What are the maintenance downsides of less water, less chemicals, more organics?

[TEPaul]

"It couldn't hurt, as my findings indicate that simply "sleeping" on it proved ineffective....."


Joe Hancock (or Craig Sweet):

Don't beat around the bush. This is a family oriented website; you know what I mean!

Listen, if I'm going to suggest this would you guys mind at least telling me what kind of bent grass you think is the most sexually attractive looking from the perspective of a male or female humanoid?

I mean, hell, I'll go do it myself if you can tell me the strain of bent grass that has some of the sexual attributes of say Heidi Klum! Come on, you guys are supposed to be the experts so start showing me what you're worth!
 
 
 

[Joe Hancock]

Joe, my understanding of organic ferts. is they need to be broken down before the plant can use them...inorganics don't...that is why, I assume they coat some inorganics so they slow their release

Craig,

I think that is generally true. I seem to remember some turkey manure based fertilizers having a significant amount of urea in them, but it's been awhile and I could be wrong.

Either way, the key is to have some control over applied fertilizers, whether it be an organic fertilizer, or low dosages of synthetic materials. Reducing volatilization (compounds turning into a gas and dissipating into the atmosphere) or leaching (moving through the root zone and making it's way to groundwater or surface water) is more important to me than the small amounts of salts that are a component of almost every fertilizer product that I know of. Organic materials are good in this regard, and the main drawback is, of course, cost.

Joe

[Joe Hancock]

Tom,

You're making this more complicated than it has to be. Which of these two options sounds more appealing:

a) A-4

or

b) L-93

Using standardized American sizing techniques, I think it should be self explanatory.

Glad to be of help.....

[Craig Sweet]

Joe...could the organics be cheaper over time?  Inorganics are not cheap with oil prices so high...and nitrogen moves thru the soil pretty fast...

[Joe Hancock]

Joe...could the organics be cheaper over time?  Inorganics are not cheap with oil prices so high...and nitrogen moves thru the soil pretty fast...

Craig,

The only way it might be cheaper is if there is a build up of nutrients over time to the point of reducing fertilizer applications to almost nil.

Remember that many of the organic, manure based products only have from 5 to 8 percent nitrogen vs. the 20 percent or more that many of the synthetic blends can provide. It is not, IMO, apples to apples, but you have to start somewhere.

Unfortunately, many of the fertility recommendations come from agriculture applications....the difference is, as far as I know, that corn, wheat and cotton have zero obligation to provide firm and fast playing conditions....

[TEPaul]

Thank you Joe! It sounds like L-93 is bigger somehow. That should be an important consideration. But maybe miscegenation isn't necessary at this point. Can you tell me anything important or useful about the differences in the emotional makeup of various bent grasses? I think it was Ken Bakst who gave me some good initial feeback on A-4 about five years ago. Ken said he's become convinced that A-4 really likes to party!

OK, then, it's time you guys stop clowning around on here and get back to the real subject of this thread!

[RJ_Daley]

Unfortunately, many of the fertility recommendations come from agriculture applications....the difference is, as far as I know, that corn, wheat and cotton have zero obligation to provide firm and fast playing conditions....

Also Joe, don't the crops have the advantage of discing or turning over the soil every year, and they don't have to worry about a pesky thatch layer developing and turning the playing surface into a sponge?  With greater application of good compost to generate microbe breakdown of the proteins in the organic applications, isn't there a far more pressing need to aerate, and do it deep enough to really pull some long plugs?  Which of course does lead to more recovery of plugs wounds if you remove them, and more difficulty timing and breaking them up if you just drag them?  Do the tea bag compost innoculants used on greens aid in thatch reduction or stimulate it, or is it a neutral effect? 

One of Tom's original intentions it seems to me (before he killed his own thread with dilleterious digression into the cross breeding of a plant with Heidi Klum - and so early in the morning to have the delleterious tremors  ) was to develop some retorts to the arguments of going more green, organic, minimalistic inorder to use these arguments to persuade a golfing consumer that there are good arguments to do so.  Well, at the end of the day, I think that the only way is to barrage the golf consumer with media.  Tea and crumpet discussions in the members smoking room isn't going to get it done, IMHO.  What is needed are a series of well produced infomercials on the Golf Channel, where high profile pros and supers combine to slowly get the facts out about the benefits and fun in F&F play, and the assurance that the sometimes browned out and rustic look of a dormant grass sward is not a big deal to worry about, and is an opportunity to play a seasonal and exciting style of golf.  I remember a very brief program filler after Hoylake Open where they did do that comparing the toasty FWs of the tournament to some video that following fall when she greened up again to a brilliant and seasonally beautiful light green, yet stayed nice and firm as intended to play.  At the end of the day, you have to hammer people in this society with repetitive sound bites, you can't have a long academic discourse, like us troglodytes have on here.

[JMEvensky]

 

One of Tom's original intentions it seems to me (before he killed his own thread with dilleterious digression into the cross breeding of a plant with Heidi Klum - and so early in the morning to have the delleterious tremors  ) was to develop some retorts to the arguments of going more green, organic, minimalistic inorder to use these arguments to persuade a golfing consumer that there are good arguments to do so.  Well, at the end of the day, I think that the only way is to barrage the golf consumer with media.  Tea and crumpet discussions in the members smoking room isn't going to get it done, IMHO.  What is needed are a series of well produced infomercials on the Golf Channel, where high profile pros and supers combine to slowly get the facts out about the benefits and fun in F&F play, and the assurance that the sometimes browned out and rustic look of a dormant grass sward is not a big deal to worry about, and is an opportunity to play a seasonal and exciting style of golf.  I remember a very brief program filler after Hoylake Open where they did do that comparing the toasty FWs of the tournament to some video that following fall when she greened up again to a brilliant and seasonally beautiful light green, yet stayed nice and firm as intended to play.  At the end of the day, you have to hammer people in this society with repetitive sound bites, you can't have a long academic discourse, like us troglodytes have on here.

I agree and disagree.As a lay person whose interest is from the club's Board perspective(aside from the playability),I think it's critical to spend time in the smoking room(soon to be outdoors,probably) with members.Especially now,the argument can be made on the finances,i.e.,is it really worth the  cost of "lush"?Nowadays,with maintenance budgets being cut,would seem to be the best time to go to the membership and explain the benefits.

[Alan FitzGerald CGCS MG]

The two main downsides to organic fertilizers is that (as was mentioned) they have a very low nutrient content (3/4%N) and they have no consistant availability. To combat this many 'organics' have syntethic nutrients added to spike the fertilizer content and to give more of a response once they are applied. The organics are acted on by the microbes in the soil and as they digest the fertilizer, nitrogen is created or made available. The soil microbiology is more active during the heat of the summer so generally it's the time one gets the best response from organics. As for inorganics not needing to be broken down; this is not necessarily true as it depends on source of the material, some are more readily available than others. Organics are only slower because they are worked on by the microbes.

There has been suggestions that organics, compost teas etc do reduce thatch, maybe, but imo highly unlikely. The microbial activity may munch away at it but too many factors are necessary for it to be a practical solution. I believe there was some research looking into this however I believe it was inconclusive.

Farmers have access to the the ultimate in aeration, ie tilling the soil every year (us Supers get frowned on for making a few little holes), so translating farming to turf is not ideal. All grass plants (turf, grain, pastureland etc) do use nutrients the same way, however golf course turf, as we all know, has to survive under additional stresses.

As for a 'one size fits all' approach, it would never work, but what is (as was mentioned) needed is to change golfers general perception of what a course should look like. Once a membership gets fully behind the idea the change would be relatively easy. The only true benefit over a nonorganic program is the fact the club can say it has gone green and as a byproduct fast and firmer conditions.

Golf needs to go brown to go green!!!!

[Michael Rossi]

I think we need to clear up a couple of items in this discussion.

Fertilizers can be organic composed of organic matter, leaves, human or animal waste, or inorganic made of simple, inorganic chemicals or minerals. They can be naturally occurring compounds such as compost or a mineral deposit, or can be manufactured.

Organic ferts rely upon mother nature breaking them down to be plant available, microbial activity. Inorganic ferts are more readily available for the plant and rely on heat or water to be plant available. Both give the same result. the plant still needs specific nutrients to grow and whether it is inorganic source or organic the plant does not care.

Salt when referenced with fertilizer is not salt like table salt, table salt is sodium. Fertilizers have little sodium, however sodium is necessary for all living things, and like anything too much or not enough has a negative impact. Sodium can bind or plug up a soil the results of this are obvious.

Phosphorous or nitrogen in high concentrations have a negative impact upon turfgrass and aquatic life, however some is necessary for life. The problem is when the concentrations are high like anything, too much red wine, scotch or of a good thing is no longer a good thing.

When either fertilizer is used correctly it has a positive impact on the golf course (environment).

When water is used correctly it allows for the ground game to be utilized, proper release of fertilizer and over all turf health.

Fast and firm conditions can be produced with either type of fert. The upside IMO with the organic approach is the reduced manufacturing costs of the fertilizer products and the fact that it is a more natural approach. Both products will need to be applied, no cost savings (it can be argued that one requires more applications over the other). Less water cost savings, less mowing cost savings, less staff required cost savings.

IMO the players or memberships will need to understand that green is not necessarily equal to healthy or good playing conditions. Lush green turf is actively growing and can repair faster than that of stressed or dormant turf. The costs of maintenance for dormant turf is less than lush, but when carts are restricted to paths due to dormant turf, revenues will be less as more player will walk and some may not play. The courses carbon foot print is reduced under the organic approach and the playing conditions IMO are much better, reduced carbon foot print and better playing conditions are big benefits.

[Craig Sweet]

Alan..your downside to organic ferts. sounds just like Monsanto/Simplott/Dow propaganda. 

Does anyone know to what extent the chemical industry funds turf school research?

[Bradley Anderson]

Alan..your downside to organic ferts. sounds just like Monsanto/Simplott/Dow propaganda. 

Does anyone know to what extent the chemical industry funds turf school research?

Craig,

As I understand it, the research that is really most important at the University level is the kind where new intelligence is discovered. In other words, the top researchers are looking for knowledge that did not exist before. As I understand it, this is how one obtains a professorship.

But most of the research that is done on chemicals and fertilizers are field trial plots that are managed by graduate students. Superintendents are invited once a year to "field days" where we can see the results of hundreds of plots under various trials. In the winter months we attend seminars where the findings of the plots  are presented by heads of Turf departments and graduate students. Technically speaking this is not true "research", but observation.

Products are applied at various rates and timing, and then observed. Some of the chemical trial plots are all about observing what products do in combination with other products at various rates and timing. Basically it is all about learning how to use these tools more effectively. When Daconil first hit the market it was being applied at 6 to 9 ounces, but through observation of field plots we have gotten the rates down to 2 to 3 ounces.

Seriously, this is not something that anyone who is intent upon indoctrinating the greenkeeping profession could be successful at.

In Illinois there are turf plots that are being "observed" under various organic programs using all the main products. But to fairly evaluate those products you need to give them three years or four years, and those results are forthcoming.

I know for a fact that if those plots demonstrate favorable results, those products and programs will find their way in to what greenkeepers are doing. Why wouldn't they? And why would anyone in research not want to present what is true? These guys are mostly lab-rats who enjoy seeing things at the microscopic level - that's all. 

I had a superintendents roundtable here at my club this summer where I invited superintendents to come and just talk turf over dinner. One of the things that came out of that meeting was a big interest in using more organics, and mainly from the stand point of reducing disease pressure, not necessarily from the F&F standpoint.

Craig, I don't what else to say here, but I hope you can just believe me that there is no conspiracy here, and greenkeepers in America are not a bunch of indoctrinated dupes.

[TEPaul]

"One of Tom's original intentions it seems to me (before he killed his own thread with dilleterious digression into the cross breeding of a plant with Heidi Klum - and so early in the morning to have the delleterious tremors    ) was to develop some retorts to the arguments of going more green, organic, minimalistic in order to use these arguments to persuade a golfing consumer that there are good arguments to do so."


RJ:

Thank you for getting this thread back on track and keeping it there this afternoon. I don't know what makes these superintendents carry on with that silliness such as cross-breeding bent grass with Heidi Klum. It must have something to do with being around too many synthetic agronomic chemicals. The latter half of your remark above is exactly what should happen, in my opinion.

[Bradley Anderson]

Craig,

I thought of another aspect to this issue:

When researchers are engaged to speak at conferences, it is almost always at the invitation of an education chair-person who is acting under the auspices of his local chapter of golf course superintendents BOD.

To some degree, research actually is driven by superintendents, because the top professors are expected to provide useful information that is going to make the superintendent more successful. If a professor comes to a regional seminar to merely regurgitate some corporate mantra he will not be invited back to speak, and subsequently his program will not be very effective at recruiting new students.

The tail that is wagging the dog here, is really the expectations of the golfers.  

[TEPaul]

"One of the things that came out of that meeting was a big interest in using more organics, and mainly from the stand point of reducing disease pressure, not necessarily from the F&F standpoint."


Bradley:

Could you explain to some of the laymen on here in as much detail as possible why less organics (more synthetic chemicals et al?) increases disease pressure?

If this is the case to some fair degree, it would seem to be a very good reason for golf maintenance programs to move towards organics.

[RJ_Daley]

Tom, not to jump Bradley's answer to you question, but in the mean while, there are a plethora of good reading materials to explain this stuff.  Here is one link that leads to many others:

http://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/compost-tea-notes.pdf

I used to read articles on the whole organic approach when they were featured in Golf Course Management magazine.  Back in the 90s they had many ongoing articles.  I can't say about lately as I dropped my subscription. 

One thing that I remember both in the GCM mag and in reading old greenskeeper mags of articles from the 1920s that I found at the UW Babcock Library was that composting is an art.  The proper collection of biodegradeable plant material and addition to catalyst decompostion material, and years of proper windrowing and turning the stuff, was a bit of an craft passed along by word of OJT from wise old greenskeepers that developed techniques.  Then the whole compost tea and extract methods were also and remain a bit like a local brew house or brew meister recipe. 

I read where a number of supers were trying these methods to get a natural and environmentally efficient method of dealing with innoculating their greens with biodiverse beneficial microbials.   While I'm guessing most folks eyes are glazing over about now, I used to enjoy those accounts.

But, here is the thing I'd ask Bradley.  With plenty of anecdotal accounts of these organic methods (it seems Cornell has been a leader in exploring these organic methods formally) why don't more turf programs have a section of courses on composting, tea and extract usage, etc.  Or, do they and I'm not knowing much about it. 

I attended a few turf days at OJ Noer, and took some certification courses there, for the hell of it.  I enjoyed the student researcher expositions of their various turf plot projects.  I enjoyed the great bug lectures by world famous Dr. Koval (Father of one of my ex-police collegues) who had the most amazing collection of insects from around the world and was one hell of an interesting lecturer.  Dr Rossi was there for a while too.  And, our State's Dean of the Supers, recently retired, Monroe Miller was always about.

Yet, I don't remember anybody associated with the UW or OJ Noer in those days putting on organic turf management as a formal subject, including these composting techniques, etc.   But, that was a while ago now and my memory is probably rocky, and I am not up on any of that since the late 90s. 

[Eric_Terhorst]

Alan..your downside to organic ferts. sounds just like Monsanto/Simplott/Dow propaganda. 

Mr. Sweet,

Could you please deconstruct Mr. FitzGerald's post and tell us exactly what you think is propaganda and why? Doubtless the practitioners here, so dependent as they are on the companies you name and other evildoers, could benefit from your encyclopedic  knowledge of the alternative methods of turf management.   

While you're at it, since we have readers here from all over the globe, please comment in the context of differing climes and soil regimes in the U.S., U.K., Australia, and New Zealand. 

Thanks 

[RJ_Daley]

Eric, Craig did use a  at the end of that.  I wonder if he was doing so as one turf manager to another, in the realm of they all experience getting pestered and full court pressed to buy the fert and chem reps products.  What are the chem and fert guys to do, say buy and use more compost methods? 

[Donnie Beck]

Not sure what all the fuss about Organic or Synthetic fertilizers is all about.  As far as I know Nitrogen can only be taken up by the plant in the form or Nh4+ or NO3-. No matter what type of fertilizer you put down it is going to be broken down into one of those forms before the plant can use it. In my opinion both have a time and a place. It comes down the the release characteristics you are looking for.

[Craig Sweet]

Eric....I think there's a lot of myths out there about organics being inferior to inorganics...costs, application rates, etc. that just aren't accurate...and my experience in the garden center/landscape business has been that these myths are spread by the chemical company salesmen/spokespeople....I have heard them first hand...better living through chemistry.

[Craig Sweet]

Sorry...I left out effectiveness in the list of myths.

[Bradley Anderson]

"One of the things that came out of that meeting was a big interest in using more organics, and mainly from the stand point of reducing disease pressure, not necessarily from the F&F standpoint."


Bradley:

Could you explain to some of the laymen on here in as much detail as possible why less organics (more synthetic chemicals et al?) increases disease pressure?

If this is the case to some fair degree, it would seem to be a very good reason for golf maintenance programs to move towards organics.

Tom,

There are a handful of guys who have been able to use organic programs so successfully that they do not use any fungicides, but I think (not 100% sure) that a lot of material is applied to achieve that - effecting playability. Moreover, I'm not so sure that those programs are truly more environmentally sound than the programs where moderate amounts of organics are applied, and fungicide use is reduced. This all has something to do with the amino acids in the organics that strengthen the plant against disease. But you would still have to spray fungicides at lower rates during high stress situations. What I am still not sure of is how much material is applied. And I wonder if every golf course is going to react differently too. Also, I am pretty sure that not every golf course is going to be conveniently located near a reliable source of compost at the volumns that are required for fairway acerage.

[Eric_Terhorst]

I think there's a lot of myths out there about organics being inferior to inorganics...costs, application rates, etc. that just aren't accurate...these myths are spread by the chemical company salesmen/spokespeople...

Craig, is it possible there are similar myths about using so-called "organic" methods of landscape and turf management?  Aren't there people and companies that have an economic incentive to turn professionals away from "synthetic" chemicals and toward the "organic" chemicals contained in the "natural" fertilizers?  

[Bradley Anderson]

Eric, Craig did use a  at the end of that.  I wonder if he was doing so as one turf manager to another, in the realm of they all experience getting pestered and full court pressed to buy the fert and chem reps products.  What are the chem and fert guys to do, say buy and use more compost methods? 

The products are not purchased directly from manufacturers, but from local companies that sell the products. Even Scotts is now sold under the name of Andersons, by local distributers. Local distributers are privately owned mom and pop business people. They will carry the organic products but ONLY IF THEY WORK beccause they do not want to be called back on product failure. Really when we figure how to use the stuff it will sell, because WE ARE A CAPITALISTIC NATION.  

My wife is thinking I love you guys more than her, and now I gotta go or I'm dead..............

[RJ_Daley]

Bradley, in one of the pubs I read, it states that on greens, 1 gallon/1000sf is recommended for anaerobic extracts and aerobic teas, weekly to bi-weekly.   How would that effect sprayer nozzle wear-out timeframes?  Is the organic material less corrosive than most fungicide formulations?