water (lack of) and architecture

[archie struthers]

Does the increasing governmental and pressures from special interest groups to limit water usage portend a change of strategy for future golf course architects/builders. Will the classic parkland golf courses many of us hold near and dear to our hearts be replaced by some hybrid that dramatically reduces water usage much like the desert courses discussed in a previous post.

[Matt_Ward]

Archie:

It's time all golf courses and future development be aware that water is indeed a precious resource and can't be squandered. I often believe many times water is added to the design / routing because of its visual appeal -- i.e., the standard waterfall and other wasted usages you often see.

Look what is happening in your "neck of the woods" regarding the recent announcement by Governor McCreevey that housing development must stop in three large townships in and around Atlantic City.

Archie, when you say "special interest groups" let's be more accurate -- it's long past due that water usage be dramatically reduced and we move away from the pristine conditions that so many courses seek to achieve each and evry year.

When you tell Joe Sixpack that he must cut back his water usage and when he drives his car past the nearby golf course and sees sprinklers dousing the fairways with water you have a major league pr problem for the long term health of the game.

I don't see why water usage could not easily be cut back 10-20% for golf facilities. Getting ahead of this issue will be a tremendous plus because failing to be proactive now will only result in golf taking it on the chin in more than a few ways.

[WilliamWang]

didn't the superintendent news have a tongue in cheek article about astroturf greens replacing grass in the water-starved future?  perhaps golf in 2050 after the effects of global warming take hold, will be entirely on astroturfed courses.

[archie]

Matt,


I don't think we have a problem with water features, although the overuse of them is not my taste. What we are talking about is drawing water out of the aquifer. Many of us who operate golf courses in NJ this year learned that we are going to have to dramatically change our use patterns going forward. We are looking at effluent, eliminating irrigated areas, etc. as ways to improve our water management.

If you take this a little further to my dismay, look for more cart paths as the grasses that typically require less water don't hold up well to traffic.

[Eric Pevoto]

How about the fact that the guidelines which are in place now might actually promote overwatering during non-drought times.  
If superintendents know that during any restrictions they will be limited to a certain percentage of the water normally used, aren't they then more apt to be "piggish" with the water during non-drought?  

The guidelines actually reward those who might use too much water to begin with.

[Matt_Ward]

Archie:

Let's be clear here in NJ -- the days of golf courses sliding by while "drought" edicts are put into place for everyone else ARE OVER! How about a united front of superintendents and golf course owners come together and demontsrate they are indeed "sensitive" to this issue and are taking "voluntary" steps to curb usage?

Golf course owners and would-be golf developers had better get ahead of the curve because if public wrath comes down because of inconsistencies on what truly is a priority you can be sure golf will be a primary target by a range of groups.

This issue is in full throttle in many states and I saw it firsthand while visiting Pueblo, CO and the Walking Stick GC in town.

I've learned from many past experiences it's far better to define the issue yourself instead of having others define you.

[Peter Galea]

Overwatering during a non-drought period so that I could get more in the "bank", was not the first thing that came to my mind while reading this thread. Besides being a detriment to the turf and the game, it seems kind of immoral.

More efficient water use at all times would be my focus.

I went through the drought in the 80's in California. No amount of overwatering to boost the average would have helped. One year, we were at 90% reduction-greens and tees only. At the end of that summer, a water department official stood on my 18th tee and said, "Greens only, in two weeks I want to see this tee, brown." What could I say but, "O.K."

[George Pazin]

Don't golf courses pay for water?

[WilliamWang]

george - during times of drought, the price of water doesn't shift to reflect its scarcity, does it?  thus, paying doesn't truly reflect its cost.

[George Pazin]

Then the problem is with the market.

[Matt_Ward]

George:

The issue isn't about the ability of people / courses to PAY for H20. The issue is about the prioritization of water usage and the desire to show some overall SENSITIVITY. It's the arrogance of when people say "I've paid for this" and "I can use it however I see fit" that ticks off a good number of people who aren't golfers (hint: the bulk of the population) and can easily define those who play as spoiled children.

Golf courses need to demonstrate they are KEENLY aware of the issue and not go about with a "business as usual" approach. I said before -- better to define the issue by being proactive than having others define you.

I mean ask yourself this -- how much of ANY golf course needs that much water? Clearly, the putting surfaces do, but the rest of any course could use less and still be worth playing. When I play a number of courses in the Northeast and see tees shots BACKING up in the fairway because the fairways are so overwatered I have to wonder if leadership at many of the clubs is really centered around the fact of reality and public sensibility.

[Eric Pevoto]

Kinda wish I could take that last post back.  I don't really know that much about the issue, just sort of speaking off the cuff.  

Overwatering for the reasons above is certainly irresponsible if not immoral.  Does it happen?  I don't know, but the cost of water notwithstanding, the controls seem backward to me.        

I'll bow out now.

[A.G._Crockett]

We aren't ever going to see water prices based on market forces, since watching the poor die of dehydration while the wealthy water their lawns is a good recipe for some degree of political unrest, given the relative numbers of rich and poor.  However, even if we did go to market pricing for water, golfers would find greens fees escalating, wouldn't we?  Rationing is a better choice on all fronts.  Then the pressure shifts to archies and supers to find ways to build and maintain more efficiently.

[Kelly_Blake_Moran]

The people I have worked with are not sitting back, they are very sensitive to water usage.  What some may preceive as over watering by an inexperienced super. could in fact be over watering because of a poorly designed irrigation system.  Our irrigation designer, Joe Sarkisian, out of Massachusetts, reduces water use by 30% by the way we have worked together to marry the irrigation design to my golf course design.  The grassing plan also has a big impact and may add a few more percentage points.  Some may be gnashing their teeth that nothing is being done, but they must just be looking in the wrong places.

Furthermore, weather patterns seem to be different.  After these next two hurricanes move toward the northeast, the drought may not be as bad.  We may just be receiving our rainwater at different times while we seem to be stuck in a different weather pattern.

A lot of good people are ahead of the issue.  It costs more money up front to save water down the road, so the accountants and management companies are not for the new technology and new designs because it costs more up front.  Squeezing the dollar can have ill effects on creativity and long term maintenance.  But, overall I see very positive trends, very creative ideas.

[David_Tepper]

For the most part, I think anything that reduces the use of water on the vast majority of courses in the US  cannot help but be a positive thing.  Many of these courses are over-watered, too soft and far too obsessed with being "Augusta National green" to begin with. Others, that feature enormous lakes, waterfalls and water fountains, are really a peversion of what are golf course should be all about.  By using more effecient watering systems, more drought resistant grasses and simply accepting the fact that a golf course does not have to be lush green 12 months of the year to play well and look good, my guess is the typical golf course could reduce its water usage by 20% to 40% and actually provide a BETTER golf experience.    

[MainelyJack]

Amen, David. My idea of a Superintendent that belongs on a pedestal is one who believes that the players are entitled to a reasonable amount of roll. Unfortunately, my current GCS doesn't subscribe to that view and we play on a verdant, soft course. This is especially true since we turned one of our par threes near the river into a large water hole which permits us to draw water from the river rather than buy it from the city. Here in Maine we are still in drought conditions, but you wouldn't know it to play the course. Complaints fall on deaf ears for now, but hope springs eternal.

[Craig_Rokke]

With regard to Will's comment about artificial turf, I think
hash-marks denoting yardages would fit right in, too. Just like at the Vet.

In all seriousness, Eric raises a good point about possibly
tying restricted water usage to a percentage of "normal
usage." Some courses  would look for a way to beat the system.

I do predict an increase in waste-water recycling from nearby housing developments. That seems pretty sensible to me.
I also feel that a few more drought -afflicted summers
will put more pressure on the industry to conserve. But
cutting down on grassed areas goes against the trend towards
more length.

The SEI Classic at Waynesborough CC in Paoli PA is an example of conflict in this arena. The tournament was held a few weeks ago, after a rain-free summer. Pretty much all local municipalities restricted the residential use of water. Subsequently, quite a few neighbors to the club put up very vocal resistance to the club's watering habits leading up to the tournament. I think one local woman even made a log of when the water tankers thundered past her home.

[Tom Doak]

"Cutting down on grassed areas [to save water] goes against the trend for more length." -- Craig Rokke

It also goes against the trend for more width, which has been discussed here voluminously.  And it puts all those discussions about equipment in a different light.

In short, the trend toward bigger golf courses is threatened -- threatened by water issues, by the difficulty of assembling large acreages, by the cost of maintaining so much ground.  That's why the equipment argument matters so much.  It isn't just about preserving Merion.  It's about all of the golf courses that may never be built if these trends continue.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Archie,

Florida had some pretty scarey and pricey legislation on the agenda for golf courses.

In many cases golf courses in Florida are the perfect victims.
Land, used by non-voter snow birds.  What could be better for taxing ?

The cost of water will go up, causing clubs to rethink their water policies.  Effluent water costs will rise as well.

Courses that don't begin a long range study and plan on their water usage will be caught when onerous or expensive legislation/costs arrive.

Every time I recommend that the clubs I'm associated with begin this planning, it rains the entire season.

The dilema is, if you cut back now, will you be further cut back later, as opposed to not cutting back now, and possibly being alloted more water later ??  

Tough issue, but I think you have to begin contingency planning now.

[Larry_Rodgers]

It's all about the $$, It takes more $$ in the design to irrigate less area. In the Southwest is is common to have construction costs near $20,000 per irrigated acre. projects in the midwest commonly cost $10,000 per acre to irrigate.
I am glad to see Tom and Kelly Moran discussion this issue as they are in the forefront in setting up budgets that will effect the efficiency of the systems.
Dry is wonderfull!! there is nothing better than palying on a dormant bermuda or bluegrass golf course off season. The extra roll is great, no more size 15 divots and the art of pitch and run is back in the game.
When water conservation of golf courses is used I do not hear any of the conservation of Agriculture users. I believe the US has studies showing 75% of the available fresh water is used in agriculture.
In Denver this past year it was obvious which courses went back to basic soil/fertilizer management in the drought and which ones had to think about it. Some courses flat did not have a back-up water supply plan and did not have the play. In this situation the Supt did not have any resources to keep the fairways or roughs alive. Many courses with "native" areas never looked or played better were achieving 50% reductions in water usage.
There is mention of reuse/effluent/wastewater for irrigation and in many areas this is the only way the golf course will be permitted. The cost of reuse water can be higher that well water because it has to be transfered from the development users to a treatment plant, treated and the shipped back to the golf course. This translates to additional costs for energy and level of treatment. Some areas of the country have 1 use water laws/agreements which have prevented the use of effluient for a second time.
Anything we can do to be responsible users of the precious resource is good and I thank our host for permitting such a topic.
I was once told that water law can be summed up as" Whiskey is for drinkin' and water is for fightin' over"

[Craig_Rokke]

I was reading about Dye's 3rd course at Casa De Campo.
The relative scarcity of fresh water in the Dominican has led the local government to voice their concern over the resort's use of fresh water for irrigation (If you've experienced the side-effects of drinking the resort's water, you'd wish irrigation was all it was used for ) Dye responded by having agronomists develop a strain of saltwater-thirsty grass for the new course. They'll be able to use as much ocean water as they want for irrigating this new type of grass.

[mike_beene]

I thought I was the only one stupid enough to drink the water.When the caddies wouldn't touch it I knew I was in trouble.

[McCloskey]

I would be surprised if Dye was responsible for requesting agronomists to come up with a salt thirsty grass.  Paspalum has been around for a long time, and over the last 2 years has had some significant improvement.  I don't think Dye should be given any credit for development of this grass type.  SeaIsle I will be used quite a bit in the next few years on coastal courses where  fresh water is at a  premium.

[McCloskey]

It is inevitable!

Does the increasing governmental and pressures from special interest groups to limit water usage portend a change of strategy for future golf course architects/builders. Will the classic parkland golf courses many of us hold near and dear to our hearts be replaced by some hybrid that dramatically reduces water usage much like the desert courses discussed in a previous post.

[A_Clay_Man]

I wish those in California respected the rain they do get, as much as those in the Caribean do. I always felt that the infrastructure of most of California was seriously lacking in forethought. Perhaps being a Chicagoan I was alittle biased, but still if there was half the respect for capturing the rain as there is in the islands, this debate would moot. And I suppose it's true everywhere.

I finally received some good news today about the overwatering issues here at Pinon. As I understand it the super and asst, went to a conference for gcsc and the main speaker was from UMN turf grass school who rightly informed them that the proper amount of water for the blue grass here was in the range of 2-3 inches a week. I asked how much they have been using and the answer was around 5. Already the last two days the course has been playing up to it's potential. My friend Joe even reach the green from 205 on the first where as in days past that shot would never have rolled the forty extra yards needed to reach.