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.


Bradley Anderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What really was the beginning of golf course architecture?
« Reply #100 on: February 22, 2009, 03:43:19 PM »
Jim,

If we can't agree on what the words "architect", and "golf course" mean, then there is no right answer as to when it began.

But regardless, it has been an interesting thread.


Tony_Muldoon

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What really was the beginning of golf course architecture?
« Reply #101 on: February 22, 2009, 05:16:16 PM »
This statement by Reginald Beale supports the assertion that Sunningdale might have been the first example of golf course architecture.

"In the first place, I claim to be the pioneer of rapid
turf production and the art of greenkeeping as it is
now practiced. In support of this I bring forward
Sunningdale, which was the first golf course produced
from seed and which was sown in September, 1900,
and in full play in twelve months' time—a feat then
considered more or less miraculous, as at that time
it was generally conceded that it took a minimum of
three years to form turf of any sort and at least a gen-
eration to produce a fine, close-knitted, thick-soled
turf, but now commonplace,as I have since produced
twenty-five courses from plough to play in less than
a year, with a record of five months made at Sandy
Lodge."


Bradley now I am going to disagree with you.  I'd bet a reasonable green fee (or donation to The GCA subscription) that that quote comes from a Carter's Seed publication and as such it should be treated as a piece of "Trumpery".  ;) Note also the claim above is not clear.  Is it a first seeded course or the first fast result seeded course?

But seeding  fairways isn't any more “Architecture” than building greens, bunkers and tees is.  You need to set out your case for this to be a significant first.

I've said it here before but New Zealand must have been seeded/turfed.  Carters and Suttons were producing seed for pasture land for 50 years prior to the turn of the century Golf explosion.  Also Carter's weren’t even consistent. Sometimes they said Sunningdale was their first course and other times they said Walton Heath.



EDIT.
Another reason why I think the above should be taken with a large pinch of Salt are the claims Re Sandy Lodge. Mark Rowlinson is currently writing the club history but I've been lucky enough to play there several times with a long standing club member who has sat on the green committee.  To this day they still have problems getting their grass to grow, particularly early in the season.





« Last Edit: February 22, 2009, 06:27:17 PM by Tony_Muldoon »
Let's make GCA grate again!

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What really was the beginning of golf course architecture?
« Reply #102 on: February 22, 2009, 05:58:42 PM »
Bradley,
I am only suggesting to you that the etymology of a word does not always make for a good definition. One etymology of the word macaroni comes from the Italian word "Maccere", meaning to "bruise, batter, or crush".
You could do that to semolina, or to your thumb with a hammer.
 
I defer to the architects, it's their profession, and so far Neil Crafter(on this thread) and Geoffrey Cornish (in his book) are of the same mind, they say Allan Robertson. 
« Last Edit: February 22, 2009, 06:00:16 PM by Jim_Kennedy »
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

Bradley Anderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What really was the beginning of golf course architecture?
« Reply #103 on: February 22, 2009, 08:33:20 PM »
Tony,

That quote was from April 1914 issue of Golf Illustrated & Outdoor America. Beale was asked by the editor to write that article. It really is one of the best pieces of writing that we have from anyone in the agronomy side of golf from that period. His ideas about seeding golf course were very sophisticated, and while I can not prove it, I think he had, in a behind the scenes kind of way, as big an impact on the development of golf as anyone else in those times.

Beale consulted at The Country Club, Myopia, Old Elm, Merion, Piping Rock, Country Club of Detroit, Merion etc. The gossip columns of those days seem to corroborate those claims.

It was Beale's words about seeding all of Sunningdale that I offer as evidence that Sunnigdale was the first significant architectural project. You are right, that is not conclusive evidence. However, I have only been saying on here that Sunningdale gets my vote. I hope I haven't sounded like I was absolutely sure of that.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What really was the beginning of golf course architecture?
« Reply #104 on: February 23, 2009, 01:40:28 AM »

first significant architectural project

Bradley

You have qualified your position somewhat.

Your reluctance to let go of the etymology of archi is puzzling.  I wonder how many building archies could be called "master", yet we have their buildings littering our landscape.  If what is architecture gonna be a call on the quality and whether or not 18 holes were built, then you have done exactly what Tom P did, merely ignored the question at hand and qualified the subject to a certain segment of architecture. 

I am gonna stick with my guns because I think the use of natural landforms and the purposeful intent to create a playing field is significant architecture - and nobody knows when this first occurred. 

Ciao

« Last Edit: February 23, 2009, 03:01:47 AM by Sean Arble »
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Tony_Muldoon

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What really was the beginning of golf course architecture?
« Reply #105 on: February 23, 2009, 02:15:53 AM »
Tony,

That quote was from April 1914 issue of Golf Illustrated & Outdoor America. Beale was asked by the editor to write that article. It really is one of the best pieces of writing that we have from anyone in the agronomy side of golf from that period. His ideas about seeding golf course were very sophisticated, and while I can not prove it, I think he had, in a behind the scenes kind of way, as big an impact on the development of golf as anyone else in those times.

It would be good to see that article on here.  Whilst I maintain Beale was a Carter's man through and through, clearly I've lost the bet (with myself). Donation to GCA in progress.
Let's make GCA grate again!

Bradley Anderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What really was the beginning of golf course architecture?
« Reply #106 on: February 23, 2009, 07:48:39 AM »
Tony,

I commend you in advance if you read this entire article. There is a lot here. Enjoy.

Golf Illustrated & Outdoor America, 1914 April Vol. 1, Issue 1, pgs. 40-44. by Reginald Beale F.L.S..

TURF AND GOLFING TURF
By REGINALD BEALE, F.L.S.

MY only excuse for writing on this subject is
that I have been asked to do so by my
good friend the Editor of this magazine,
but before getting under way I must present my cre-
dentials.

In the first place, I claim to be the pioneer of rapid
turf production and the art of greenkeeping as it is
now practiced. In support of this I bring forward
Sunningdale, which was the first golf course produced
from seed and which was sown in September, 1900,
and in full play in twelve months' time—a feat then
considered more or less miraculous, as at that time
it was generally conceded that it took a minimum of
three years to form turf of any sort and at least a gen-
eration to produce a fine, close-knitted, thick-soled
turf, but now commonplace,as I have since produced
twenty-five courses from plough to play in less than
a year, with a record of five months made at Sandy
Lodge.

I have inspected at least 250 established golf
courses and prescribed mixtures for not less than 100
new ones standing on all classes of soil, from pure
sand to hard clay, in all countries of Europe.
But what has all this to do with turf in the
United States of America and the Dominion of Can-
ada? Admittedly very little, excepting that the
same thing is required there, i.e., good turf, for the
same purpose, the Royal and Ancient Game, but
under different geological and climatic conditions.
Until the year 1908, I knew nothing of golf or
turf in America and certainly cared less, but that year
I had an interesting proposition put before me by
the Chairman of the Greens Committee of The Coun-
try Club, Brookline, Mass. This Club was extend-
ing its course by taking in some thirty acres of new
ground; samples of soil were sent to me together with
a very accurate description of the climate and in-
structions to prepare sufficient seed for the greens
and fairways. I carried out the instructions to the
best of my ability, hoped for the best and awaited
results, which were so satisfactory that in 1911 I de-
cided to tour the Eastern States, myself, so that I
could thoroughly investigate conditions on the spot.
My tour embraced the golf courses connected with
the following clubs—The Country Club (Brookline),
Arcola, Baltusrol, Brae-Burn, Chevy Chase, Chicago
Golf, Columbia (Washington, D. C.), Detroit, Gar-
den City, Glen Echo (St. Louis), Hackensack, Hunt-
ingdon Valley (Philadelphia), Kanawaki (Montreal),
Mayfield (Cleveland), Merion, Myopia, Onwentsia,
Philadelphia Cricket, Royal Montreal, Shinnecock
Hills, Tedesco, the National Golf Links of America,
Toronto, Whitemarsh Valley, and many others.
On my second tour, from which I have just re-
turned, I visited Piping Rock, Garden City, Sleepy
Hollow, Pine Valley, the New Merion, Atlantic City,
Westmoreland (Pittsburgh), Oakwood, Indianapolis,
Chicago Golf, Onwentsia, Skokie, Winnetka, Old
Elm, Westmoreland (Chicago), Detroit, Mayfield,
Wanakah, Rochester, Scarboro' (Toronto), Toronto,
Kanawaki, Outremont, and Essex County, and so
revisited many old friends, which enabled me to note
results and at the same time extend my territory and
experience.

By visiting the country, I got an absorbed knowl-
edge of its geological, and more important, the cli-
matic conditions under which one has to grow turf
in the Eastern and Central States of America and
Canada, and I can now sit in my study chair with
closed eyes and picture in my brain the existing nor-
mal conditions in those sections any time of the year.
In order to discuss the question of turf intelli-
gently, it is necessary to divide it into two sections,
viz., Turf for the Putting Greens, and Turf for the
Fair Green.

TURF FOR PUTTING GREENS
It is well to remember at the very start that a
modern putting green is artificial both in its make-
up and upkeep, consequently it may not be necessary
or desirable to choose grasses that are natural to, or
thrive best in, a certain district under natural con-
ditions, but rather to choose those that are best
suited to the purpose for which they are to be used;
this, no doubt, sounds unscientific and all the rest of
it, but when all is said and done, science is a good
servant but a very bad master, and the man with a
good fund of common sense and knowledge of apply-
ing same usually gets the better results.

It has always been my opinion and I state it here
right boldly, that turf of the best English quality can
be developed on putting greens anywhere in the
sections of the country covered by my tours, provided
that the greens are properly prepared, fertilized, and
top-soiled if necessary, so as to form a seed bed of rich,
friable soil of a minimum depth of four inches with all
undulations fashioned with runaway surface outlets
for storm water or melting snow in order to prevent,
as far as it is humanly possible,any such accumulations
when freezing and thawing conditions alternate and
when the natural or artificial drainage, as the case
may be, is put out of commission by the frozen sub-
soil. The so-called winterkill is bound to occur if
such methods are not adopted and valuable time and
money will be wasted.

A green made on these lines and sown with a mix-
ture of seeds, say for the sake of argument, the Coombe
Hill Mixture, should produce turf similar in all re-
spects to that at Coombe Hill in any section of the
United States and Canada that I have seen.
In support of my contention that the best Eng-
lish, or perhaps I ought to say British turf, as there
is some wonderful stuff in Scotland and Ireland, can
be produced in North America, more or less to order,
I bring forward the Country Club at Brookline, where
they sowed the greens with our Mid Surrey Mixture
and have obtained greens equal to those at the Mid
Surrey Golf Club, Richmond, England, which means
a lot to anyone who has seen Peter Lee's famous pro-
ductions at the latter club.

The greens at Brookline, especially the 9th, 10th,
and 11th, taking them year in and year out, are in
my opinion the best in North America, and while I
may claim some of the credit of obtaining such re-
sults for myself it is only fair to say I should not get
it all—I explained how the greens should be made
and sown, but if that Club had not seen that my in-
structions were faithfully carried out, nothing would
have been accomplished.

Before leaving the question of greens, I may as
well give a few hints on the making and upkeep in
tabloid form, so that they can be easily digested.
Always, if possible, arrange for early fall sowing
and regard the period between mid-August and mid-
September as the selected moment. When the first
rains come in the fall the soil is so warm that the seeds
germinate very quickly and if sown thickly get well
established and self-protecting before the winter
sets in.

In the spring the soil is cold and in consequence the
seed not only germinates slowly but it also grows
slowly and the young grass plants have to face the
heat and more especially the drought of the summer
when in a very young, weak state, very often with
evil results. Also in spring weeds and other obnox-
ious growths are much more prevalent than in the
fall.

When making or contouring a green, remove the
top soil, work with the subsoil and finish off by re-
placing the top soil in an even layer over the green.
The separation of the soil and the replacement of the
same cannot be done properly by scoops, so it is al-
ways advisable that this section of the work should
be done by hand with spades and barrows.

All drains should be laid before the top soil is
replaced.

In making up greens, each scoop or barrowful as
it is shot down, should be carefully trodden; other-
wise, the surface will sink later.

Always, if possible, make surface runaways from
undulations, otherwise water will accumulate with
disastrous results to the turf.

Water freely during droughts and in the evenings,
if possible, as best results are then obtained. The
water applied at that time does most good and does
not evaporate as quickly as it does if applied in the
heat of the day. In any case, water freely, and re-
member that one good soaking is worth a dozen light
sprinklings.

It is hardly necessary to state that pond or stream
water of a natural temperature gives the best results,
but where this cannot be obtained and the water is
pumped from a depth, or city water is used, some
means, if possible, should be taken to get it up to the
natural normal heat by exposing it to the sun and air
in a shallow pond or reservoir tank or if it is pumped
direct by laying the pipes close to the surface where
they will feel the influence of the sun.

If the latter system is adopted, draining cocks
should be put in all low places so that the pipes can
be emptied in the winter; otherwise they will freeze
and burst.

To avoid the tired, sickly appearance that turf
gets after a long period of artificial watering, give it
a monthly or bi-monthly dose of Complete Grass
Manure, at a rate not exceeding 20 pounds per 400
super yards, mixed before use with at least 100 pounds
of dry, fine soil or sand. A light fertilizing as above
will keep the grass growing and in good heart, whereas,
if artificial watering is relied upon alone it just keeps
it alive, especially if the water is hard, low in tem-
perature, or contains any impurities.

Eradicate and destroy all weeds as soon as they
appear, do not let them multiply, and remember that
wire, witch, crab and September grasses get hold
best in weak or exhausted greens. If you cannot
exterminate the latter, keep them, like clover, in check
by lifting the creeping or prostrate stems and branches
with a close-toothed iron rake and mow closely; re-
peat this as often as necessary and use our Anti-
clover manure for the drought dressings when the
trefoil is prevalent.

Topdress freely with a finely sifted compost of a
light, friable, porous nature, rich in organic or fer-
tilizing matter, so as to reduce the plasticity of the
soil if it is too heavy and to add body if it is too light,
and when doing so remember that a cubic yard of
compost will cover 144 superficial yards to the depth
of a quarter of an inch, and that sixteen dressings at
the above rate spread over, say, three years, will re-
duce the natural top spit soil of the dressed area to
the secondary position of the subsoil, so there is hope
for all greens, no matter whether they stand on sand
or clay. The contouring and general preparation of
a green is costly and its upkeep is more so, conse-
quently it is the worst economy to be parsimonious
when seeding. In England, with our warm genial
climate, we sow one ounce to a superficial yard and
expect to get a close turf in a year or less, and when
we are in a hurry we sow at the rate of two ounces
per super yard.


Bradley Anderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What really was the beginning of golf course architecture?
« Reply #107 on: February 23, 2009, 07:49:41 AM »
Beale Part 2

In America and Canada, where the climatic
conditions are, to say the least of them, extremely
severe and difficult, the minimum rate should be two
ounces per square yard and the maximum, four ounces.

TURF FOR THE FAIR GREEN
A true golfing turf is composed of dwarf creeping
grasses, which form a close-soled, springy sod, which
is both a delight to walk over and play on, as it holds
the ball from the ground so that it sits up and looks
at the player and when a divot is taken the club cuts
through the matted fibrous roots of the grass without
hardly touching the soil.

Turf which does not answer the above description
is not golfing turf at all; it may cover the ground
and make it look nice and green and so mislead the
casual observer, but it is worthless from a golfer's
point of view, and that's all there is to it.

This sort of turf will pass with those who have
not played on or seen anything better, but those who
have can tell it at once by the way it feels to the foot
and club.

As I have already explained, a true golfing turf
is springy to the foot and when a divot is taken the
club slides through the mat of grass without hardly
disturbing the soil.Turf of the non-golfing quality, on the other hand,
is uncomfortable to walk over, there being very little
fibre under the foot and it is difficult and unfair on
the player because the ball falls through it and rests
on the hard baked ground, which the club has to cut
through to take a divot, a difficult and unpleasant
stroke which oftentimes jars the wrists.

Of all the clubs I visited in 1911 and this year,
only a small proportion could show even a reasonably
good turf on the fairways and as far as I know there
are not many clubs in North America that can at
present boast of a true golfing turf.

This is a very bold statement, but if a golfer who
knows what a true golfing turf is will make a tour of
inspection in the same section as I did he cannot but
bear me out. That the results required can, however,
be obtained, I stand convinced and as proof of this
would point among others to the Country Club
of Detroit, Toronto and Mayfield (Cleveland) where
there is a young but true golfing turf—all having been
sown in accordance with my system and with my
mixtures.
To avoid any hair-splitting, I must say here that
I have taken the courses as a whole and have avoided
all mention of those that I have not seen or those that
have some good or reasonably good turf and some bad.
I will now attempt to explain the reason for the
lack of really good turf in America. In the first place,
the best natural turf in the British Islands is found
in locations that have been nibbled close by sheep or
rabbits for years, and the best artificial turf where
mixtures of grasses have been sown and where the
turf has been closely mown, from the very start.
These conditions suit the finer grasses which tiller
out, mat and increase, while the coarser grasses die
out to a very large extent. In some instances I have
seen just the reverse happen; that is to say, a fine
rabbit or sheep fed turf has been saved for hay, which
allowed the coarse grasses to gain the mastery.
Probably many of my readers have seen exactly
the same thing happen on an abandoned green, which
I think in conjunction with the above conclusively
proves that to get a fine turf, close grazing or mowing
is absolutely necessary.
Secondly, the great majority of the artificial or
sown courses in America have been sown with ven-
erable prescriptions propounded years and years ago
for agricultural purposes before golf was known out
of Scotland.

I might state here that eighteen years ago not
only was it considered impossible to produce fine turf
from seed, but there was absolutely no demand for
it, but when the game of golf took hold of the civil-
ized world I saw that the ordinary commercial mix-
tures of lawn grass seeds and the old methods of turf
production must go by the board and new methods
and new mixtures take their place.

The third reason is the antiquated idea that the
indigenous or native grasses are best in their own
sections or zones, because they are indigenous or
native, an argument which absolutely bolts and bars
the door to any sort of improvement and is as worth-
less as it is futile.

The fourth and last reason is the improper ratio
in which the various varieties are used (even when the
mixture is made up of correct varieties) and also the
thin sowing.

It takes years of patient observation and costly
experiment before one is fitted to propound mixtures
of grass seeds for a neighbor's lawn by propounding
mixtures of which they really know nothing; yet quite
a few persons are prepared to gamble with the pros-
perity of a golf club, when it is well understood that
a club is, or rather should be, judged by the quality
of its turf rather than by the comfort of its club-house.
I met one man who intended to base the prescrip-
tion of grasses for sowing a course situated on raw
sand from about half a dozen quaint little handwatered
trial plots, each about one yard square. He pointed
out the grasses to me and asked me to note how well
they stood on the sand without any fertilizer at all;
the plots were barely a month old and the expert
evidently did not know that any grass seed will germ-
inate freely and keep alive for months on a piece of
cloth or an old sack, or anything, so long as it is kept
moist.
Another showed me with pride a course on which
he had used almost every named grass procurable;
he certainly had got a turf, but it was far better suited
for dairy farming than golf and the cost of it must
have been simply cruel.

A third sent me out on a hot dusty trip to see an
"eye opener" in the rapid production of fine turf by
sowing fescues and bents, and when I arrived the per-
fect turf had absolutely no bottom and looked like
a stubble field, as it well might, considering that the
seed was sown in equal quantity of each description
at the rate of 120 pounds per acre. The significance
of this will be better understood when it is known that
the number of seeds that go to one ounce varies rough-
ly in the different varieties from 14,000 to 500,000.
There are a few other little pitfalls which are quite
easy to fall into, such as the different rates of growth;
that is to say, some grasses take twice as long to reach
maturity as others. The area covered by one grass
plant may be two to ten times as large as the area
covered by a single plant of another variety of the
same age, and some grasses amalgamate and go well
with other grasses and some will grow only in isolation.
By just pointing out a few little difficulties such
as the above, one can easily understand why there
is not much good golfing turf on fair greens in America.
The rate the seed is sown per acre is another very
important question and no matter from what point
of view the subject is tackled, financial, common sense,
or golfing, heavy sowing is undoubtedly the best and
cheapest.
For a start, let us assume that the course in ques-
tion is a first-class venture with sixty acres to sow,
calling all told for a capital of, say, $250,000 and an
annual upkeep of, say, $10,000, the latter of which is
very reasonable. If money is worth six per cent,
which I understand it is in America, the club has to
face a steady outgo of six per cent on its capital which
in this case would be $15,000 plus the cost of the up-
keep, $10,000 or $25,000 per annum in all, or say
$2,000 per month. Now, if the greens and fairway
are sown at the minimum standard rates of one ounce
per square yard on the greens and 200 pounds per
acre on the fairway, the approximate cost of the sow-
ing would be for eighteen greens of, say, 900 super
yards, $330 and sixty acres of fair green, $3,360, or
$3,690 in all.
The above rates per acre are the minimum stand-
ard rates as used in England, which admittedly pos-
sesses the best grass growing climate in the world,
and are calculated to produce a turf fit for play in
from nine to twelve months from the date the seed
is sown, so if I allow a full year to produce a playable
turf in America where the climate is difficult to say
the least of it, I am being under rather than over
sanguine.
I will now bring the figures into collision; the up-
keep bill all told is $2,000 per month and the sowing
cost $3,690.
If the seed is sown at the double rate of two ounces
per square yard on the green and 400 lbs. on the fair-
way, the sowing cost would be $7,380, which should
bring the course into play, give normal seasons, some-
times between six and nine months from the date it
is sown, but assuming that a saving of only two
months is made it will pay for itself. These are hard
figures which no doubt will be carefully scrutinized,
and whilst not being a financier I do not think I have
made a mistake.
A friend, after reading a rough proof of my notes,
tackled me on the upkeep question by saying the
sooner a course is got into play the sooner will one
have to start paying for its upkeep, a truth so palpa-
bly true that it is untrue.
The upkeep of a course does not start from the
time it is fit to play, but from the time it is sown,
and between these two dates the course is not earning
a red cent.
There is another very valuable point for the con-
sideration of the financial committee which is usually
not given proper thought, and that is the speed of
growth or quantity of herbage produced in a season
by various varieties of grass.
Grass, from the standpoint of the farmer, who is
of course the greatest producer, is valued solely by
its feeding value and weight of herbage produced per
acre, whilst the golfer, who constitutes a small part
of the small minority, values the same family wholly
by its texture, the lie it affords the ball and the cost
of mowing. Generally speaking, the most valuable
grasses from the farmer's point of view are of the
broad-bladed, fast, tall-growing, non-creeping class,
which give the heaviest cut, and conversely from the
golfer's point of view they are of the fine, dwarf,
creeping varieties, which give the smallest cut.
It follows, therefore, that a valuable farmer's turf
is uneconomical to the golfer and that a good golfing
turf is uneconomical to the farmer.
Now, as the farmer is in such a great majority, it
is safe to assume that his requirements keep the Boards
of Agriculture and Seed Merchant experts busy and
that the golfer is badly served unless the latter fully
understand his requirements and has sufficient knowl-
edge, which cannot be acquired in a day or a year,
to meet his case.
The above will be more readily understood when
I explain the well-known fact that a good farmer's
turf will grow to a height of about thirty inches on
an average soil, in an average season, whilst a good
golfing turf will grow only about ten inches in the
same period.
I do not, however, wish my readers to think that
the mowing bill of these two classes of turf is exactly
in the ratio of 3-1, as this would be wholly inaccurate;
it is more like 4-1.
Speaking generally, the growth of the coarser
grasses is stimulated by repeated mowing, as there is
no other outlet for the energy of the plant, whilst the
surplus energy of the finer grasses is absorbed by
their spreading, creeping nature.
If it were possible for me to produce a turf which




Bradley Anderson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What really was the beginning of golf course architecture?
« Reply #108 on: February 23, 2009, 07:49:59 AM »
Beale Part 3

43
G O L F
I L L U S T R A T E D
________________________________________
Page 5
after reaching perfection would cease growing, it would
easily be worth $1,000 per acre, and as I can pro-
duce one the upkeep of which is at least one-third
of that of an ordinary meadow turf, I feel that my
reputation stands on a sound base.
Judged from the common-sense point of view the
advantages of heavy sowing are just as striking,
especially if one remembers that a close turf is either
composed of relatively a few large grass plants which
may take a year or more to mature, or a multitude
of small ones which can be produced in a few months
and which improve with age. Furthermore, if a club
decides to sow lightly and wait for the turf to mature,
not only does it face a long, tiresome costly wait, but
worse still, the chances of a partial or total loss through
adverse weather are increased about threefold.
If the seed is sown heavily at the right season the
little grass plants are crowded together and so afford
each other shade and protection from wind or sun
almost from the start, whereas, if light sowing is re-
sorted to the little grass plants have got to stand
alone and a poor chance they get if adverse weather
sets in either in the shape of a cold dry wind or a hot
scorching sun. It is wonderful what a little shelter
will do; I have frequently noticed that the seed in
the hoof-marks made by horses harrowing and rolling
in the seed gets quite a start on its exposed neighbors
and where the seed has been gathered together by a
wash-out it comes up like hairs on a cat's back and
is self-protecting from the very start.
When a golfer joins a club, he wants to play on
the course as soon as possible and not wait for a
year for the turf if it can be produced in a shorter
time.
Most of the golf courses I have seen in America
possess interesting natural features, which, if prop-
erly handled, are of sufficient importance to earn
reputations for their clubs in exactly the same way
as they do at home; as a matter of fact a goodly few
have already done so and have been copied, such as
the tenth at Brookline.
To my mind, however, to copy the work of another
is a sure sign of weakness and any attempt to repro-
duce nature, futile and ridiculous; a genius accepts
hints from both and produces original masterpieces.
Before writing Finis, I will discuss in a few words
one or two points in regard to keeping the course
"through the green" which are peculiar to the North
American Continent.
Although water and fertilizers are freely used on
the greens, the fair greens get none, and yet the play
of the long shots is or should be just as important as
the short shots and if it is necessary to have good,
true putting greens, surely it is equally necessary to
get a good lie on the fairway, yet, as a rule, little or
no attempt is made to improve matters.
If the above is admitted as it must be, I ask, why is
the turfon the fair green allowed to peter out from sheer
starvation when it could not only be kept alive but
improved year by year by an annual dressing of
fertilizer at a cost of about $15.00 per acre and an
occasional sprinkling of water? The answer to the
question is always the same, the area is too big for
any club to handle; but is this true?
Acourse6,000 yards long by 50 yards wide occupies
approximately 60 acres; from this deduct say 15 acres
for the rough in front of the tee and short holes where
good fair green is unnecessary, which leaves 45 acres
to deal with.
The fertilizer for 45 acres would cost about
$675, but that of the water I cannot even guess at,
but surely it would not be prohibitive to put in hy-
drants, say, 100 yards apart and devise some method
of semi-automatic watering by means of demountable
perforated tubes, after the style of the Skinner sys-
tem, anyhow for clubs which own their own water
plant.
An occasional watering would not only be a great
help to the grass but it would also improve the play
of the whole course by reducing the hardness of the
soil and the abnormal summer run of ball.
The next question is the use of heavy automobile
mowers, weighing 2,000 pounds or more. These
heavy tools may be economical so far as the wage
sheet is concerned, but I am quite sure that there
are few soils and less turf that can stand their regular
use without injury.
If they are used on medium to heavy soils when
they are wet, they cap or seal the surface and so arrest
the natural flow of air and water and generally get
it into a state inimical to the growth of grass and they
crush and bruise the grass if they are used when the
ground is dry. On light soils they do not do so much
damage, assuming that the turf is thick and well-
rooted, but where it is not, the back thrust of the
driving roller actually moves the surface soil, espe-
cially when starting or grunting up a gradient.
If one with a knowledge of mathematical engi-
neering was to calculate the hammerstroke imparted
to the turf by the driving roller in terms of pounds
per square inch, the result would be simply staggering.
The ideal automobile mower does not weigh more
than 1,200 pounds, it cuts thirty inches wide and is
operated and steered by a man who walks behind it.
Those who own a heavy automobile mower and
do not wish to scrap it can use it with advantage in the
early spring as a roller when the frost is out of the
ground, provided that care is taken to see that the
soil is neither too wet nor too dry, or in other words
is in good condition for rolling.
If the few suggestions that I have made are given
careful consideration, especially those in reference
to the making and upkeep of fair green turf, I am
sure good will come of it, as the fair greens of the
American golf courses are undoubtedly their weak
spot.

G O L F
I L L U S T R A T E D
44

Tony_Muldoon

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: What really was the beginning of golf course architecture?
« Reply #109 on: February 23, 2009, 05:33:56 PM »
Thanks Bradley I enjoyed every last word.   

I do have stuff for you and will get them out as soon as I get a chance.

Peter Lee's featured in Adverts for Carter's as did Coombe Hill. 

Let's make GCA grate again!

TEPaul

Re: What really was the beginning of golf course architecture?
« Reply #110 on: February 23, 2009, 07:05:48 PM »
Brad:

Thanks so much for posting that Beale article. I'd seen it before but never really read it particularly carefully. He does express some very specific, detailed and strong opinions on various things to do with golf agronomy.

I for one can't find a thing about what he said about agronomy that I'd question but that's obviously because I really don't know that much about it. What about you----does what he said in that article all pretty much check out with you? You're in the business; you should know.

TEPaul

Re: What really was the beginning of golf course architecture?
« Reply #111 on: February 23, 2009, 07:11:40 PM »
By the way, Brad, just looking at Beale's itinerary on the two trips he mentioned he took over here and all the courses he visited, and then basically comparing it to the advertisement of the Carter Tested Seed Co. immediately below his article that includes the courses in North America that had used Carter Tested Seed Co. seed, it sure looks to me like Beale was a Carter representative, maybe even their primary representative. He may've even been the one who made the recommendations for particular seed and mixtures to use from the Carters seed company on those courses listed in his intinerary and in the Carter ad.

TEPaul

Re: What really was the beginning of golf course architecture?
« Reply #112 on: February 23, 2009, 07:19:11 PM »
Brad:

Catch the part in his article when he mentioned some of the people he visited and what they were saying about their own seed plots and experiments and how it wasn't very productive on their part. I would bet some pretty good money that even though those few people were not named that one of them was C.B. Macdonald and NGLA. What Beale said in one of those examples is exactly what Piper and Oakley said about Macdonald and NGLA when he brought them in after a fairly complete agronomic wipeout or two. Basically, initially Macdonald was trying to grow grass on straight sand!

One irony, at least for us today, is about 3-4 years later Crump made exactly the same mistake at Pine Valley that Macdonald did initially at NGLA. That was probably the reason for Macdonald's famous remark when he visited PV for the first time; "This might be the greatest course in the world if they can get the grass to grow."