Melvyn, thank you for that article. While it relates a fascinating (to me, anyway) description of the origins of hollow tine aeration, it also shows how far we’ve come from the primitive methods of the early twentieth century.
It does raise one or two elementary questions. For example, it refers to, “alkaline ammonia sulphate fertilizer”. Ammonium sulfate is a common agricultural and turfgrass fertilizer, manufactured by combining ammonia with sulfuric acid, and so is an acidic product, commonly used to lower high pH soils. Obviously, the knowledge of soil science at the time of the article was less than perfect.
Another question raised is, previous to Hamilton’s tenure, how many earthworms were active in sandy, links, soils? While I don’t have any empirical data to support this, earthworms aren’t normally found in great numbers in a sandy soil because it lacks the high organic matter that the worms thrive on. I have observed on my own course that earthworms abound in the native clay soils of fairways and roughs but they are rarely seen in the sand-based construction of greens and tees. Also, there is no mention of how Hamilton eradicated the worms from the Old Course, if in fact they were a problem there in the first place.
As a turf manager, I say that hollow tine aeration is superior to earthworm activity for several reasons:
- Uniformity – Mechanical aeration is done evenly across the surface. The object of golf turf management is to provide consistent conditions across the course. Earthworms will always favor certain areas over others.
- Consistency – We can perform mechanical aeration to our own schedule, when we need to, and not depend on the vagaries of mindless soil organisms.
- Presentation – With mechanical aeration, we can collect cores, topdress, brush, and prepare the surface in a predictable manner to allow for playable conditions in the shortest possible time span. No mud. . Also, and more importantly, earthworms attract predators such as crows, skunks, raccoons, badgers and boars, that are severely disruptive to turfgrass swards.
- Thatch control – Hollow tine aeration will guarantee the removal of up to 8% of the thatch layer in each process. Earthworms remove none. I know the argument that a healthy soil aerated by earthworms will have more thatch-consuming micro-organisms, but this is far from proven, and anyway, mechanical aeration will produce the same results.
The idea that we could ever further the industry by forsaking modern methods and returning to the days of old is a fallacy. There is no lost, mystical, knowledge that if only we could bring back it would make the world right again. None of us have first-hand knowledge of course conditions prior to WWII, but I’ve been playing and working on golf courses since the 1960’s, and in my lifetime conditions have improved by leaps and bounds.
In the history of greenkeeping, courses began irrigating because it improved conditions. The first courses to irrigate their turf had an edge over the competition that didn’t do so. Likewise fertilizers and chemicals were introduced because there were severe problems caused by insects, diseases, weeds, and lack of nutrition resulting in all but unplayable surfaces. This wasn’t a chicken or egg scenario; which came first, the pests or the chemicals? Irrigation, chemicals, and fertilizers were employed because they led directly to an enhancement of the game. The same is true regarding the evolution of turf equipment, but that doesn’t seem to bother anybody; no one suggests we should go back to mowing fairways with horse-drawn gang mowers.
I don’t get mad at golfers who complain about earthworms. I’ve seen fairways so infested with these “beneficial” creatures that you couldn’t find enough open turf for a lie. In the fall and winter here in the north of France, where it never dries out but it’s still warm enough for the grass to grow, mower blades, seals, and bearings will be ruined as they smear the mud across the sward. It is unacceptable for reasonable people.
Along the same lines, I understand people who would rather play off bentgrass than, say, clover. It makes sense to me, and I don’t hold it against them. Turf needs some nutrition to recover from normal wear and tear due to play. Diseases left unchecked will obliterate a stand of grass. Unirrigated areas can and will die, leaving bare areas ripe for weed infestations.
We superintendents are in a service industry, and so we respond to customer expectations. If I managed a restaurant, I would put steak on the menu, and not argue with people who want one that, “No, beef comes from too high up the food chain, and so is ecologically irresponsible, have the vegetarian lasagna instead.” Sure, you could have a vegetarian restaurant, or a totally organic golf course for that matter, but you would be reducing your potential customer base to the point that it would be an impractical business model for the majority of locations and situations.
That said, I am not advocating excessive water, fertilizer, or chemicals (drainage, on the other hand, is like thin or rich, you can never have too much). Chemical and fertilizer applications are never cheap or easy, and they should be used as sparingly as possible. However, these products, applied correctly, pose no threat to the environment on or off the golf course, and contribute to the growth of an industry and the enjoyment of the game by tens of millions of people.