issues, infrastructure, budgets, equipment, water management, and grass and soil types, contribute greatly to these variations.  However, in my opinion, the greatest influence in playing surface conditioning, dollar per dollar, is organic matter management.  

Organic matter percentages in playing surfaces are directly responsible for the quality.  That statement is so important that it bears repeating.  The undoubtably, unarguable fact is this “Golf Course Playing Surface Quality is 90% Organic Matter Management.”  Water infiltration, firmness, quality of cut, plant protectant efficacy, surface trueness, and green speed are all negatively affected by an increase in organic matter in greens of as little as <1%.  (1% increase in organic matter can result in up to 25,000 gallons of water retention per acre. Source: Kansas State Extension Agronomy e-Updates, Number 357, July 6, 2012)

Classification of golf courses pyramid

The theory of Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs applies to golf in the sense that before an expectation for the quality of tees, fairways, or any other surface is to be concerned, the putting greens’ needs are to be satisfied.  Quality putting surfaces demand proper cultural and plant protectant programs, cutting units that are sharp and well adjusted, uniform irrigation, and abiotic stresses addressed.  Facilities that commit the folly of ignoring the accumulation of organic matter in greens will endure poor playing surface conditions that will require remediation efforts in the future to correct the situation.  

The common recommendation for golf greens is 3-4% in the top 1 inch of the greens, a threshold which has been established from multiple studies (O’Brien and Hartwiger, 2003).  Organic matter management is complex and each site will have strategies and percentages that result in the best putting surface for each individual site.  Achieving great playing surfaces for the game of golf, begins at the putting greens and expands outwards to the other playing surfaces typically in the order of tees, fairways, green surrounds, primary rough, bunker surrounds, tee surrounds, secondary roughs, practice areas, and so on.  

Championship Golf Conditioning

Golf course greens can only do three things in regard to organic matter; accumulate, maintain, or dilute.  The greater the intensity of organic matter removal via cultural practices, the more disruption the players will encounter.  A cultural program that maintains organic matter at a given percent is less labor intensive and less disruptive than any organic matter removal program.  Preventing organic matter accumulation while maintaining the recuperative capacity for traffic and pitch marks is where a golf course superintendent's management philosophies regarding fertility and irrigation can play a major role of differences in conditioning.  Organic matter management that is delayed is organic matter accumulation multiplied.  

Plant protectant efficacy is greatest on surfaces with proper organic matter percentages.  Once organic matter is controlled properly, a solid plant protectant program can provide optimum conditions.  To be of maximum value the plant protectant program mirrors the intensity that each playing surface demands.  It may appear obvious that the most intensely managed surfaces will require higher inputs than turfgrass that is maintained at the basic level.  The diagrams in their entirety, which are not included in this post, attempt to address the agronomic differences between golf courses of different management intensities.  

As mentioned prior, I have begun to expand these pyramids and diagrams with additional specifics regarding golf course management such as equipment needed and tasks required, demonstrating the differences in inputs that are required to manage a golf course to the differing intensities.  This tiered pyramid idea hopefully provokes conversations that help to define a property and give clear vision to persons responsible for carrying out the processes of caring for a golf course.  Understanding where your course lands in the realm of organic matter management, plant protectant applications, labor tasks funded, and equipment provided, can deliver an understanding of proper golfer expectations.  Alleviating expectations of the golfer hopefully leads him or her to an "openness to experience," or what I would describe as the ultimate goal of golf and play.  

Establishing realistic aesthetic and playability expectations for a facility that are based upon the resources provided is only fair to the individuals managing and maintaining a golf facility, as well as the player.  

Employees deserve a fair and thoughtful job description that provides a framework for evaluating job performance.  The happiest and healthiest employees are the ones that have been given clear and realistic expectations and in the case of a golf course superintendent can be successful providing an appropriate golf experience.  If you would like to discuss how you can use these diagrams to determine the current classification of your course, develop a vision, create maintenance standards, or provide feedback about what is missing or incorrect, please feel free to contact me.

Have a great day, solve collective problems, make deep connections, and spread love,

Turf.

O’Brien, Patrick, and Chris Hartwiger. “Aeration and Topdressing for the 21st Century” USGA Green Section Record, vol 41, no. 2, Mar./Apr. 2003, pp. 1-7 

Beard, James B. 1973 "Turfgrass: Soil and Culture" Prentice-Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. 1973, pp 329