I personally like lush green golf courses.  But I understand the impact they can have on an ecosystem.  I don't mind a "brown" golf course, if it is architecturally designed with that in mind.  In other words, if it's a links style course, I don't mind it.  For other styles, I'm ok if they let the rough "suffer" but keep the tees, fairways, and greens in shape.

If it is a links course then it should play firm and fast, which may result in not so lush conditions. We as Americans have become use to over watered lush courses. What you see week in and week out on the PGA Tour is really not feasible for a normal course to maintain. A lush course means more maintenance, which not only causes added stress to the playing surfaces, but also wear and tear on equipment.

As the previous superintendent at my course used to say, "Brown is a color too."

You are exactly right about the Links courses.  I'm definitely spoiled being in the mountains of the northeast.  Water is usually not an issue for our courses.  We have a couple of links style courses in the area and they are typically green most of the summer without the need for watering.

I just like to see the "color" architected into the design of the course.  Personally, I like the look of the Pinehurst redesign.  But I wouldn't have liked it if they simply stopped watering the rough and allowed it to brown.

I think courses should strive to be "off the grid."  Like I said though, being in the northeast, it's probably easier for me to have that view point.  I know of at least one course in my area that uses the ponds and streams for all of their irrigation needs.  That's probably not possible in places like California.

Green,I live in Floriduh  and it rains here a lot . With all the crappy snow bird hacker golfers we get down here it would be like playing off the cart path all the time if we didn't water the fairways . Sorry if you fit in that category and I upset you. But that is how it is.

Green, by a long shot. While brown is a color too, I never truly enjoyed some of the courses down where my father is in Myrtle Beach based on the time of year I was there and the color of the rough, etc. Plus that type of grass isn't my favorite if I don't hit the fairway, but that's personal :) 

A lush green course looks great but plays harder for me.  I need that roll!  When a golf course is dry which is usually the case here in Texas I get great roll in the fairways.  The greens are in better shape so the ball still rolls nicely.  

I don't mind brown fairways, as long as they are still in good condition (not all torn up with divots, etc). Greens should always be nice and lush green though.

Hey dave p, Being a super at a county owned course in southern N.J. you get water alocations from the D.E.P. It all depends on Mother Nature. After 20 years, you learn not to waste it all in the spring. Who knows what July and August will bring. Cutting down a few trees to allow air flow to the greens and tees are a big help too. We are allowed 30 million gallons. Sounds like a lot of water, but you can blow through that in a hurry in a drought. I like them green. But it is a fine line we walk at times. Every year is different.

Play Well,

Steve S.

My home course (Swindon, England) is a municipal/public course so hasn't had a great deal of investment in it until the local council leased the complex to a private golf operator last year. We only have a sprinkler system for the greens so our fairways in the summer are hard and can get quite bare, on the plus side it means our better ball striking is always good because of the tough lies and means playing away is always nice!

As other folks on this thread have said, I really believe it should depend on the type of track the club claims to be. A parklands layout should be as green as possible without wasting water/creating too saturated conditions. If a club is going to claim to be a links club, like many do in the states, it better be running firm and fast.