[David Davis]

Is there any industry standards for the life of a green? i.e.. they should be completely redone every 40 years. Does this significantly vary between various green build ups? Parkland course, links course, USGA standards, USGA with sub air etc?

[Jon Wiggett]

David,

USGA is 25 years or thereabouts I believe. If built and maintained properly however I would have thought several hundred years should be possible .

Jon

[Mike_Young]

I think as more go to the ultradwarf greens and manage the bermudas on the USGA greens they will last much longer because they are not looking for the same thing they were on bent....

[JMEvensky]

I think as more go to the ultradwarf greens and manage the bermudas on the USGA greens they will last much longer because they are not looking for the same thing they were on bent....

Plus,re-grassing is pretty cheap,relatively speaking.

[Randy Thompson]

I can understand the possible need for resurfacing after twenty five years but not the need for total reconstruction if constructed properly with sub surface drainage and a médium to coarse sand.

[Andrew Hardy]

Reconstruction/renovation lifespan has so many variables. If you didn't fix the problem/issues (trees, rootzone/drainage etc...) that vetted the work, then you are destined to shorten the timeframe for the next renovation. I know of a prominent club in the Toronto area that has done their greens 3 times in the last 15 years.

[James Bennett]

The newest green at The Old Course is about 150 years old, apart from the slight re-work on 11 and ()  2 and 4.
Why would you need to renovate a green if you do maintenance regularly each year?

Of course, if you choose not to aerate, scarify, sand the greens in deference to a better playing surface every day of play, then the greens will need to be replaced after 5 to 10 years.  There is a choice.

[Tom_Doak]

Is there any industry standards for the life of a green? i.e.. they should be completely redone every 40 years. Does this significantly vary between various green build ups? Parkland course, links course, USGA standards, USGA with sub air etc?

I believe a figure has been set at 25 years in the U.S.A., primarily so that clubs can depreciate the value on their tax returns.

As others have said, there is no reason a course shouldn't go much longer than that.  Oakmont is at 112 years and counting, to the best of my knowledge.

[Justin VanLanduit]

I think it's a matter of; you get out of it what you put into it.  Had this exact conversation with USGA Agronomist and Greens Committee members when we were pushing our regrassing project.  We have roughly half our greens which are originals from 1920, while others have been changed throughout that time.  If one is given the ability to carry out the necessary practices and maintenance that is needed that greens can last a long long time.  Now you may want to change grass due to different and better cultivars coming out but as for digging up and rebuilding, that is a different animal. 
Similar to having a car; if you take care of it with maintenance etc, you can push it on miles.  If you don't you'll be looking at a lot of band-aids costing lots of money and still having to get rid of it earlier than if you would have taken care of it.

[Joe Hancock]

I wonder what would happen if we could determine the longevity by gallons of applied water vs. number of years in existence...

[Adam Lawrence]

I think as more go to the ultradwarf greens and manage the bermudas on the USGA greens they will last much longer because they are not looking for the same thing they were on bent....

Plus,re-grassing is pretty cheap,relatively speaking.

That isn't entirely true. It has been so in the US, where you''ve been able to gas greens and then resurface them, but you can't do that so easily everywhere. Methyl bromide, which is what has been used for the gassing, is illegal in many (most) countries around the world, certainly in the EU, and I believe it either has been or soon will be banned in America too. If you can't easily kill off the grass, then suddenly regrassing becomes a much bigger job.

[Randy Thompson]

I think as more go to the ultradwarf greens and manage the bermudas on the USGA greens they will last much longer because they are not looking for the same thing they were on bent....

Plus,re-grassing is pretty cheap,relatively speaking.

That isn't entirely true. It has been so in the US, where you''ve been able to gas greens and then resurface them, but you can't do that so easily everywhere. Methyl bromide, which is what has been used for the gassing, is illegal in many (most) countries around the world, certainly in the EU, and I believe it either has been or soon will be banned in America too. If you can't easily kill off the grass, then suddenly regrassing becomes a much bigger job.

Adam,
Methyl Bromide is or was one alternative to get the proper results and usually the most expensive and dangerous alternative. There are many qualified supers that are quite capable of killing grass without it becoming a major production!

[SL_Solow]

Methyl Bromide has been removed from the permitted list unless an end user already owns it and has it in storage.  Its main advantage was that it neutralized poa seed in the ground as well as that which was growing.  I am informed that there are other methods but they are not as effective in cleaning the seed bed.

[David Davis]

Gentlemen,

Thanks for the replies. Might have to add this to the "long" list of things that perplex me about some of the practices here in The Netherlands. The particular case I'm talking about would also include:

- Extremely small greens (for a links course)
- Contaminated soil utilized in the green construction (begin 70's) - contains battery fragments etc.
- minimal flag positions
- less than ideal shaping of greens and aprons
- strange grasses for a links - creeping bent
- poor/fragile root systems

So honestly my favorite answer is the 25 year mark but understand that on a classic links (or even parkland) i.e. St. Andrews this could stretch considerably.

The course mentioned finds itself in a Natura 2000 area and under new European restriction may not use ANY chemicals whatsoever.

[Don Mahaffey]

David, the greens you describe sound like a candidate for renovation from the very beginning

Poor design and construction dictating renovation is a lot different than determining lifespan of a well designed and constructed green.

The lifespan question is interesting to me because end of life is often a result of maintenance practices not meshing with the physical properties of the green.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I have seen many old USGA greens that are still serviceable.  I mean, sand is sand, and its not going to change, so if it is correct to start, it could last nearly forever.  Some migration/contamination in the gravel layer is possible, too much thatch is typical, so removing the top 3" and replacing with a similar sand happens.  Also, sometimes windblown silt/dust contaminates the top, too.  Drain tiles should last, but sometimes get crushed.

So, it all varies.  Turf usually needs replacement every 12-15 years, depending on how picky the golfers are about purity and things like that.

The USGA does have that life cycle chart, and they put USGA greens at 15-30 years, depending on the quality of construction.

[Bradley Anderson]

Every factor which works against the extended life of a green is manageable.

Thatch and organic matter at the surface can choke the free movement of air and water through the root zone. But this can be managed by limiting the application of fertilizers so that excess organic matter is not stimulated. Light applications of sand topdressing combined with periodic aeration will dilute the formation of naturally occurring thatch as it develops. We have the tools now for accurately measuring if we are doing enough, or possibly more than required, to maintain adequate infiltration with aeration and topdressing.

Shade trees promote the development of Poa annua in greens. Keep the shade off of the greens and they can be kept at status quo with far less inputs.

In my opinion the most neglected practice for extended the life of a green is in the management of the Sahara effect: where sand is thrown up on to the embankments and putting surfaces from bunkers. These deposits can buildup up to the point where they effect surface drainage routes. A blower needs be sent out every morning to blow the deposits back into the bunkers. When the bunker sand is replaced it is a good time to remove the sod between the bunker and the green to expose the bunker sand layers that have accumulated over the original grades. There is a lot of work and some disruption involved in scraping these layers back, but it is the only way to maintain the perimeter grades of the green for perpetuity. And when the perimeter grades raise, the topdressing applications effect the interior grades during the brushing process. To be fair I only know of one superintendent who actually did this kind of work on every green with consistency and that was Tim Davis at Shoreacres.

[Martin Lehmann]

David,

I happen to know the greens you mention in your post. And I agree that they don't match with the quality of the rest of the golf course. Not only form a construction point of view, but especially when you look at the design of these green complexes. They are to small and lack definition and character. Not sure if they have creeping bent on them, but if that is the case, that would be an additional problem.

Convincing membership that something should be done about it, probably is the hardest nut to crack. It took me almost ten years at my club to get a reconstruction program started, and I was lucky enough that we had, and still have, 60 year old, traditional push-up greens, that passed their sell-by date at least twenty years ago. And even now, as we have opened new and very nice USGA-greens, some members still think that we should have kept the old ones....

[David Davis]

Thanks again for sharing the expert opinions gentlemen. I had forgotten to mention the significant build up of organic matter as well. The Sahara effect is minimized since there are not to many bunkers on said course.

New greens, green complexes and reshaping are certainly ideal.

Martin, thanks for joining and welcome to GCA since I noticed it was your first post. I'll have to get down to see the fruits of your efforts as soon as possible.

Do you actually have 18 push=up greens? I think you should do a photo tour of your course, maybe even a before and after if you have the photos. That would be quite interesting.

[Martin Lehmann]

In fact, we had old fashioned push-up greens at the original 9 holes layed-out by Fred Hawtree in 1955 (in heavy clay, as our course is clay-based unfortunatly). Until now, five have been redesigned and reconstructed and the remaining four will be done this and next year. Our course was extended to 18 holes in 1990 and we have started an intensified maintenance program to get the greens on these holes on more or less the same level as the newly built USGA ones. This includes bi-monthly aeration and heavy scarifying twice a year. As soon as the root zone is where we want it to to be, we'll start overseeding with the same fescue-bent mix we use on our new greens.  It's not ideal, but the next best thing to a complete rebuild.

Our course renovation program will take four more years at least, so give me some time and I'll be more than happy to make a photo tour. And as said before, in the meantime you're welcome to come over and see how the course renovation is progressing.




 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()