[Joe Bausch]

That is the title of a recent article at GolfIndustry.com:

http://www.golfcourseindustry.com/news/news.asp?ID=4485

Perhaps firmer and faster will be coming at some courses whether it is desired or not!  Here is the text of the entire article:

If the golf industry’s No. 1 concern is attracting enough players to grow the game, finding enough water to grow the grass at the nation’s 16,000 courses runs a close second in terms of priority. As a new report from the NGCOA finds, the golf industry needs to act quickly to address the issue of water supply and conservation or it will be left vulnerable to the dictates of lawmakers, local municipalities and environmentalists.

NGCOA will release the report, “Trouble Waters: Golf’s Future in a Thirsty World,” on Oct. 15, when members can download the report free from www.ngcoa.org and the public can view the executive summary.

“If, as many observers suggest, water is the oil of the new millennium, then golf faces a long and difficult struggle to protect its share,” according to the report, which was developed by the NGCOA after interviews with a number of water experts inside and outside the golf industry. “How the industry, historically splintered and new to large-scale campaigning, will fare in that climate is anything but clear,” the report says. “What is apparent … is a sense that for the game to do nothing is to risk everything.”

There is an urgent need for the golf industry to act, according to Bob Carrow, a University of Georgia professor and water conservation expert. “The immediate question is whether golf can get its act together soon enough and astutely enough to shape its fate or whether regulators will do so first.” Carrow adds that “the window of opportunity for golf to get in ahead of stringent, potentially damaging regulation is closing.”

The water issue affects everyone associated with the game and the business of golf, the report says. To avoid a public backlash from those who believe golf is not a good steward of the environment, golf needs to convince a cross section of stakeholders and influencers of the benefits the industry provides.

“Golf will need to present a sound scientific case that its water use is clean and efficient. It will need to underpin that case with the economic rationale that [it] is an industry that delivers a $76 billion annual bounty ….” the report says.

The report goes on to say that golf’s position needs to be communicated to scientists, politicians and the public and “balanced with the ethical consideration that at the end of the day there are things in the life of a community more important than a game.”

As Clark Throssell, director of research for the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America, says: “To date, water’s largely been seen as an agronomic issue, but now … everybody needs to step up and be part of the dialogue, even the golfer.”

While the report paints an urgent situation with serious consequences, the water issue also could have a positive “galvanizing” effect for the industry, NGCOA CEO Mike Hughes says. ”Water presents a huge challenge, but also an opportunity for the industry to come together and spell out the economic, environmental and social benefits that golf’s water use provides.”

The NGCOA report is expected to complement the GCSAA’s survey of golf course superintendents regarding water use and conservation. Results of the GCSAA survey, which was underwritten by the association’s philanthropic organization, the Environmental Institute for Golf, are expected to be released later in 2008.

[BCrosby]

Joe -

Water issues will impact gca sooner rather than later. It's a huge issue in the SE as I type. Thank you God for Fay last weekend.

People are going to have to rethink how courses look and play. The wall to wall verdant stuff - lush green fw's, bunker walls, juicy green roughs, etc. - all that will have to be rethought. Architectural features will need to be designed with drought survival in mind.

Because whether or not a course gets rain, there will be municipal limitations on water usage never before imagined.

All of which presages a new minimalist minimalism?  

Bob

[Jeff_Brauer]

I noticed in my ASLA newsletter that the Federal Govt is now writing irrigation conservation guidelines.  Actually, they don't look much different than what is out there from Toro, IA and others, so that's a good thing.  But, the idea that someone in the Fed govt is writring them is not, at least IMHO.

I don't say this because water conservation in golf isn't necessary, I say it because the needs in Minnesota are far different than those in California, for example.

I also noted a water conservation article in that ASLA newsletter. The author notes that the term xeriscape is fading in favor of other less scary sounding monikcer.  He then offers up that we should reduce turf in the home landscape in favor of "lower water use" trees and shrubs.  Funny, but Texas A and M research shows that, at least around here, most turfs use far less water than most trees and shrubs.  The author goes on to note that he waters his shrubs "only" a half an inch a week.  Well, an adapted turf would get by on that in all but the worst weeks of the summer, and could probably do it then, with some browning.

Short version - I hope conservation is done both regionally and on fact, and I hope the golf industry comes up with a less defensive strategy than we did with the environment.

Bob,

At least in my case, I do consider architectural features differently now from a decade ago - specifically, mounding is more of a no-no because the severe elevation changes create a situation where turf just a few yards apart needs such dramatically different water useage.

As to the other stuff, I have written lots on overwatering, and we discussed it here the other day.  I really don't think that for most places, letting the roughs brown a bit will be a big deal. 

[BCrosby]

Jeff -

Two years ago I could stop a greens committe meeting on a dime just by mentioning the possibility of brown fw's. It was if I had lepresy. People immediately cleared out.

That's changed. Now they will stay in the room a few minutes and listen. They aren't there yet, but they are figuring out we probably won't have much choice.

I am secretly happy about the development. But don't tell anyone I said so.

Bob 

[Dan Herrmann]

Joe - thanks for bringing attention to the article.

Water is NOT going to become more plentiful, so we should get used to a golf course with water restrictions.   And that's not a bad thing. 

Overwatering leads to weak roots, disease, ball marks, and a course that just isn't much fun to play. 

I love what our new superintendant has been doing this year.  Imagine this - he reads weather forecasts!  We've had a spell of dry sunny days here in Philly with below average temperatures.  What has he done?  He's aerated all the greens and tees and has kept fairway sprinklers off the whole time.     All because September will be really busy and the remnants of Fay are due here on Friday.

By following practices like this, he's managed to get our greens' roots to go from 1/2 inch to the point where they're coming out of the hole plug when they cut a new hole.    The greens were in jeopardy of dying last year and now they're incredibly healthy.

We need a lot more of that.   It makes me sick to see sprinklers going when it's raining or about to rain.

[Pat Brockwell]

As a whole, golf is at the forefront of water conservation already.  That said, there is room for improvement.  The GCSAA, research community and irrigation equipment suppliers are all on top of it.  The next front is with the golfing public to reshape perceptions and expectations of how a well conditioned golf course should look and play.  I call out the USGA and PGA get with the program and start educating the public. 

[Dan Herrmann]

Pat - the leading edge is doing fine, but a lot of middle/lower tier courses are using WAAAAY too much water.  Sort of like auto emissions - 2% of the cars produce 50% of the pollution.

[Jim Nugent]

I'd like to see some real hard numbers on how scarce water is.  Also how fairly priced it is.  My initial reaction, without the data, is to wonder if this is as exaggerated as some other environmental issues have turned out to be.  Think Malthus and Ehrlich. 

[TX Golf]

A couple questions for everyone. Is it really necessary to put limits and regulations on water. When our supply is the same and the demand continues to rise it is just going to get more and more expensive. Golf courses will need to cut back significantly in their usage if they don't want to bankrupt themselves. I think the situation will end up regulating itself.

Second question... A course that I play at quite frequently has multiple wells on the property that they use to water the course. What the they rules/laws regarding water coming from wells. Can this type of water gathering be prevented by local or larger governments?? Thanks

Robert

[Jeff_Brauer]

Dan Hermann,

I think you threw out a gross generalization that probably isn't true.  To start with, mid level courses often don't have the irrigation systems that could even throw out enough water in a night to say they are overwatered.  At least, thats the case here in Texas.  While the average weather stats say a golf course would have to put down up to 800,000 gpd at this time of year, with a 1500GPM system, they are lucky to get half that down.  They can't be overwatering.

And, a green course doesn't meant its overwatered. It could be watered as little as 50% of its actual need (although not long term, just at a moment)

Jim,

As to scarcity, the total water content of this planet is constant.  Availability varies by region, and by technology available (when I built in Indnoesia years ago, water was plentiful, and yet the local villages were served by only one pipe and water was scarce to them)

As to wells, right now in Texas, the state "owns" all surface water, but wells are not regulated.  That will likely change.  Lots of water laws everywhere are still based on ranchers and farmers rights, but the mentality is shifting towards state ownership for better "control" and allocation to the most deserving parties, rather than the people who own the land above the water.  Of course the detemination of who deserves the water is very political.

[Dan Herrmann]

Jeff - I was speaking more about munis and small mom and pops that sometimes seem to leave the sprinklers on all night long.  The one I'm thinking of doesn't have any H2O automation - it's all done the old fashioned way.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Dan,

I kind of figured!  That said, if they have an old single row quick coupler system, the capacity is very low, even if they are overwater perhaps half the area of the course to get the other half acceptably wet.

So, there are two issues - total capacity and watering efficiency.  I suspect that by law, most courses will have to put in new systems to address watering efficiency, but they will probably be grandfathered in. That is, they won't need an efficient system until they replace theirs.  There may be some time limit placed on irrigation systems, like 20 years.  These systems will have to meet whatever efficiency guidelines whatever govt body sets, and may even need to be reviewed and permitted.

One thing I can't quite comprehend yet is how systems will be designed to meet maximum daily need (or close to it) and not go over any annual allotment that might be set.  I was in consideration for a Philly job a few years ago and there was something like a 17 Mil gpd limit on golf watering.  My irrigation guy proposed a system that could deliver nearly a million gals a night.  I figured we could save money by designing one that could deliver only 300K gallons a night.  Doesn't seem right that you could use your allotment up in 17 days!

[Tom_Doak]

I don't think anyone in the industry is really doing their part to address this issue, although I will be glad to be corrected on that.

At the same time, BLANKET GENERALIZATIONS about water use on golf courses are going to be a disaster.  There are such differences from one part of the US to another (and one part of the world to another) that you just can't make any rules that apply across the board.  And so it's just up to every individual project to think about it -- and not in terms of what should we do to protect our rights to use as much water as we want to.

At dinner tonight (with a Toro rep and a bunch of guys from the EIGCA) we all agreed that most courses in the UK could cut back water use 20% and see a benefit rather than a problem -- less thatch and less poa annua.  I volunteered that in the USA the figure was more like 40% less.

[Mark_Fine]

I was at a course today in New Jersey that has employed (and received EPA approvals) to utilize a novel "skimmer" that allows them to take water from a stream when it is above its base level (such as after a heavy rain).  The water is skimmed off the top and pumped into a holding pond.  The concept is that the water above base levels will be lost to the sea and not impact downstream users.  Supposedly they are the first to use this (at least in NJ). 

[Chris Cupit]

I don't think anyone in the industry is really doing their part to address this issue, although I will be glad to be corrected on that.

At the same time, BLANKET GENERALIZATIONS about water use on golf courses are going to be a disaster.  There are such differences from one part of the US to another (and one part of the world to another) that you just can't make any rules that apply across the board.  And so it's just up to every individual project to think about it -- and not in terms of what should we do to protect our rights to use as much water as we want to.

At dinner tonight (with a Toro rep and a bunch of guys from the EIGCA) we all agreed that most courses in the UK could cut back water use 20% and see a benefit rather than a problem -- less thatch and less poa annua.  I volunteered that in the USA the figure was more like 40% less.

Agree and disagree.  The generalization point is excellent--nothing could be worse for the industry than a "one size fits all" approach.  A federal approach would be disasterous.

But as part of a group that has been very proactive re: water issues I can assure you that this has been a key issue in GA for more than 6 years--two droughts ago!

Together, the Georgia State Golf Ass (GSGA)., GA Golf Course Superintendents (GGCSA), GA Club Managers GCMA) and GA Owners (GNGCOA) have been participating in an Allied Golf Group that has been working with state (EPD) and local officials to offer solutions and have been "at the table" to represent the industry vis a vis water use and water rights.

Several years ago and led by Tenia Workman and the Superintendents (with tremendous help from Mark Esoda CGCS at Atlanta CC) the golf industry in GA became the FIRST industry in the entire state to develop a best management practices (BMP) guideline for golf courses and made the commitment to have 75% of all golf courses in the state certified in these BMPs by 2006.  As of this year we have achieved a certification rate of over 93% and received special commendation from both our Governor and head of our state EPD for leading the way for other industries as well.

As one can imagine golf is not a political darling!  Golf is viewed as an elitist, white sport and most could care less if bad dressing white guys don't get water for their little hobby!  Fortunately we have demonstrated what efficient water users we are.  Per acre, we water and apply chemicals at far lower rates than homeowners and unlike homeowners golf courses do not use potable water to irrigate their grass.  Many people mistakenly think golf courses irrigate using city (drinkable) water--like most homeowners.  I can not think of a single course in the state that irrigates in such a manner.

Anyway, the golf industry in GA is proud of their combined efforts regarding water. 

One last note.  At this year's Superintendent's Association trade show in Orlando four of us were invited to speak at one of the educational "break out" sessions that follows the business meeting.  The session was dedicated to water issues and how GA could be a model for other states that will certainly face water issues if they have not already.  I think the title of the seminar was "No Water, No Grass, No Business"!  Unfortunately, maybe a dozen people (all industry people) bothered to attend.  Water isn't "sexy" until you don't have any.

PS  I am certainly a pro-brown guy as anyone who knows me or my course can attest to.  But, to give you the extremity of the restrictions at one point last year in north GA the ONLY area a golf course could water under level IV restrictions was greens--period.  It is also worth noting that it did not matter if the water was "yours" e.g. you pumped out of your wells, your lake or pond.  The state, not you, owns the water!!!  That point alone shocks many people.

If you were using grey water from an approved municipality you were exempt from any restrictions but that is an option for a small minority of clubs.

[TX Golf]

Chris,

Great post and congrats on the good work. Do you know if that information regarding wells is specific to the state of Georgia or is a law that applies to all fifty states. Keep up the good work.

Robert

[Chris Cupit]

I am certainly no lawyer but I believe riparian (?) law varies from state to state.  I am certain when water leaves one state and goes into another (e.g. rivers and larger lakes serving as borders) then it becomes a federal matter.  Right now GA, FL and AL are in a water fight over water which originates in north GA and ultimately flows through all three states.

Unless a well was tapping into another state I would guess that your state law governs.

PLEASE seek legal advice elsewhere though

[TX Golf]

Thanks for the reply Chris. It was just a question out of curiosity. A course that I play quite frequently uses well water and I was just curious as to their future prospects. Right now it isn't much of an issue in NorCal (except for this summer) as water is usually fairly plenty. Thanks though.

[Kalen Braley]

Thanks for the reply Chris. It was just a question out of curiosity. A course that I play quite frequently uses well water and I was just curious as to their future prospects. Right now it isn't much of an issue in NorCal (except for this summer) as water is usually fairly plenty. Thanks though.

Robert,

Don't know if I would agree about your assessment of NorCal, unless your talking about Eureka or some spot way up north.  I lived in the bay area for over 30 years and we were always in and out of some type of water restrictions.

And with the area continuing to grow, and more water from the Sierras being diverted down to SoCal, the problem is only getting worse.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Joe Bausch & Tom Doak,

I don't know that it's an "industry" problem as much as it is an individual club problem.

Most clubs pride themselves on how they look, how they are groomed.

Reducing water applications will change that look, (for the better IMO),
however, until the perception and the CULTURE changes, don't look for clubs to turn off the spigot any time soon

[Dan Herrmann]

At dinner tonight (with a Toro rep and a bunch of guys from the EIGCA) we all agreed that most courses in the UK could cut back water use 20% and see a benefit rather than a problem -- less thatch and less poa annua.  I volunteered that in the USA the figure was more like 40% less.

ding, ding, ding - we have a winner!

[Jeff_Brauer]

Dan (and Tom)

Not trying to bust any chops here, but after putting "BLANKET GENERALIZATIONS" in caps, Tom D then went right ahead and made the BLANKET GENERALIZATION that courses in the US could reduce watering 40%!

I agree many could, and there are benefits to keeping any course as dry as possible.  But, I am still not sure that courses in the US overwater by 40%.  I mean really, at somepoint, courses would all be mushy as described in posts in this thread and others.

While I have played mushy courses, and know a few to be caused specifically by overwatering (and more specifically by superintendents who really haven't figured out their computer systems) in truth, the percentage of rounds I have played on mushy courses is far less than 5%, excluding playing after big rains.

Is it really and truly your guys experience that most courses you play are mushy and overwatered?

[TEPaul]

My advice on this kind of thing is if it seems even semi-imminent, golf clubs would do themselves well long term to begin conditioning their grass to less water right now. I think the best "transition" period planning can be and generally is 3-5 years, at least depending on how you go about.

If a club thinks they can just immediately reduce by 40% or something like that the water output their grass has become conditioned to, the result will generally be a mess not imagined and certainly not expected. The grass can't take it and the eventual remediation will be expensive many factors compared to if the proper amount of transition time is used. It's sort of a Darwinian thing and a Darwinian thing takes time. One of the best descriptions I've ever heard for this kind of transition is "managed turf loss" (the weaker grass dies out and the tougher grass takes its place).

[TX Golf]

Kalen,

I guess that was a little bit of a generalization. I guess what I should have said is that we would have plenty of water if we didn't need to send three quarters of it to the brilliant people that decided to build one of the most populated parts of the US on a desert (aka SoCal) haha.

[Dan Herrmann]

Jeff - the old super at my club used 27.5 million gallons of H2O last year.  Honestly, we don't know where he got it becuase our supply is all well, and a small amount of effluent.  All the poor guy did was water, water, water.

We ended up with algae on the greens, balls plugging everywhere (greens too!), and generally poor turf health.

Now, with reduced H2O usage, the roots are much, much healthier, the algae is gone, and the balls never plug.  We're actually finally getting a course where a tee shot runs out.

I recently played at an out of state top 100 golf club.  We had about an hour of steady rain at 2am, but the sprinklers were up and running most of the day.  And they had algae in their greens, some poor turf health, and even water "pockets" under the grass - they felt like underground water baloons.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()