[RJ_Daley]

I think it is a given that many courses overmaintain, over input, over water, and keep conditions soft.  

These practices are probably not really what a well educated super would like to do.  They are practices of survival of the fittest of supers, not survival of fittest turf cultivars.  I think most supers know that their turf swards can be maintained much leaner, seasonally lean and mean, periods of dormancy, etc.  But, they can't survive in their careers when the members or powers that run their facility start bitching.

What the supers need is plausible deniability, or a bogeyman to blame the practice on.

I think if would be cool if some officials of state environmental regulatory agencies (were really passionate golfers) would see that the future points to dwindling water resources, and that some sort of mandate for action by large water users like golf courses, must show a plan, and demonstrate a practice that can effectively cut their consumption now by an X % factor.

One way that they could demo this is to take one long par 4 or par 5 out of the regular rotation of maintenance and impliment a lean and mean program.  Turn the water significantly down.  Reduce through weaning the chemical and fert inputs.  Then, the members would have to play that one hole during a transition, and see for themselves the effects in the transition, and the results after a couple of years.  

One of Demmings 14 points in quality management is "driving out fear".   Members and supers are fearful of such changes.  We need a mechanism to drive out fear.  Maybe environmental pilot programs of reducing resource usage, manditory and nee4ding documentation to show compliance is the way to get er done.

[Norbert P]

 We need a mechanism to drive out fear.  Maybe environmental pilot programs of reducing resource usage, manditory and needing documentation to show compliance is the way to get er done.

  Dick, you know you are more smarterer than I, but I don't think that is the right way to elucidate golfers into fast and firm appreciation.  Besides, when has government mandating, needing documentation to show compliance, ever driven out fear?  

  I like the one hole for demo purposes tactic.  

  Keep brainstorming Dick.  Eventually you'll lead the golf designa nd maintenance industry into the future widespread use of F&F.  

[Dan Kelly]

As I said in that other thread:

Brown Is Green.

Take it away, USGA -- for the good of the game.

I like the demo-hole idea, too.

[JESII]

What would a superintendent say about the "demo hole"?

[Gib_Papazian]

Dick,

I am not certain if this is your idea, but if so I nominate you to head the USGA. This cannot be an original idea, but maybe you have hit on an impossibly obvious solution to educating the masses.

It reminds me of a story, relayed by an elderly friend who worked for NASA much of his career.

The Saturn V rocket was enormous and moving it from the construction site to the launch area was an unwieldy task, requiring endless planning because it was necessary to use existing roadways.

At one point, one of the engineers had incorrectly calculated the height of the rocket as it sat on its side on the moving platform.

The problem was that the rocket was three inches too thick to get though this one underpass.

The story goes that all the engineers are calculating how much trouble it would be to dismantle the body of the rocket, even discussing removing part of the overpass temporarily as they were facing a launch window.

One of the engineers finally ascertained that it would be cheaper to gouge three inches out of the concrete, the width of the enormous tires carrying the load under the logic that the highway department could patch it up, necessitating the closure of the road for only three or four days.

Some kid, riding his Raleigh Rodeo bike, came peddling up, wanting to know what all the fuss was about.

All the geniuses were deep in thought, huddled in the corner trying to decide what to do, but one of the workman in charge of laying the pylons told the kid the problem and suggested he run along because this was serious business.

The kid peddled over to where the engineers were gathered, still scratching their heads and nervously looking at their watches every 30 seconds or so as night approached.

"I know what you guys can do!" yelled the kid, who immediately got told to scram.

But the kid would not leave, so one of the exasperated engineers finally snapped at him that he was only a kid and had no idea about rocket science, but would listen to his idea if he promised to get out of everybody's hair and go home.

"Okay," said the kid. "Just let three inches of air out of the tires."

The launch went as scheduled.

[Jim_Kennedy]

It appears Jay Sigel was on the same page back in 1980. Aronomink didn't get a watering system until 1965 or so?:

http://turf.lib.msu.edu/1980s/1980/800304.pdf

[Craig Sweet]

People like their "parks" to be green and we have, unfortunately, a mentality that considers a golf course to be a park, or even worse, a country estate...have you ever noticed the money spent, and the time spent, planting flowers and other flora, to beautify your golf course?  

As a greens keeper I can tell you people do not come up to me and say "the course is really playing good these days"....no, they come up and say "the course sure LOOKS good...."

I think anyone promoting a brown is good maintinence plan is fighting a losing battle....I think smart superintendents want to keep grass alive and keep their jobs....if their is a ground swell of support for firm/fast/brown within the membership a good super knows how to deliver....setting up a "demo" hole is foolish, in my opinion...I bet most members would play it and say, "so what"? "make it green again"....

[TEPaul]

Although we've been over this subject before on GOLFCLUBALTAS it should be mentioned again that brown is not necessarily a requirement for firm and fast. We certainly have seem some very impressive firm and fast playability at some of the high end courses and those courses are not brown. What they are is a lightish green (I call it the "light green sheen" ) but to get that look which is generally indicatove of some serious firm and fast playability costs a lot of money. It's all about manpower, lots of manpower and that costs.

[RJ_Daley]

Norby, I hear your reticance on a government agency mandating an X percent cut back on water usage and chem imputs.  Everyone these days seems to fear the big government takeover...  But they are the only ones with regulatory authority to mandate any resource usage cutbacks.  You don't think some private industry group association would ever ask people to consume less, do you?  

I just think that one of the biggest hurdles to overcome in turf maintenance is, the managers fear of loosing their jobs based on their overseers ignorance and marketing conditioned notions that the greener, lusher, the better.  As I said, I don't doubt just about any turf science educated practitioner knows the reality of hearty, lean and mean turf cultural practices.  They just fear those that don't know not being able to willingly break through their conditioned attitudes of lush green is best.  So, I'm looking for a way to allow them to point to a higher authority to say, they made me do it.

Gib, I don't know if anyone else thunk up a manditory or some bully mechanism to have courses put one hole in a pilot lean and mean maintenance program, or if the media and USGA could mount a mass education fad to encourage this, (like the soft spikes movement several years ago) but it came to me this morning in something of a dull hum, not blinding flash or burning bush.  What does that mean?

I love that line in the movie on Howard Hughes, his quirky sort of chant; 'its the way of the future, way of the future, way of the future'.  

Do you know Dr Katz personally and could you get me access?

[Joe Hancock]

 Do you know Dr Katz personally and could you get me access?

It's too late. You are now the enemy........

Welcome to the dark side.

Joe

[Dr Katz]

I am here
Dr katz

[RJ_Daley]

Dr. Katz,

Can you help me pull back some on the joy stick?  I fear I'm nearly out of control...  

[Jon Wiggett]

I think that the way forward in most parts of the world will be done through enviromental regulation. The best example is that to date is Denmark where serveral years ago they effectively banned all chemical spraying and put a masive tax on N in fertilisers. Due to this clubs HAD TO alter to grass types that were naturally more desease resistant and the appropriate maintenance. Denmark has seen a rapid and mainly successful change to fescue and to more traditional greenkeeping practices. The result has been after several transition seasons that at most clubs golfers enjoy good condition of play for a longer period of the year.

I am certain this will happen in most of europe in the next decade or so and it could take place in northern parts of the USA but probably won't. At the moment there is a strong movement in GB&I/Europe pushing traditional greenkeeping with the R&A and many top clubs taking the lead. Through this it has become easier to argue this point of view but it is still hard. I am not so aware of what is going on in the USA or what the USGA are doing. Such practices are more than possible in cool season grass areas but my knowledge of warm season grasses is too limited to comment on if it would work in a warm season grass zone or with what grasses.

Craig is right though, the main problem is not the Supers but rather the golfers. One answer is instead of looking at the world through 'rose tinted glasses' golfers could look at the course through green tinted ones

[Eric Morrison]

This is all well and good when it is not YOUR job that is on the line. After the Open Championship at Royal Liverpool, Hoylake, members told a superintendent friend of mine that the fairways at their course were "too green".   He cut back the water and firmed them up. Obviously, some of the turf went dormant in spots. The membership wondered what killed the fairways, and he was fired that fall. F+F can still be green.

[Michael_Stachowicz]

This change over can be done slowly if needed.  I do know of some courses who have just turned off the water and stopped spraying to eliminate the trash (poa) and get a good seed bed for the fall.  That is extreme and it takes a talented Greenkeeper agronomically and politically to pull this off.  No one pulls this off with out the backing of his committee.  This is extreme.

It can be done steadily over 3 to 5 years if bent grass promotion is the number one priority.  Remove trees, manage water for some brown, use growth regulators, aggressive over seeding, mow with triplexes and buckets, cut back on phosphorous, acidify the soil, stop spraying for poa based diseases (anthracnose, summer patch), and do a better job of aeration timing so as not to leave a seed bed for poa.

It isn't as easy as just turning off the water, you have to create the right environment for the right grasses to thrive.  

This is why I think the art of Greenkeeping is dying, it is much easier politically and less complicated scientifically to just water and spray and keep whatever grass that is there alive and green.  Traditional greenkeeping requires alot of knowledge of the plant and the game and it also requires that less than 100% perfection is acceptable.

We have the medicine needed in our toolbox, just not everyone is going to like the taste.

So clubs (1) need to make this a priority when looking for a superintendent, not every candidate is going to be able to go down this road, and (2) give him the ironclad contract to turn the course around.

The benefits besides F&F?  A healthier course that requires less water, less fertilizer, less chemical (yes, we will still need some) and will survive weather extremes with much less damage.  This is all good for the expense side of the budget and the revenue side...fiscally and environmentally, what is not to like?

I hope this helps.

[Dan Kelly]

One answer is instead of looking at the world through 'rose tinted glasses' golfers could look at the course through green tinted ones

That's an idea lifted directly from L. Frank Baum's "The Wizard of Oz."

The Emerald City was not, in fact, emerald. It was dingy.

Emerald Citians were required, by the Wizard, to wear green-tinted glasses.

Who will be our Wizard?

[Jeff_Brauer]

I could be wrong, but I think government reggies and water cost are already heading us in that direction, if not on a national level then a local one, where needed.  IF there is any gov reggies, they should be local, since conditions vary so much.

And, once again, I think perhaps our focus here on the top courses may skew our view of how much over watering there really is.  Most courses make do, because of cost, or old irrigation systems that just can't put out enough water, rather than ones that put out too much.  The biggest cause of over watering is really antiquated irrigation systems that require overwatering some parts to get other parts the moisture they really need.  I think any of the irrigation designers who post here would agree.

We can't forget that turf has a minimum and maximum "field capacity" for water.  Usually, it can survive on 1/3 of its max saturation, although this varies by variety and some go dormant but don't die.  

If the super let turf dry out to, say 40% of field capacity for FF conditons, by not watering for two weeks, then he would be back to putting on the ET value lost every night.  If he puts out just a little less than ET dictates he should, he gradually gets to FF and counts on rain to keep the turf at the minimum acceptable moisture level.

I doubt even the most committed super would allow his turf to regularly get below 50% of soil saturation.  Any lower is just cutting it too close for comfort to them.  However, replacing just a part of ET every night, rather than the full amount is, IMHO, a practical watering method.  You don't HAVE to get the soil back to full moisture content for turf to be green and healthy.

[Eric Morrison]

Mike, great post! That is what I wanted to write, but do not have the tolerance for that much typing!

[Joe Hancock]

Michael Stachowicz,

Excellent post. I think you have a lot of usable suggestions, not only agronomically but also addressing the human factor, i.e. the superintendent's position and his/her ability and stability. Thank you.

I might also note that there could be a negative effect as this continues to be discussed. It could identify the firm AND green golf course as "perfect", which narrows the levels of acceptability even further.

Joe

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()