[Joe Hancock]

Of course no one ever got a raise by lowering a budget....

Hmmmm, sounds familiar….😁

[Kalen Braley]

Of course no one ever got a raise by lowering a budget....

If only this were also true in the corporate world....

[Charlie Goerges]

win, win ,win
More turf to get a club on
more firmness to the bounce
less pure grass "speed: so contours are embraced not avoided

You're getting at my secondary point. The game would be better, more fun with these conditions while being much more frugal with water and probably costing everyone a lot less. Big contours without the divot farms everyone dislikes and so on. But I believe it can't happen without concerted effort, both from a water-saving perspective and from a conditioning perspective. I feel like everyone needs to jump at once so to speak.


That said, I'm still curious what kind of savings of water there could be if we take up the slack in the system that Chris mentioned, plus made a major play toward 1"+ fairways and slower greens and dry/brownish aesthetic.

[Thomas Dai]

win, win ,win
More turf to get a club on
more firmness to the bounce
less pure grass "speed: so contours are embraced not avoided

You're getting at my secondary point. The game would be better, more fun with these conditions while being much more frugal with water and probably costing everyone a lot less. Big contours without the divot farms everyone dislikes and so on. But I believe it can't happen without concerted effort, both from a water-saving perspective and from a conditioning perspective. I feel like everyone needs to jump at once so to speak.
That said, I'm still curious what kind of savings of water there could be if we take up the slack in the system that Chris mentioned, plus made a major play toward 1"+ fairways and slower greens and dry/brownish aesthetic.

Be interesting to get an appreciation of the extent water usage and mowing regime will change if a course with regularly used fairway irrigation were to increase their fairway HoC from current height to 1”+?
It would additionally be interesting what the water usage and mowing regime situation would be for any ‘manicured rough’ areas that are regularly irrigated too, like green surrounds and collars around bunkers.
Atb

[Charlie Goerges]

win, win ,win
More turf to get a club on
more firmness to the bounce
less pure grass "speed: so contours are embraced not avoided

You're getting at my secondary point. The game would be better, more fun with these conditions while being much more frugal with water and probably costing everyone a lot less. Big contours without the divot farms everyone dislikes and so on. But I believe it can't happen without concerted effort, both from a water-saving perspective and from a conditioning perspective. I feel like everyone needs to jump at once so to speak.
That said, I'm still curious what kind of savings of water there could be if we take up the slack in the system that Chris mentioned, plus made a major play toward 1"+ fairways and slower greens and dry/brownish aesthetic.

Be interesting to get an appreciation of the extent water usage and mowing regime will change if a course with regularly used fairway irrigation were to increase their fairway HoC from current height to 1”+?
It would additionally be interesting what the water usage and mowing regime situation would be for any ‘manicured rough’ areas that are regularly irrigated too, like green surrounds and collars around bunkers.
Atb

I very much would like to know this stuff too Thomas. If there is already a large slack amount in the system, it feels like we could really reduce water usage by a lot which would make golf a much more palatable partner for cities and regions. What I'm worried about in five or ten years' time is various governments cutting off the majority of water for this kind of thing virtually overnight. I would imagine it would be way easier to plan for a 50%+ reduction with years of planning rather than abruptly.




This is where the supers or turfgrass professionals can let us know what we're looking at and be a reality check.

[Charlie Goerges]

I'll bump this in hopes of maybe someone being able to weigh in on the potential water savings for a significant height of cut increase and general change in conditioning.

[Forrest Richardson]

Phoenix is actually quite efficient as a location to dwell. Our water is primarily from the Colorado River and snow melt from our 6,000 ft. Alpine mountains. Most people fail “Arizona Geography”.

And — In golf we primarily BORROW water. Thanks Buck for reminding us of this.

[Charlie Goerges]

Phoenix is actually quite efficient as a location to dwell. Our water is primarily from the Colorado River and snow melt from our 6,000 ft. Alpine mountains. Most people fail “Arizona Geography”.

And — In golf we primarily BORROW water. Thanks Buck for reminding us of this.

I don't get what you're saying here Forrest, would you elaborate?

[Forrest Richardson]

Phoenix, and a predominance of Arizona, enjoys a very efficient energy use index and does not rely on the seasonal use of fossil fuels that many large cities rely on across the U.S.  We operate the largest nuclear power plant in the U.S., providing more power to neighboring states than to our own. I already noted water use — which is NOT predominantly ground water, but surface water (rivers and snow melt). Surface water is THE MOST EFFICIENT of all water resources, and in Arizona it has been managed since the early 1900s through dams, reservoirs and canals. None of this discussion takes into account recycled water, which is another hallmark of how we manage water in Arizona.

The Hohokam People first dwelled here in 300 A.D., and their layout of clever canals remain even today. Phoenix is among a very few U.S. metropolitan areas that have been in continuous habitation for more than 1,700 years. That does not happen by "accident" or "whim". It happens because it continually — through many ages, including the Industrial Revolution — remains an efficient place for people to inhabit.

[Charlie Goerges]

Fair enough, but as Phoenix has access to less water, the golf courses will surely have less. What I'm curious about is how best to deal with that from a golf perspective. What would significantly raising the height of cut do to water consumption? Would you personally mind playing on, say, 1 inch fairways?

[Forrest Richardson]

The solution to more growth in Phoenix is:

1. Return to ground water
2. Advances in "toilet to tap" technology
3. Pump water from the Sea of Cortez

Until then, golf has done a great job of reducing water. Agriculture has NOT. My hunch is that golf will continue to use less (turf reduction, turf varieties, polymers, better coverage, and management...such as not overseeding, etc.)

Adam Lawrence points out that "golf is not essential" ... until, of course, you consider the millions of jobs across the world that involve golf as a business. Then, golf becomes essential...at least to particular families.

[Kalen Braley]

Forrest,

I'm not so sure how wise it is for Arizona to continue to rely on water from an already over-allocated Colorado. 2023 brought a 20%+ cut to its delivery...on top of what it's lost in recent years, and the cuts most certainly will continue.

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona-environment/2022/08/16/federal-officials-impose-cuts-colorado-river/10311378002/

[Forrest Richardson]

The Colorado River is only ONE source for Phoenix, and a majority of that is used by agriculture and domestic. We don't "rely solely on Colorado River water", and never have. The easterly watershed (mountains and canals) is the other primary source besides recycled water. Colorado River water allotment to Phoenix was negotiated by John McCain, and has been constant expect for the portions we've given away during the past 20+ years.


Desalination is the solution to most all water issues, even inland where brackish water can be treated. I predict Phoenix will continue to pioneer innovative water solutions, as we have since the Hohokam age. The pipeline from Peñasco, MX to Phoenix is a bold prediction — but I'll make it here based on my knowledge of how Arizona water works.

[Kalen Braley]

Link to a story about a bill currently in the works in Utah..

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/golf/bill-that-would-publicize-how-much-water-golf-courses-use-meets-opposition/ar-AA16QFo6?cvid=63d527c11efd4ac89a3157877cb40036

[Grant Saunders]

I'll bump this in hopes of maybe someone being able to weigh in on the potential water savings for a significant height of cut increase and general change in conditioning.

Height of cut and water requirements arent necessarily a direct correlation. Higher height of cut does not automatically equate to a reduction in water.


Growth rates, plant transpiration and environmental factors such as shade, wind exposure etc all play a part.


Higher cut grass can use more water

[Buck Wolter]

LA Times Article today.


Why desert golf courses and artificial lakes remain untouched by the Colorado River crisis (msn.com)

[Charlie Goerges]

I'll bump this in hopes of maybe someone being able to weigh in on the potential water savings for a significant height of cut increase and general change in conditioning.

Height of cut and water requirements arent necessarily a direct correlation. Higher height of cut does not automatically equate to a reduction in water.


Growth rates, plant transpiration and environmental factors such as shade, wind exposure etc all play a part.


Higher cut grass can use more water

I believe that it can be the case, and that the opposite also can be the case. I feel like the point is to talk about reducing water usage, what could help a major reduction?

[Charlie Goerges]

Thanks for the links Buck and Kalen. I gotta say, I don’t think golf’s ostensible allies in those stories are doing the game any favors. In fact, if it was an 80’s movie, I’d say they are clearly setting up golf to take the fall in the third act. The call is coming from inside the house!

[Grant Saunders]

I'll bump this in hopes of maybe someone being able to weigh in on the potential water savings for a significant height of cut increase and general change in conditioning.

Height of cut and water requirements arent necessarily a direct correlation. Higher height of cut does not automatically equate to a reduction in water.


Growth rates, plant transpiration and environmental factors such as shade, wind exposure etc all play a part.


Higher cut grass can use more water

I believe that it can be the case, and that the opposite also can be the case. I feel like the point is to talk about reducing water usage, what could help a major reduction?

Grass selection is a big consideration. As i mentioned also, grass growing too fast will consume more water. Reigning in growth has many benefits from nutrient use to organic matter production.


Honestly, if you want to use less water, apply less. There will be discomfort, the level of such will be dependent what a membership can tolerate.

[Charlie Goerges]

Grass selection is a big consideration. As i mentioned also, grass growing too fast will consume more water. Reigning in growth has many benefits from nutrient use to organic matter production.


Honestly, if you want to use less water, apply less. There will be discomfort, the level of such will be dependent what a membership can tolerate.

These seem like valid suggestions. I just want to comment on the last one. As an ordinary player, people like me have been told that isn't possible. True or not, that's what we've been told. It's this piecemeal way of communicating that gets frustrating. As we've seen in this thread and others, a lot of us are willing to make (or accept) changes in order to put the game in a better standing, but we need real ideas that we can get behind.

[Ben Sims]

Phoenix is actually quite efficient as a location to dwell. Our water is primarily from the Colorado River and snow melt from our 6,000 ft. Alpine mountains. Most people fail “Arizona Geography”.

And — In golf we primarily BORROW water. Thanks Buck for reminding us of this.

Forrest,


Any way to know what percentage of water used in PHX and TUS comes from Arizona’s mountains vs other states’ mountains? I’d be quite surprised if the alpine watersheds in AZ supplied even a quarter of the water used in the valley vs what’s flowing from north and east of the state.

[Grant Saunders]

Grass selection is a big consideration. As i mentioned also, grass growing too fast will consume more water. Reigning in growth has many benefits from nutrient use to organic matter production.


Honestly, if you want to use less water, apply less. There will be discomfort, the level of such will be dependent what a membership can tolerate.

These seem like valid suggestions. I just want to comment on the last one. As an ordinary player, people like me have been told that isn't possible. True or not, that's what we've been told. It's this piecemeal way of communicating that gets frustrating. As we've seen in this thread and others, a lot of us are willing to make (or accept) changes in order to put the game in a better standing, but we need real ideas that we can get behind.

Charlie


This is far from the best platform to have a discussion about water usage. Too many people will read what gets written and then think it translates to their specific situation. Well meaning golf architecture junkies are a growing and somewhat troubling demographic when it comes to course maintenance 


I will go out on a limb though and use an architecture based example:


Pinehurst number 2 completed a large scale renovation/restoration of the course. One of the strongly communicated benefits was the significant water reduction that was achieved. 1100 heads reduced to 450 (i dont recall the exact number) Removal of irrigation from areas of rough, revegetation etc


The unfortunate side effect of the project and messaging was that it drew a connection between the renovation and how it saved so much water. Certainly they did reduce water use significantly but this implied cause and effect points the industry towards the renovation being necessary to have achieved these results. At multiples of millions it cost to renovate, people believe that this is the path to a water saving solution.


Sprinkler heads dont run themselves (yet!). It requires someone to tell them when to turn on and how long for. A course with irrigated rough could simply reduce running times or even turn those heads off saving significant volumes of water. You do not need to rebuild a golf course to apply less water.


If you want to discuss water more, please PM me and i will happily chat about it over email.

[Max Prokopy]

Phoenix is actually quite efficient as a location to dwell. Our water is primarily from the Colorado River and snow melt from our 6,000 ft. Alpine mountains. Most people fail “Arizona Geography”.

And — In golf we primarily BORROW water. Thanks Buck for reminding us of this.

Forrest,


Any way to know what percentage of water used in PHX and TUS comes from Arizona’s mountains vs other states’ mountains? I’d be quite surprised if the alpine watersheds in AZ supplied even a quarter of the water used in the valley vs what’s flowing from north and east of the state.

From a chemistry perspective, you could tag snow/snowmelt with certain innocuous substances: substance #1 from mountain region #1, and so on and so forth.  Then you measure the proportion of those tags in what gets applied to a golf course.  It would be a fairly pricey project, but something a university or government agency might want to take up. 

[Max Prokopy]

I see no reason why we shouldn't be building freshwater pipelines.  Other countries do it and they are much easier than oil/gas pipelines.


The other half of the coin is getting golfers to find appeal in less lush conditions.  I don't see that happening in the US...

[Sean_A]

Phoenix is actually quite efficient as a location to dwell. Our water is primarily from the Colorado River and snow melt from our 6,000 ft. Alpine mountains. Most people fail “Arizona Geography”.

And — In golf we primarily BORROW water. Thanks Buck for reminding us of this.

Forrest,


Any way to know what percentage of water used in PHX and TUS comes from Arizona’s mountains vs other states’ mountains? I’d be quite surprised if the alpine watersheds in AZ supplied even a quarter of the water used in the valley vs what’s flowing from north and east of the state.

Doesn't Phoenix have specific water supply areas. If I recall correctly the north side of Phoenix is supplied by the Colorado. Much of the remaining valley is supplied by the Verde via Salt (reservoirs). It is going to require a significant infrastructure project to move the Salt-Verde water to northern parts of area. Of course, if the drought escalates, the Salt supply is in danger. Assuming nothing good or bad radically changes, I think the bottom line is valley has enough water to see out my life.

Ciao

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()