Quote:
Originally Posted by MrGolf
I have been around and worked on golf courses both north and south for the better part of 62 years. The Director is doing as well as he can given what he has to work with. My comments were not criticizing the Director, just clarifying the fact that the courses will look worse and the fairways play worse than if proper overseeding was done. This is purely a cost savings move and it should be stated rather than skirting the issue. They want to spend less on maintaining the championship tracks. That is the mandate. Don't sugar coat by telling us they are trying to be good stewards of our resources or that it will look better in the long run by doing this
|
I'm interested in the source of your information that it is 'purely' a cost cutting move. I've been here 10 years and there have been winters in the past that they've not over seeded the fairways due to lack of rain. But when there is sufficient rainfall in the summer, they have always over seeded the fairways. Within the annual budget, how big an expense do you think overseeding is as a percentage of expenses?
7" deficit is significant due the water restrictions they have to deal with. Are you aware that below 466, there is a single allocation of water that has to cover everything, homes, common areas, recreation centers, and golf courses? The more those other places use, the less is available for the courses. They have to rely on the retention ponds and recycled water to supplement their allocation. Less rain-lower pond levels-less golf course water.