What’s the thing we golfers moan about the most on our courses? If it isn’t bunkers, they would have to be a very close second behind greens.
We harp on about their size, the sand, whether there’s too much sand, or not enough. We complain about players not raking them, or raking them but not doing it well enough.
Pop into any clubhouse and it’s a fair bet you’ll find someone snarking about the sand. But with that particular resource becoming more scarce, there is a big debate going on in the wider golf world about bunkers.
Do we need so many on our courses? Do they take far too long, and too many people, to keep them in the condition we’d like them to be 24-7?
Now a new study has dropped that’s going to blow the debate wide open. The Great British Bunker Study, produced by bunker experts EcoBunker Ltd with the support of the British and International Golf Greenkeepers Association, has just revealed the massive hole they punch in your club’s finances every single year.
Having audited 32 courses, looking at bunker management, maintenance efficiency and design quality, they discovered the annual cost of keeping bunkers up to standard on an average course was £43,490.44.
And there was much more.
Inconsistency was the most frequently mentioned issue among clubs, with the study reporting “over 90% of respondents identified sand contamination as a major concern”.
It also revealed the average number of bunkers on the audited courses was 49, and 93% did not have a bunker liner.
It reported 9% of all bunkers were superfluous to either gameplay or strategy, and the average sand area per course was 2,905 square metres.
On bunkers that weren’t necessary, the study said “by eliminating unnecessary bunkers, courses can decrease maintenance burdens, allocate resources more effectively, and enhance strategic play”.
Advertisement
Golf bunkers: Clubs are desperate to keep their Course Rating figures
It also revealed players were more satisfied when clubs had adjusted bunkers to improve visibility from fairways and tees and said many golfers preferred “traditional, simple bunker shapes over elaborate designs”.
The study reported “the desire to maintain course ratings has led some clubs to hesitate in removing bunkers, believing that more bunker equate to a more challenging course”.
Richard Allen, Founder of EcoBunker and study lead auditor, said: “It did surprise me to learn that the visual style of bunkers was not very high up the priority list for a large number of golf courses. That’s something I thought would have been a bigger concern for more golf courses.”
“Another thing that came across was that most golfers prefer a simple bunker in the traditional bean shape.
“You see a lot of very fancy, frilly bunker designs on some courses, but much of the feedback we got was that golfers would rather see a simple shape that’s well maintained than a badly maintained work of art.
“Perhaps most surprising of all was that many golf courses didn’t want to remove bunkers as they are desperate to keep their course rating figures.
“There seems to be a general view that the more difficult a course is, the better it is, even if it means having more bunkers than you need.”
“The regular feedback we receive from our members tells us that the maintenance of bunkers is a significant area of concern and so we were eager to engage with our long-established supporters at EcoBunker Ltd to facilitate the Great British Bunker Study,” added Karl Hansell, Head of Communications & Content at BIGGA of the collaboration.
“Our thanks go to the greenkeeping teams that took part as the results provide a fascinating insight from the perspective of golfers, greenkeeping staff and golf clubs.”
You can read a copy of the initial findings of the Great British Bunker Study by visiting EcoBunker’s website.
Last couple of hours of Amazon Prime Day Golf Deals – check out some of the best bargains.
Now have your say
What do you think of this golf bunker debate? Do they cost too much? Should there be fewer of them on your course? And do you care how they are shaped? Let us know by leaving a comment on X.
Advertisement
