News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Dave_Wilber

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #25 on: November 10, 2009, 01:57:51 AM »
I sure have gotten a lot of email about this. Glad people are reading and appreciate the nice comments.

---------
Dave Wilber
Wilber Consulting--Coaching, Writing Broadcasting, Agronomy
davewilber@yahoo.com
twitter: @turfgrasszealot
instagram @turfgrasszeal
"No one goes to play the great courses we talk about here because they do a nice bowl of soup. Soup helps, but you can’t putt in it." --Wilber

Alan FitzGerald CGCS MG

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #26 on: November 10, 2009, 09:40:09 AM »
I know I'm a llittle late getting back here but I'll echo the sentiments that this isn't really a technical paper just more of a debate starter (which obviously it did here).

As for using fescues, they will work in the right envirnoment and managed the right way. Most of the courses in the UK that go the fescue route do add browntop bents also to the mixes and rarely have pure fescue monostands. I think the guys pushing sustainability (especially those in the UK) are the ones pushing a sustainable monostand that can withstand anything, whereas in reality that is not possible if you are doing true sustainability where only the strong survive. Grass adapts and the different cultivars will adapt as needed if left to their own vices. Of course the toughest sell to a club is not so prefect conditioning but playibility shouldn't be effected.

btw Dave nice post!
Golf construction & maintenance are like creating a masterpiece; Da Vinci didn't paint the Mona Lisa's eyes first..... You start with the backdrop, layer on the detail and fine tune the finished product into a masterpiece

Dan_Lucas

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #27 on: November 10, 2009, 10:15:41 AM »
Vargas wrote this in response to an article Tom Mead wrote regarding sustainability and reducing inputs on turf. Joe made it a personal attack on a guy that's been in the turf business for 30 years or so. One of Vargas' biggest faults is that in his view, if he hasn't seen it, then it can't be done. I remember in my first class with him in 1980 he asked the students to raise their hands if their course had less than 50 or 60 percent poa (with bent greens). Then he asked those to keep their hands up if their course was over 8 years old. Three or four still had their hands up. He said "You're wrong, it can't happen."

He is right in many areas in this article. Fescue cannot be a monostand, but neither is any other grass. You can't keep poa out in any climate that favors it. And as Dave so eloquently said, you must choose grasses that are suited to what you are trying to achieve. What you can do is provide conditions that give a competitive edge to your chosen grasses over poa. The less water and fertilizer you use, the harder it is for poa to gain ground. This in turn assures that any poa that survives in this environment is almost as tough as the chosen varieties. There are thousands of genotypes of poa and some of them make very good turfgrasses. Let me emphasize that the amount of fertilizer and water needed to provide ideal conditions is different at every golf course. At Kingsley we have ideal conditions with sandy soils, good drainage and air movement, VERY low traffic and an owner and membership that is completely behind the "firm and fast, we don't care what color it is" maintenance program.

 We are constantly working at what we can do to give our bent tees and greens and fescue fairway grasses a competitive edge over the poa. We don't spray fungicides on our fairways. We had a problem with microdochium patch 3 or 4 years ago and had to spot spray 2 or 3 areas. We found that the thatch layer in the fairway had gotten too thick so we started a more aggressive aerifying program and the disease disappeared. We do spot spray for weeds and ants.

You don't have to grow fescue to grow grass this way. I have grown bentgrass fairways, bleuegrass/ poa fairways and now fescue fairways with the same philosophy. Use the lowest amounts of water and fertilizer that you can to keep your grass healthy and control thatch aggressively. Your grass will handle stress better, you will use less fungicides and your playing surface will be better.

JC Jones

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #28 on: November 10, 2009, 10:25:02 AM »
And to back Dan's comments up, those of us who have been lucky enough to play Kingsley know that the turf there is as good, if not better, than anywhere.

Joe Hancock and I were talking about it this past weekend, the turf at Kingsley is second to none in this country.
I get it, you are mad at the world because you are an adult caddie and few people take you seriously.

Excellent spellers usually lack any vision or common sense.

I know plenty of courses that are in the red, and they are killing it.

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #29 on: November 10, 2009, 10:46:13 AM »
Dave Wilber,

A most informative, well-written piece you contributed here.  Could you or someone else familiar with the concept of "sustainable golf" provide a short summary of its thesis?

I too had the good fortune of spending some time with Joe Hancock during the Dixie Cup this weekend.  Among the many things we discussed was the critically important role the superintendent plays in the golf industry, and how in my experience with a sizable number of them I had found relative few who could or would communicate effectively.  Speaking with Joe and now seeing Dave Wilber's piece with follow-up comments from turf professionals inspires hope that golf can turn the corner.

With regards to not the grass but other factors being the problem, was this the situation at Spanish Bay?  My then partner and I had a short discussion with Tom Watson years ago on this very subject and he insinuated that it (the fescue) should have worked but didn't.  He wasn't defensive about it at all, but nor did he have any explanations as to why they had to go to some other grass.



 

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #30 on: November 10, 2009, 11:28:17 AM »
Just to follow up on Dan Lucas' comments:

Dr. Vargas has been totally against the idea of fescue for twenty years.  He told us when we were building High Pointe it absolutely wouldn't work and he was basically rooting for it to fail, instead of trying to figure it out.  Of course, he is a professor of turfgrass pathology [i.e. diseases], and does a lot of research for herbicides, so his worldview is that turf "medicines" are entirely safe and he doesn't like anyone talking about sustainability if it implies those chemicals could be anything but 100% safe.

Lou:

I think the #1 problem at Spanish Bay was that the ownership was only committed to it to the extent that they thought they needed to be in order to obtain the permits to build the course.  Once they built it, they didn't really care much what the turf was ... and it's pretty easy to let Poa take over on the Monterey Peninsula.

On top of that, it's hard to manage fescue greens when there are fast bent/poa greens just down the road, and everybody playing your course just played faster greens the day before.  There were a lot of complaints about the greens, and when they gave up trying to keep the fescue on the greens, they pretty much gave up on the fairways, too.  I went out and peeked at the course the last time I was in Monterey, and the only fescue I could find was in the roughs.


Bradley Anderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #31 on: November 10, 2009, 11:41:57 AM »
Are fescue fairways dollar spot resistant in the midwest region?



« Last Edit: November 10, 2009, 11:45:29 AM by Bradley Anderson »

Micah Woods

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #32 on: November 10, 2009, 11:48:59 AM »
A general description of sustainable golf would be "optimizing the playing quality of the golf course in harmony with the conservation of its natural environment under economically sound and socially responsible management". This is the definition according to The R&A Golf Course Committee.

https://www.bestcourseforgolf.org/content/sustainability

For a short summary of the sustainable golf thesis, I would say that it is to minimize inputs (water, fertilizer, pesticides, petroleum products, electricity) while providing the best possible playing surface. Grass selection plays a crucial role in this because different grasses, in different growing environments, will require hugely varying inputs (of water, fertilizer, pesticides, petroleum products, electricity) to produce the desired playing surfaces.

I think the Golf Environment Organisation's certification criteria are a good practical guideline to look at for most golf courses. They can be downloaded at this site:

http://www.golfenvironment.org/certification/about-certification/

The idea must be to choose a grass that is well-adapted to the particular growing environment of the course, while at the same time managing the facility with an eye to minimizing inputs (and producing the desired playing conditions).



« Last Edit: November 10, 2009, 12:10:51 PM by Micah Woods »

Ian Larson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #33 on: November 10, 2009, 12:31:52 PM »
ANY type of grass is going to be a "sustainable" grass type if it is well suited for its environment. Soils are important when it comes to grass type selection, but the most important factor is the overall climate. Well drained soil or not, too much rain and humidity is going to be the demise of any grass thats not suited for it. To infer Vargas is against Fescue because hes getting a kick back from fungicide companies or something is ridiculous. Vargas is a grass man, period. Hes going to tell you whether or not a grass is suited well regardless of the answer he thinks you want to hear. He doesnt care if the architect or owner has a vision for his design with Fescue as the turf so the character of the course is marketable with all of the "links golf" buzzwords. So when I hear him speak or read his articles I think of him down to earth and very genuine. What I took from the article presented in this thread is that Vargas is doing nothing but saying that fescue will only be successful and "sustainable" in the perfect situation with the climate and the soil. Spanish Bay or the courses Vargas referenced in Michigan are examples where Fescue was pushed, and probably for marketing purposes, and it failed. And Im sure when we dwelve deeper into it there are numerous other examples where it was pushed for the wrong reasons and failed. Sure. It can be sown, germinate and grown in as a playing surface. But does that mean its going to be completely happy in its environment? No. Its going to have to be artificially resecitated to survive and fend off the better suited grasses that deserve to be growing there. And that is the antithesis of "sustainability".

Brett Hochstein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #34 on: November 10, 2009, 12:49:29 PM »
I think Micah is sort of onto the whole basis of sustainability as it relates to golf.  It is really about considering these factors--environment (local and global), enjoyment of the game, and financial solvency.  Take these things and analyze your site, climate, and intended clientele, then go out and make the most of them. 

Take golf in the desert for example.  There is no reason for turfgrass to ever grow in Arizona.  It isn't native, it is not environmentally sound to maintain, and it costs a lot to maintain.  But, for whatever reason, lots of people live in the desert, and people have the right and should play golf.  Thus, we should have golf courses in the desert, even with the given that turfgrass has no business there, because then you are taking away the 2nd factor I listed above--enjoyment of the game.  What we can do though in maintaining those courses is taking what we have with the site and climate and making the most of it re: irrigation, fertilizer, pesticides etc.  I have seen very little of desert golf in person, but outside perspective would guess a place like Rustic Canyon is doing a good job of this.

Sustainability has to be practical, too.  I'm working on an environmental report for a local golf course with the intent of maximizing its environmental potential, but to truly maximize it you would ruin some playing aspects of the game as well as some aesthetics both on and off site, which I just don't believe you can and should do.  We are humans, and we have a responsibility to our world, but sometimes we have to step back and ask if we are taking too much from ourselves in the process.  In my opinion, that is a part of sustainability as well.
"From now on, ask yourself, after every round, if you have more energy than before you began.  'Tis much more important than the score, Michael, much more important than the score."     --John Stark - 'To the Linksland'

http://www.hochsteindesign.com

Brett Hochstein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #35 on: November 10, 2009, 01:02:20 PM »
Ian,
 I don't know of any courses in Michigan that were marketed for fescue, if for nothing else than the fear that it would fail.  The only course I know of to market fescue is Kingsbarns in an effort to show that they provide a "true" links experience, which I must say, they do pull off quite well.

Tangentially, you find more of an even sward of fescue at Kingsbarns than say the older links.  I would add Kingsley into that as well (BTW--Fescue can't grow on fairways in Northern Michigan?  Seems to do well to me, and almost more favorably so than some of the links here in Scotland, esp. as more of a pure blend.  Northern Michigan has one of the best climate and soil combinations for fescue outside the UK.)  The reason though for the better swards of fescue I think is because these courses, Kingsley and Kingsbarns, started from scratch whereas the St Andrews Links just sort of evolved over time and have managed for what they have, which is the proper approach since what they have (and they have EVERYTHING) works just fine as it is.
"From now on, ask yourself, after every round, if you have more energy than before you began.  'Tis much more important than the score, Michael, much more important than the score."     --John Stark - 'To the Linksland'

http://www.hochsteindesign.com

Ian Larson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #36 on: November 10, 2009, 01:32:11 PM »
Brett,

"BTW--Fescue can't grow on fairways in Northern Michigan?  Seems to do well to me, and almost more favorably so than some of the links here in Scotland, esp. as more of a pure blend.  Northern Michigan has one of the best climate and soil combinations for fescue outside the UK."

-Im not sure who said Fescue cant grow on fairways in Michigan, Im assuming that is an indirect quote of Vargas. But Im sure youve seen Fescue fairways doing well in Northern Michigan. But the measuring stick to how well Fescue works and if its the right selection of turf for that environment, in relation to sustainability, is if minimal inputs are used in its maintenance. Is there minimal disease pressure thus requiring minimal fungicides. Is there minimal pressure from other invasive plant species, thus not requiring herbicide inputs. Im not saying I know whether or not North Michigan is well suited for Fescue as I wasnt being as specific as you are with locale and clubs, but if fescue is used at the sites you say it is and it is thriving with no competition or disease pressure.....then that is the correct grass type and it is sustainable. But if the fescue is getting attacked by diease and being sprayed by fungicides, or sooo much fungicide is put down preventively so you never see disease......fescue was the wrong choice and is not sustainable. The same can be said if the superintendent and the fescue are constantly in a battle to prevent poa invasion.

If I choose to purchase a used car that constantly leaks oil to where I have to check the level every week and add a quart....is that car considered a sustainable car? Is that car even considered a good selection? Absolutely not. Its the antithesis to sustainability and in even broader terms its a bad purchase choice.


Brett Hochstein

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #37 on: November 10, 2009, 02:03:34 PM »
Ian,

Here is what I was basing it off.  It is a bit vague, and maybe there is not enough context.  It was just my interpretation after reading the other posts as well.

An interesting article. Page 20.

Quote
The fine leaf fescues are adapted
to northern, oceanic climates and do not perform well when planted in other climates.
They are also adapted to sandy soils and do not grow well in fine-textured soils that are
susceptible to compaction. Planting them in environments they are not adapted to is one
sure way to guarantee the invasion of annual bluegrass. Yes, they do fine in the sandy golf
course roughs of Northern Michigan, but they are certainly not in pure stands, and they
are not mowed at fairway heights.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/18468138/Course-Conditions-Summer-2009


Let me be the first to say I am not "all fescue, all the time," also that you weren't necessarily insinuating that.  I will often talk it up a bit more before adding the caveat "..in the right conditions," especially with those not as keen because I am trying to change the general attitude of golfers and get people to think a bit more outside the box.

Of course it makes no sense, environmentally or financially, to push fescue when it is not the ideal species for the site.  That is not sustainable as I just defined it a few posts ago.  Sustainability is about managing for what is best for the site AND best for the golfer--taking those two virtues and maximizing them as a whole.  Dan at Kingsley just outlined the fungicide use on the fairways, and it is very minimal--a rare case-type event.  Say it wasn't that way though, and you did have to spray often as you mentioned.  Then you have to question how much is too much?  What are the alternatives, and will they compare negatively or favorably to the current?  Then you have to consider those alternatives from the other side--the enjoyment of the golfer--and weigh them against your environmental impact.  Ok, so alternative B is going to cut back on some fungicides, but it is coarse textured and play much slower, thus ruining the architectural intent and integrity of the golf itself.  Are the environmental problems enough to make the switch?  Conversely, would building a fast playing golf course in a place that requires extremely high inputs and chemical use be the best idea?  I don't think so; I think you strive for something different.  Golf can be interesting aerially too (though not quite as much ;)), and in a case like that it make the most sense.  Golf sustainability is about asking the hard questions and achieving a balance for both the environment and the golfer.  Afterall, aren't we a part of the environment too?
"From now on, ask yourself, after every round, if you have more energy than before you began.  'Tis much more important than the score, Michael, much more important than the score."     --John Stark - 'To the Linksland'

http://www.hochsteindesign.com

Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #38 on: November 10, 2009, 02:35:20 PM »
Brett,

-Im not sure who said Fescue cant grow on fairways in Michigan, Im assuming that is an indirect quote of Vargas. But Im sure youve seen Fescue fairways doing well in Northern Michigan. But the measuring stick to how well Fescue works and if its the right selection of turf for that environment, in relation to sustainability, is if minimal inputs are used in its maintenance. Is there minimal disease pressure thus requiring minimal fungicides. Is there minimal pressure from other invasive plant species, thus not requiring herbicide inputs. Im not saying I know whether or not North Michigan is well suited for Fescue as I wasnt being as specific as you are with locale and clubs, but if fescue is used at the sites you say it is and it is thriving with no competition or disease pressure.....then that is the correct grass type and it is sustainable. But if the fescue is getting attacked by diease and being sprayed by fungicides, or sooo much fungicide is put down preventively so you never see disease......fescue was the wrong choice and is not sustainable. The same can be said if the superintendent and the fescue are constantly in a battle to prevent poa invasion.

If I choose to purchase a used car that constantly leaks oil to where I have to check the level every week and add a quart....is that car considered a sustainable car? Is that car even considered a good selection? Absolutely not. Its the antithesis to sustainability and in even broader terms its a bad purchase choice.



Ian,

what grass do you know that does not suffer from competition or desease pressure at sometime or other? And if the climate suits Poa, which grass will keep it out on its own strengths?

Ian Larson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #39 on: November 10, 2009, 03:12:36 PM »
Jon,

I dont know of any grass that doesnt suffer disease pressure from one time or another. But there are certainly certain species that are susceptible to more disease pressure in certain climates. So its up to the owner/developer/superintendent to do the work to ensure the best grass is selected based on its performance in that region. Not because its Fescue and "thats what the true links courses have". Between correct grass selection and intelligent turf management disease can be kept to a minimum.

As far as invasion, I think you know my stance on turf and what should be embraced going back to the "Why the hatred towards poa" thread. I believe in natural selection. If poa is aggressively invasive in a certain region, and the cost to keep it out competes to the cost of just maintaining it....poa should be allowed to invade and be maintained.

For the record I dont think there is such a thing as a "sustainable" grass type in golf turf. The term "sustainable" means able to support itself. I cant think of a grass type out there that can support itself. Growing grass for golf turf is unnatural to the natural growth habits of grass. It always needs support from the superintendent. The point is to choose turf varieties that can be maintained with the least inputs required, only to attempt to become more sustainable.

So to answer your question Jon, I dont think there is a grass that will keep out poa on its own. So in the climates that favor poa and poa is the right selection of turf....poa should be promoted and maintained. In the climates that dont favor poa, poa should be kept out. For example, in the Southeast United States poa does very poorly. It should not be promoted even when it tries its hardest to get in. But because the supers in the southeast have bermuda as the dominant grass type AND they have heat and humidity working in their favor....it doesnt take much to keep poa out of their stands.


Brett,

I dont consider grass type and its sustainability to have anything to do with the golfer when it comes to grass selection and its agronomics. Yes , we can make a correlation between the 2 in about 2 degrees. But sustainability in the turf field is about choosing the correct turf variety and species according to the region. I dont think we will have to worry too much about a course grained turf being used when it shouldnt and lowering the quality of playability for the golfer. I dont think there is a coarse grained turf out there that is so course that it takes away so much from the golf course and its conditions for playability. Any warm season clubs are using warm season grasses, and warm season grasses have developed tremendously into finer textured plants. After working at Riviera and LACC I now have a better opinion of Kikuyu and Common Bermuda. With proper cultivation practices the most coarsest turf out there can be maintained just as firm and fast as any cool season / finer grained grasses.

So my point is the grass type selection and its "sustainability" is all for the grasses success and its environmental impact. The golfers enjoyment isnt part of that (especially if your talking about a warm season coarse textured plant) because no matter what the texture is....it can be maintained to uphold the architectural intent of the golf course.

Dan_Lucas

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #40 on: November 10, 2009, 03:57:22 PM »
Brad A.

The "Midwest" has a lot of different climates. I wouldn't plant fescue in Michigan south of the Grand Rapids to Saginaw line. Above there, IF you have the right growing conditions and low traffic for the first 3 years there is not a better surface. The newer dwarf bluegrasses are very good and handle heavy traffic much better than fescue.

There are big differences even within species in disease resistance. The fescue at Kingsley doesn't have a problem with dollar spot. It is much more disease resistant than bent.  The poa and bent patches in our fairways get it, but that's OK here. We use a higher threshold for disease problems than a lot of other places. Some supers are not allowed to have any brown patches on the course. Here, I get comments after a fert. application or a rainy stretch that "the course is too green." I allow diseases to go further than most before spraying because the weakest plants are the ones that succumb to disease pressure first. We don't want those plants anyway. The courses that are in the business of keeping every grass plant on the course alive are just watering down the gene pool with weak plants that won't handle stress.

The biggest factors in controlling disease are contolling water and thatch. Two courses side by side with the same grasses can have very different disease problems if one controls those and the other doesn't.

Bradley Anderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #41 on: November 10, 2009, 04:54:52 PM »
Dan,

The reason I ask if fescue gets dollar spot is because with my experience growing bent/poa f-ways in the midwest, dollar spot is the only disease that I need to spray for, and on a good years that's 6 sprays - on a bad year maybe 9 sprays. 

The other question I have with respect to fescue is how much water it requires compared to bent/poa. Again in my experience, bent/poa f-ways can be allowed to get really dry until it starts to wilt, but even then you could let it go longer without watering if it wasn't for cart traffic on the wilted turf. So is fesuce that way too? I mean, does fescue track from cart traffic when it is wilting? I'm guessing that it doesn't because the fescue leaf blades just don't wilt as quickly right? Isn't that the big benefit of fescue: the leaves retain turgidity with way less water requirement than bent/poa?

The other cost factor is mowing. I have never been one to mow bent/poa fairways more than 3 times a week. Can you mow fescue fairways less than that?


Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #42 on: November 10, 2009, 06:25:53 PM »
'But there are certainly certain species that are susceptible to more disease pressure in certain climates. So its up to the owner/developer/superintendent to do the work to ensure the best grass is selected based on its performance in that region. Not because its Fescue and "thats what the true links courses have". Between correct grass selection and intelligent turf management disease can be kept to a minimum.'

Ian,

Thanks for the very good answer.
I don't believe anyone has suggested that fescue should be chosen if it is not suitable. Any grass type will be susceptible to desease in a climate not suited to it or through apoor management regime. This is not a problem that fescue has any more than any other grass type.

Dave_Wilber

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #43 on: November 11, 2009, 12:36:25 AM »
Ian,
 I don't know of any courses in Michigan that were marketed for fescue, if for nothing else than the fear that it would fail.  The only course I know of to market fescue is Kingsbarns in an effort to show that they provide a "true" links experience, which I must say, they do pull off quite well.



I was on the team that selected grasses for Kingsbarns (along with Walter Woods and Dr. Paul Miller and Stuart McColm...directed of course by Mark Parsinen) and I can tell you that the surface is much more Browntop dominant by seed count. That was always one of the interesting things to me about the UK. I'd be listening to a lecture about fescue while standing on a mostly Browntop sward. Over time, the fescue has done well, but one can see the Browntop and the Smooth Stalked Meadowgrass in there as well. That's what makes it cool!

---------
Dave Wilber
Wilber Consulting--Coaching, Writing Broadcasting, Agronomy
davewilber@yahoo.com
twitter: @turfgrasszealot
instagram @turfgrasszeal
"No one goes to play the great courses we talk about here because they do a nice bowl of soup. Soup helps, but you can’t putt in it." --Wilber

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #44 on: November 11, 2009, 12:53:31 AM »
Spanish Bay or the courses Vargas referenced in Michigan are examples where Fescue was pushed, and probably for marketing purposes, and it failed.

Ian:

I am the architect of one of those courses, and I can only assure you that fescue was not "pushed" "for marketing purposes".  We chose it because we thought it was the best choice for low-input turf management and that it would provide the best playing surface for a $40 golf course in this climate.  Unfortunately, we didn't get to follow through on its management, and the management changed policies; but luckily for me Dan Lucas has been proving for the past few years that maybe we weren't wrong in what we were trying.

You are welcome to question my results but not my motives.  And you should really go and see Kingsley or Pacific Dunes or Barnbougle before you try to school me any more about what kind of playing surface fescue provides.  I have seen a lot more of it than you and Dr. Vargas put together.


Dave_Wilber

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #45 on: November 11, 2009, 01:08:55 AM »
On the idea of Sustainability...

I'm getting a little weary of the word sustainable being tossed around so much. There are all kinds of ways to define that and then even more ways to apply the word towards whatever agenda is being supported...or torn down.

I grew up in an agricultural environment. In fact, I came to the golf course world as an agriculturalist more than I came as a golfer. So I tend to define the sustainability of an agricultural system in terms more along the lines of looking at an Amish farm versus a more "modern" system.

 I think a system that requires inputs doesn't disqualify it from being sustainable. All agricultures require a degree of input..some more and some less. So the notion that something is sustainable if it requires nothing isn't really the way I would look at it.

A sustainable system (or a developed sustainable system) in true definition means that a degree of productivity can be accomplished without the need for inputs that are "single use" type additions. Indeed, in the true sense, a sustainable agriculture uses all parts of the biotic pyramid to raise a crop and in turn, the desired yield can be taken from the system without the system failing.

Real world. I took over a property that was agronomicaly tired. As I looked at the revitalization of the property there were big gaps in the management of holistic resources available. In the time before me, every day, the section guys mowed greens, filled their utility vehicles with clippings, came into the shop and shoveled those clippings into the dumpster. So we created a compost pile, stopped sending good carbon off to the landfill and used that compost, returning it to the course. Simple. Carbon from leaves, tree work etc, was also composted and returned to the course. Soils were tired, so instead of just the usual synthetic NPK fertilizers, we used a strategy to increase mineral inputs. Lime and Gypsum and organic oriented, mined materials and minerals were added in mass and the result was a performance oriented soil that needed less in the way of NPK inputs and manual intervention. A layer of thatch had developed and instead of stripping it off, carbon based materials, rich in bio-diversity were added to the program to create better degradation. Water, while a natural input, was used sparingly and the intent was not to water unless we had done everything else and when we did water, decrease the opportunity for runoff and allow that water to penetrate soil and oxygenate that soil. A long history of preventative fungicide spraying was replaced with curative treatments only. Weeds, while undesirable, were looked at as indicators of soil issues and problem solving inputs were made instead of symptom treating efforts. Overall, pesticide use was taken to almost nil and $ spent was diverted to areas that were more of an investment in agronomy (seed, compost, minerals, bio dynamic inputs) versus consumable single use products (pesticides, synthetic fertilizers, wetting agents).

More Real World. In construction, we saw time and again that even the most well meaning clearing and grubbing efforts were taking away topsoils or topsands and were either turning those under or sending them away or destroying their structure. A change in soil handling methods left soils that were not beaten up by construction. Handling traffic (a fairway that is treated like a haul road will always look like a haul road) was also of prime concern and we did a lot of "sustainable" work in managing traffic on sites. Many of the courses you all know and love here that are newer (or restored) have had painstaking efforts made to handle soil better and do so with an eye for soil as an asset rather than just a plant holding mechanism.

Sustainable Golf is real. Lots of folks are doing it. Requires a dramatic shift in thinking and a degree of thumbing the nose at the agronomic old guard, but it is being done and will continue to grow as a movement. Regardless of grass type.

I'm stoked that this discussion is going on. Good for all of us who love the game!!
---------
Dave Wilber
Wilber Consulting--Coaching, Writing Broadcasting, Agronomy
davewilber@yahoo.com
twitter: @turfgrasszealot
instagram @turfgrasszeal
"No one goes to play the great courses we talk about here because they do a nice bowl of soup. Soup helps, but you can’t putt in it." --Wilber

Brad Fleischer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #46 on: November 11, 2009, 01:13:37 AM »
A little off topic but I can vouch for Dan getting yelled at(I mean commented on) as I personally gave him some grief on my last round of the year for putting to much water down. My god I was making ball marks !!!  Now Dan stop that sh@t !!!

Brad

Ian Larson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #47 on: November 11, 2009, 03:30:53 AM »
Tom,

I have know idea what you are talking about when you say I am trying to school you on the playing surface Fescue provides. Nor have I questioned your motives or your results. I have only been talking in broad terms about turf. The only specifics I cited was, as your quote shows, Monterrey and whatever courses Vargas referred to. To tell you the truth, I had absolutely no idea of what courses Vargas referenced in his article. Nor did I know who the architect was, and I really don't care. Because it doesn't matter. And where did I try to school Mr. Tom Doak on the playing surface Fescue provides? I didn't.

All I have said on here is that any type of turf variety can be the sustainable variety if it's the right choice for that climate. Fescue isn't the only turf out there that can be "sustainable".....whatever that means anyway because the term isn't being used right when referring to only Fescue. I've also said that I believe the best grass is the dominant grass. If fescue fairways lose a battle to poa why fight it? It's obviously a sign that it's the naturally dominant grass. The only thing I said about fescue was that if the scale has been tipped from money being spent to maintain it to money being spent to fight off everything else......fescue isn't the right choice nor is that "sustainable" management.

As far as the marketing thing, am I wrong in saying that clubs with Fescue have included the fact that they have fescue in their marketing to some extent? This day and age where clubs are trying to set themselves apart from fierce competition that they make a point to NOT use the one thing that DOES set them apart? Mentioning Fescue and links golf in marketing / advertising doesn't exist? Really?

I am all for Fescue in situations that call for it. And I'm sure Dan Lucas is kicking ass with it up in North Michigan at one of YOUR designs. But I don't think the thread was about Tom Doak and his designs, nor were my posts. Ill give you that you've seen more than me, that's a given. But Vargas?!?! Thats a pretty ballsy statement to make just because the guy disagreed with you or whatever bad blood there is between you two. I don't know anything about it nor do I care, but it's safe to say he doesn't recommend something just to promote fungicide use or whatever wild claims have been made. I'm sure I was lumped in there because I mentioned how much I respect the guy or some nonsense.

I didn't see the thread as about Doak or his designs grassed with fescue, but since you want to make it about  that maybe you can tell us about how you come about the process of selecting Fescue as the primary turf for some of your designs. What research is done for the selection process and who's involved.   

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #48 on: November 11, 2009, 10:03:54 AM »
Ian:

I will stand by the quote I took from your last post ... you said fescue was chosen for marketing purposes, and I am telling you it isn't for that.  Do the courses that choose fescue say so in their marketing?  Damn right they do ... they have to educate the golfer on why firm and fast and brown is a good choice, because it is the dead opposite of what the turf industry has been showing golfers for the last thirty years.

What research is done for the selection process?  Well, at Bandon they did numerous test plots with fescue and bent and poa annua to try and select the grasses for Bandon Dunes, but they had every seed salesman and turf professor and Green Section guy in the northwest involved, and the consensus choice was a fescue / Colonial bent mixture where they had to spray for take-all patch all the time ... for the Colonial bent, not the fescue.  I am wary of big "committee" decisions like that because if you have five guys involved there are going to be at least two who are staunch defenders of the status quo -- it's like trying to pass a reform bill in Congress.

I am happy to put my chips on somebody like Dave Wilber or Tom Mead or Walter Woods instead.  They listen to what I am looking for from a golf standpoint, they are not beholden to anyone (including me) as to what they recommend, and they are really open about looking for the best solution and not just what somebody is trying to sell us.

P.S.  Dan Lucas is the superintendent at The Kingsley Club, which is Mike DeVries' design, not mine.  But I've known Dan since we were selecting grasses for High Pointe and he was the superintendent of a low-budget course twenty miles from here that had primarily fescue fairways.  And as Dan explained earlier, the key to "fighting off" other grasses for the sake of fescue is to NOT SPEND MONEY on it.  I hardly consider that to be a problem.

Ian Larson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Myth of Fine Leaf Fescues and Sustainable Golf
« Reply #49 on: November 11, 2009, 11:48:54 AM »
Tom,

I stand by what I said as well because I wasnt specifically picking you or anyone else out. But it took me about 5 seconds to look up a course that you specifically pointed out to see how they are marketing the course.

"Spanish Bay recalls the original Scottish concept of the game golf, established over five hundred years ago. This was the intention of the design team, Robert Trent Jones Jr., Tom Watson and Sandy Tatum, in their creation of a true links golf course. Links is an old Scottish word for sandy wasteland, usually near the sea, with bristly grasses and ever prevailing wind. The Links at Spanish Bay are so authentic that even the Monterey coastline mirrors the rugged, natural beauty of Scotland."

....now before the fescue failed and poa wasnt finally allowed to take over I will bet the house that you could insert "...and authentic fescue fairways and greens." somewhere in that paragraph. To the common golfer looking at the website when hes planning a golf trip with his buddies, all he is seeing is "true links", "Scottish", "authentic", "rugged", "natural" blah blah blah.

So to the common golfer where are they being educated about the playing conditions of fescue? Somewhere in between the guy reading this on a website and where he tees off? Probably not. But did this get his attention and secure a tee time because he thought it would be awesome to play an "authentic scottish links". Yep

So you cant tell me that golf courses that choose to go with this style dont think about marketing it with all these buzzwords including the fact that they have "fescue" to make them more "authentic". Im talking in broad terms here, not saying anything happens 100% one way or the other. Only that I know there are cases out there where fescue was pushed to help achieve this theme and it was either not used because it wasnt suited or that it WAS used and didnt come off as a huge success. If youre trying to tell me that fescue should be used more in the US in more situations and that it has been successful everytime it was used here in the US...we will just have to agree to disagree.


Maybe Dave Wilbur can explain to us the whole point of having Colonial Bent or Browntop (is it the same? I dont think it is) in the mix with fescue. It seems you dont agree with it being in the mix at Bandon and kinda feel like it was a sales ploy with all the seed salesmen and green section agronomists? From my understanding there is a reason agronomically to have these bents in the mix, that could be wrong but its what Ive been taught.


Per Dan at Kingsley......I dont know anything about Kingsley other than its in Northern Michigan. And from what Dan has said Northern Michigan is perfect for fescue but he wouldnt use it south of Grand Rapids. If the fescue is thriving at Kingsley and its actually doing its job by not needing MONEY SPENT to keep it clean or disease free....then that is a perfect choice for that course in that climate. And youre right, thats not a problem. Its a homerun! But that is 1 golf course in the US. Do you see those same results with every other fescue course in the country? Doubt it, and that CAN be a problem.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back