Shelf life of greens...

[Jim Nelson]

Do greens have a shelf life?  That is, once greens are established on a new course, or they are redone on an existing course, is there a somewhat predictable time when the greens will need to be redone?  Are there regions where this is more or less likely to happen?  I have heard the greens in the Southwest which use Colorado River water will suffer over time from the high levels of minerals and salts in the water.  I am interested if this is at all true, if there is indeed a time, regardless of maintenance practices when greens simply have to be redone.

[Tom_Doak]

Jim:

I believe this started from someone establishing an accounting standard, that a club should be able to depreciate the cost of greens reconstruction over 15 years.  Some people in the business recommend rebuilding greens on a similar time frame, because they like to stay busy with such projects.  But there is no reason that should be necessary, if the greens are well maintained.

[RDecker]

I manage a course established in 1895 that has alway had a modest budget, they are definitely "push up" style and have a heinz 57 mix of grasses including German Bents, Penncross, A1, G2, L93 and a healthy share of Poa.  They were built with incredibly subtle but effective surface drainage.  They are not as consistent as USGA spec greens but are a very acceptable playing surface, one that I can keep rolling at between 9-11 all year and still hold a reasonable approach shot.  If 117 years isn't good enough shelf I don't know what is.  That being said the newer ones are alittle more consistent and easier to manage but with reasonable expectations greens can last a long time.  In the current economy I think you'll see clubs alittle more hesitant to regrass as it is very pricey to do so.

[Adrian_Stiff]

I think greens should last forever with correct maintenance but there are hundreds of caveats to that statement. Purity of grass strains are probably the biggest hurdle.

[Jeff_Brauer]

The USGA and ASGCA have put out the number of 15 years as an average shelf life for a sand based green.  There are really two components - the green base and the turf.

I have seen 25 year old and older sand greens that still have identical physical properties to what they had when built, where you could just scrape off the thatch, add a similar sand, and go from there.  The other big issures are whether the drainage works as it started out or if it is crushed or silted in.  And, whether irrigation water quality has declined, and left you with a salty greens mix which needs to be replaced.

I think most agronomy guys figure the turf will be changed out maybe every 15 years, or less, as new strains become popular, contamination gets in, etc.  But, re-turfing isn't quite as traumatic as a full rebuild.

[Jim Nelson]

Thanks for all your responses.  I appreciate it.  As you might have suspected, there is a reason I am asking this question.  I belong to a course in the desert Southwest which has bent greens which by and large have been pretty good.  This year, two have the greens have sustained damage and require large portions to be replaced.  There are various theories such as the type of punch in the late Spring, a change in the timing etc.  Probably all of the above.  Our area has seen a spate of requiring entirely new greens on courses for again, a variety of reasons.  I do suspect that regions, as well as, turf types have something to do with this.  Running greens fast and keeping cool weather grasses happy in a desert cannot be easy.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Ours are 85+ years old and are similarly mixed along the lines as RDecker's up in Mass.

I have to think that cool season grasses on 'push-up' style greens have a much better chance of remaining viable over the long term than most anything in the mid, southern, or southwestern parts of our country, and that more research has been put into newer strains for those areas which has the side-effect of encouraging more change-outs.

[Mike McGuire]

Jim:

I believe this started from someone establishing an accounting standard, that a club should be able to depreciate the cost of greens reconstruction over 15 years.  Some people in the business recommend rebuilding greens on a similar time frame, because they like to stay busy with such projects.  But there is no reason that should be necessary, if the greens are well maintained.

Tom has hit on something important, and perhaps worthy of a new thread.

Private clubs depreciating the expense for  course projects effectivlly makes the members pay twice for said improvements which makes them unaffordable.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak, Jim Kennedy, RDecker & Jeff Brauer,

It would seem that "push-up" greens have a shelf life of 100 years or more.

It would also seem that USGA greens have a relatively limited shelf life.

So why build a USGA green unless the site soil is hostile ?

I understand perc rates and the like, but, it would seem to me that "push-up" greens have withstood the ultimate test,
the test of "time".

What better endorsement can there be ?

[Jeff Goldman]

How many clubs with push up greens in northern climates have put in an XGD system (or have mot)?I know a very many that have (Shelly, how is it working out?) . Is this seem as an alternative to rebuilding, and does the success of the system say anything about longevity or is it just a way to get even better performance?

[Tim Gavrich]

I keep hearing 15 years as the average life of a set of greens if they're Bermuda strains.

[Greg Chambers]

15 years is horse manure.  The associations put that out there to justify spending more money...or to justify poor maintenance.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

I don't know of any courses, classic or modern, in NJ that have installed the XGD system.

[Steve Burrows]

I don't know of any courses, classic or modern, in NJ that have installed the XGD system.

Pat,

XGD is not a very invasive procedure, so looking at the link you see below, it seems that you will be surprised at just how many courses in your area have employed the XGD techniques.  I am, of course, assuming that this company keeps an accurate, honest website with respect to the work they have done. 

http://www.greensdrainage.com/portfolio/

I will also speak quickly to a question posed by Jeff Goldman.  You are right in saying that XGD is not an alternative to rebuilding.  It is a technique that helps ensure drainage, and thus, more consistent turf growth and daily performance.

[Mike Nuzzo]

Jim
If it were my course I'd not rebuild greens - assuming they were well built to begin with.
It is hard to flush poor river water without significant rain events.

Pat
Those 100 year old greens didn't roll 11-14 back then.
Push up greens pushed to the lowest height of cut limits don't survive hot wet summers well.
If members want perfect greens the medium needs to be very controllable - water on and water off.

Another data point:
Recently Don Mahaffey and someone who has planted thousands of Bermuda greens both concurred that the greens on an existing course would best be regrassed with a no-til solution - no new sand needed other than grow-in requirements.  This would save $$$$ over what the specialist recommended.  They wanted to change from a dwarf to an ultradwarf - we recommended they not regrass them at all.

Cheers

[Kevin_Reilly]

Private clubs depreciating the expense for  course projects effectivlly makes the members pay twice for said improvements which makes them unaffordable.

Can you explain how the depreciation expense results in members paying twice...I'm probably slow but I don't understand the connection.

[Jon Wiggett]

Jim
If it were my course I'd not rebuild greens - assuming they were well built to begin with.
It is hard to flush poor river water without significant rain events.

Pat
Those 100 year old greens didn't roll 11-14 back then.
Neither did sand based
Push up greens pushed to the lowest height of cut limits don't survive hot wet summers well.

Neither do sand based

If members want perfect greens the medium needs to be very controllable - water on and water off.

Another data point:
Recently Don Mahaffey and someone who has planted thousands of Bermuda greens both concurred that the greens on an existing course would best be regrassed with a no-til solution - no new sand needed other than grow-in requirements.  This would save $$$$ over what the specialist recommended.  They wanted to change from a dwarf to an ultradwarf - we recommended they not regrass them at all.

Cheers

Mike,

it has more to do with how you look after them and not what they are as you should well know

Jon

[Anthony_Nysse]

Another data point:
Recently Don Mahaffey and someone who has planted thousands of Bermuda greens both concurred that the greens on an existing course would best be regrassed with a no-til solution - no new sand needed other than grow-in requirements.  This would save $$$$ over what the specialist recommended.  They wanted to change from a dwarf to an ultradwarf - we recommended they not regrass them at all.

Cheers

This is 100% based on if there was an accepatable subsurface. The Supt that are doing no till on soils that are not ideal, USGA or close to, are DEEP verticutting, dryjecting, drill and filling, vertidraining-trying to remove as much organic/loam material as possible without having to rebuild the subsurface. In some cases, this has turned out fine. In other cases, Supts are seeing some issues and failure after 8-10 years.
  As for dwaft to ultradwaft-That decision is completely based on what the cliet/club wants and how much money they want to put in to. Both grasses have positives and negatives.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I think there are many old courses that have cut in drainage, whether XGD or not, to their topsoil greens.  Most have topdressed to have some kind of sand base for the first several inches.  To say that old topsoil greens have lasted 100 years without some help and change along the way is probably not quite accurate.  If they have, its likely that its because they are private clubs with low play and good water in the NE. 

I believe sand based greens are more effective in most climates, although I agree that looking at each climate and micro climate to really tune the construction method is probably better than a one size fits all.

[Jon Wiggett]

I think there are many old courses that have cut in drainage, whether XGD or not, to their topsoil greens.
Jeff, many also had tiled drainage installed at construction
 
Most have topdressed to have some kind of sand base for the first several inches.
Most pushups are the local soil improved with sand mixed in. Although they may have been topdressed with sand (though the best is with the rootzone mixture) the rate of surface lift is so gradual that any pure sand topdresses get plenty of organic material added though the swards growth. There would not be a layer of sand as you seem to imply. One of the problems with USGA thought process is that their specs are really precious but are quickly compromised through topdressing
 
 To say that old topsoil greens have lasted 100 years without some help and change along the way is probably not quite accurate.  If they have, its likely that its because they are private clubs with low play and good water in the NE. 

There are many example of old greens that are native soil based, seeing large numbers of player and being in good condition. Statements like the last are just lame Jeff.

I believe sand based greens are more effective in most climates, although I agree that looking at each climate and micro climate to really tune the construction method is probably better than a one size fits all.

Trying to have it both ways.

Jeff,

I agree that Sand greens are the safer way to go for construction because if they fail the GCA and construction firm can say it is down to the maintenance. This is not the case with pushups. Having said that sand greens are expensive to build and maintain. They are also far more desease prone even if looked after well.

Jon

[Jim Nelson]

A couple of questions for the experts out there.
1. in the southwest, it seems that most of the greens are punched and sand filled twice a year.  I have been told that this is to remove thatch and improve drainage.  But it also takes time for the greens to heal and return to form.  Is this method used in most, if not all, courses around the country/world?  Verticuts seem to be much less damaging, but is this method less effective?
2. You mention Sand greens as one construction method.  I assume this refers to layers of sand as the foundation which would encourage better drainage?  What are the other methods?
3.  I played Olympic just before it closed for the Open.  The greens showed no ball marks.  I played it after the Open.  Still no ball marks.  Olympic Lake gets lots of play, while my home course (bent) gets very light action yet shows every mark it seems.  Olympic greens were rebuilt to USGA standards I assume.  Why does it not show many marks?
4.  Are those Subair systems worth it?
Thanks.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Jim in lay mans terms the golf green is a living thing. The grass grows and its cut pretty much every day, it gets stressed with golfers feet, pitch marks, mowers and the grass like any living product produces 'shit'. Fibre and dead material if left untreated will produce what isi teffectively a peaty bog, the grass will still grow but it gets diseased and under even mildy damp conditions scarring and footprints appear which are obviously not good for putting. To correct the 'shit' that gets produced the idea is to dilute that material with perhaps pure sand on a regular perhaps monthly basis 'top dressing' which over a period of 10 years could easily add a couple of inches in height. Verti cutting or even stroger deep scarifications can help sand enter into an inch.

Top dressing deals only with the surface, underneath has problems and punching holes in the fibre or even coring (takes a plug away) all help air get into the rootzone, filling those holes with sand will help the green drain and fresh material helps that nasty stagnant thatch zone.

Certain grasses are more aggressive and there are lots more things that can occurr that go well beyond a paragraph, but in real raw terms the idea is to keep a sandy profile and little thatch, that speeds the water away. If you stick to that you should have greens for a long time if the right sands are used with the right shape that dont rebind. Verti draining to 10" (its a mechanical garden fork) will restretch the profile to help compaction, good green design that does not constrict entry on/ entry off is essential in keeping good healthy greens, size. height of cut are other important factors. (hope I have not told you how to suck eggs)

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,

XGD is not a very invasive procedure, so looking at the link you see below, it seems that you will be surprised at just how many courses in your area have employed the XGD techniques.  I am, of course, assuming that this company keeps an accurate, honest website with respect to the work they have done. 

Steve,

Thanks, there are a few in Northern NJ.

One that installed the system about 6 years ago is still experiencing drainage problems, so, with this relatively new system, I wonder what the effective duration is.

http://www.greensdrainage.com/portfolio/

I will also speak quickly to a question posed by Jeff Goldman.  You are right in saying that XGD is not an alternative to rebuilding.  It is a technique that helps ensure drainage, and thus, more consistent turf growth and daily performance.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat
Those 100 year old greens didn't roll 11-14 back then.

That's true, but, they do today.

Push up greens pushed to the lowest height of cut limits don't survive hot wet summers well.

Also true, but, those push up greens can be maintained at reasonably fast speeds, even in summer.
In the ultimate, Mother Nature will dictate terms, but, under normal circumstances, push up greens can produce consistent, relatively fast speeds.
Obviously, speeds tend to increase routinely in Sept & Oct

If members want perfect greens the medium needs to be very controllable - water on and water off.

Another data point:

Recently Don Mahaffey and someone who has planted thousands of Bermuda greens both concurred that the greens on an existing course would best be regrassed with a no-til solution - no new sand needed other than grow-in requirements. 

With the same genetic strain or another genetic strain ?

This would save $$$$ over what the specialist recommended. 

They wanted to change from a dwarf to an ultradwarf - we recommended they not regrass them at all.

[SL_Solow]

Jeff;  Sorry for the late reply but the holiday intervened.  While I am not a greenkeeper, I have been a chairman for almost 20 years and work with the supers throughout Chicagoland. Accordingly, my opinions are those of an educated amateur.   At Briarwood, we installed XGD on almost 90 year old push up greens 3 years ago.  The greens were a mix of Washington bent, penn cross and , predominantly, poa.  Root system was extremely shallow although we had engaged in aggressive topdressing for several years.  As i understand it, many of the old push up greens, having been built before the installation of automatic irrigation, were built to hold water.  XGD acts as a "release'; when the soil profile is saturated XGD causes the water to flush rapidly out of the system, almost like flushing a toilet.  We have had rains of several inches and been able to cut greens the next morning.  Installation took about 3 days for the entire course.  Greens were playable the day after installation.

We did other things to improve drainage including several years of drill and fill along with regular aeration and verticutting.  Nonetheless, after the horrible summer of 2010, our club voted to gas our greens and surrounds and plant an A1/A4 mixture.  The project commenced in August of 2011 and the greens opened Memorial Day weekend of 2012.  It has been a great success.  The surface is very true, the greens drain beautifully.  The new surrounds have created more ground game options as we cut them short and maintain them to be quite firm.  We will see if we can keep them for a long time.  So far they are everything we could have envisioned.