Obit. for a Keeper of the Greens......

[Bob_Huntley]

From today's London Telegraph.

See:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/05/23/db2303.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/05/23/ixportal.html

[Scott_Burroughs]

An unbroken link here

[RJ_Daley]

A traditionalist, he believed that links courses are the most challenging for the players; and he deplored what he regarded as the cosmetic improvement of greens that resulted from the increasing exposure of golf on television - how a green played, not its spectacular emerald hue, was what intereted him.

Now here was a man with something valuable to say, particularly about cultural practices.  It is too bad we didnt have the benefit of his thoughts prior to his passing in some of the discussions we have had here on GCA.com  ...RIP

I am going to look for his book, "Practical Greenkeeping" here in the states.  I see several outlets for it in the UK.

[Steve Okula]

With all due respect, Jim Arthur was never a greenkeeper. He was a consultant.

I never met Jim Arthur, but I read some of his theories regarding greenkeeping. He was controversial, with both strong supporters and detractors.

For example, Arthur proclaimed that a properly constructed and managed putting green never needed any nutrient besides nitrogen, and precious little of that, while every other authority in the world says that potassium, phosphorous, and micronutrients are necessary to at least some degree.

A lot of Arthur's ideas sounded interesting, and perhaps would work in the context he was preaching. But those of us who need to provide fast, smooth greens for a demanding golfing public don't have the luxury of following Arthur's advice and keeping our jobs.

[Bob_Huntley]

Steve,

Thank you for providing the counterpoint, coming from a professional, it is a welcome sign to see the opposing viewpoint.

Bob

[RJ_Daley]

Steve, I understand the conventional wisdom, let alone the practical aspect of a fellow who must provide a certain high standard of expectations for conditions just to keep his job.

Was Mr Arthur's attitude just naive, or archaic?  I remember some time ago when a detailed description of cultural-maintenance practices at TOC were featured in one of the turf magazines.  I remember the description of the low fertilizer N inputs, and I can't remember if they were using some organic applications to provide P and K.  I also seem to remember them using lime and potash to adjust PH levels.  They were hand picking of pest weeds, and top dressing with beach sand.  M memory of details is foggy, and I may be quite off about the P-K ammendments and liming.  Is all that out the window now at all the old links courses besides the famous and highly visited by tourists ones?

[Eric Johnson]

Steve, I understand the conventional wisdom, let alone the practical aspect of a fellow who must provide a certain high standard of expectations for conditions just to keep his job.

Was Mr Arthur's attitude just naive, or archaic?  I remember some time ago when a detailed description of cultural-maintenance practices at TOC were featured in one of the turf magazines.  I remember the description of the low fertilizer N inputs, and I can't remember if they were using some organic applications to provide P and K.  I also seem to remember them using lime and potash to adjust PH levels.  They were hand picking of pest weeds, and top dressing with beach sand.  M memory of details is foggy, and I may be quite off about the P-K ammendments and liming.  Is all that out the window now at all the old links courses besides the famous and highly visited by tourists ones?

Don't have a lot of time to write but after discussing the fertility program with Euan Grant, Head Greenkeeper of TOC, they applied 16kg/hectare of N in 2004.  I'll let you all do the math converting to lbs/Mft or Acre.  I may have time to write more later.

Steve,

Have you read the Danish Fescue study articles in Greenkeeper International or on the R&A website.  Food for thought.  It may be that Mr. Arthur may have been on to something.  I haven't come to any black and white conclusions but the results are interesting.

[Brent Hutto]

All of this is far beyond my meager knowledge of grass cultivation...but I've read the article and it seems quite specific to links courses and fescue grass. Was Mr. Arthur speaking advice intended for greens of, say, a hybrid Bermuda in South Carolina or a modern variety of Bent in Ohio?

My uninformed impression would be that different practices would be called for at a course on the coast of Scotland and one in Florida. I can't parse which elements described in that article are grass- and climate-specific details versus general philosophical principles.

[RJ_Daley]

If conventional wisdom recommends 90-180kg/ha yearly depending on soil type, leaching CEC, watering rates, carrier type slow release or water soluable, and PH, for blue grass and bents; and 45-134kg/ha for fine fescues, it sure sounds like a wee tiny dose of N that they're applying at 16Kg/ha per year.

Brent, Bermuda requires significantly more N.

[Steve Okula]

"Was Mr Arthur's attitude just naive, or archaic?"

My take on Arthur was that he was pathologically opposed to Poa annua in the greens, to the point of phobia. There was no sacrifice in playing quality that one could make that was too great if it meant keeping out Poa, i.e. mowing at 5-7 mm., starvation diet, constant drought stress. Sure, you could keep bent/fescue greens this way. On links courses, like the Old Course, with the wind blowing and the undulating greens, maybe a stimp of 8 feet is fine.

The last time I was at the Old Course, January 2004, the greens were fairly free of Poa, but there is no way I could present greens like that at my club, they were long and slow.

"Don't have a lot of time to write but after discussing the fertility program with Euan Grant, Head Greenkeeper of TOC, they applied 16kg/hectare of N in 2004.  I'll let you all do the math converting to lbs/Mft or Acre.  I may have time to write more later."

16kg is actually quite a lot for there. I got by last year on 11 kg N./ha on my greens.  But also 2.5 kg Phosphorous and 30 kg Potassium, not to mention myriad applications of iron sulfate, manganese, magnesium, and so forth.

"Steve,

Have you read the Danish Fescue study articles in Greenkeeper International or on the R&A website.  Food for thought.  It may be that Mr. Arthur may have been on to something.  I haven't come to any black and white conclusions but the results are interesting."

Yes, I did read the articles, but I haven't been there to see for myself how conditions are.  I understand in Denmark now that practically all pesticides have been banned for golf course use, meaning there is no way to control Fusarium. In that case, they had better start looking for some alternatives, and the golfers had better be prepared to sacrifice some putting quality. We haven't got to that point yet here in France, I have the tools to manage Poa greens, so I don't have an excuse.

By the way, as far as I know, Arthur didn't work much if at all with warm-season grasses, he was mainly a British Isles kind of guy.

[Steve Okula]

Sorry, my math was all wrong, I don't know what I was thinking.

Yes, 16 kg/ha is a tiny amount of notrogen per year.

Last year, I put out 110 kg on my greens, plus 25 kg P, and about 300 kg K.

Stupid mistake.

[RJ_Daley]

Well Steve, math is really a stumbling block to me also.  Yet, your mistake would lead to putting too little N and P over the year.  It is obviously much worse to put on too much.  So, keep rounding down...