What are the maintenance downsides of less water, less chemicals, more organics?

[Craig Sweet]

I know a super...brand new to the job...and he inherited a water logged, over chemicaled  course...so he cut back on water and chemicals (mostly ferts) and the grass started dying...and his job was in serious trouble...so he increased water and ferts...now, in his third year, he is working to find the balance as he slowly reduces water and ferts...there's grass, the course is a tad firmer...the members are happy again...

It is clear...the biggest obstacle he faced was not the challenge of reducing imputs...it was his membership...I heard members at his course say they were paying a lot of money and the place looked like a goat track.....you and I would say the course was perfect...firm...fast...but not them.  I think the younger members understood and was accepting of what he is doing...but the older members wanted green. lush...and their ego's restored.

[Craig Sweet]

Bradley....in the nursery business you do get called on by all sorts of suppliers...however, there is always two or three that get 90% of your business...they get the business because you like the product, the service, the price, and the convenience...and I'm sure the golf business is not very much different.

[Alan FitzGerald CGCS MG]

Sorry I’m a little late responding..

Craig, I’m assuming your comments were in jest, but my comment was just to mention the downside of straight organic fertilizer, it certainly wasn’t to promote the use of chemistries. Donnie is correct in saying that the plant doesn’t care where the source of nitrogen is, it’ll use it once it’s in it’s available form, it’s just as a superintendent you want some control over it.

I don’t think there’s been much education toward an organic move because the industry as a whole wants perfection so therefore it’s pointless to go over items that not many will take from, now if golfers perception changed I think you’d see a lot more on using organics.

“The point here is we need to come up with a pretty unassailable pitch for less water, less chemicals and greater organics if it's ever going to be considered valid generally. If we can't do that for whatever reason, then why should we propose what we do propose?”

It’s simple; possibly save cash (by lower standards or should I say less uniformity) and being ‘green’.

“It always amazes me when Americans go to the UK and praise the simplicity (getting less so with each passing year due to huge amounts of visitor cash) of the conditions then go home and complain if things aren't just so.“

This comment sums up what I believe; people buy into the perception of what it should be like. I guess I’ve seen this first hand as the influx of “American style” courses in Ireland. Added to the fact Irish golfers were becoming wealthier and vacationing in the States” the average golfer was blown away by these ‘new’ standards {although some of the older guys didn’t like the tighter fairways) and slowly other clubs started playing catch up along with each subsequent new development. Ok the links somewhat didn’t change and the small local clubs didn’t have the resources however there was a change of expectations.


Here’s another video from Scott Anderson (courtesy of Turfnet) and he states that savings are made but again I believe it to be from the fact his program has been successful for so long.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1119170378/bclid604573469/bctid1785277298

I guess in summary, firstly we need to get golfers perception changed, then start a committed program of reduced water and using organics that can be supplemented with chemicals only as needed.

[Craig Sweet]

Alan...I think the reductions in water and chemical use are coming...one way or the other...and it certainly couldn't hurt to begin to educate golfers as to what this means....the pro's and the con's...

The question the golfer is going to ask will probably be all about appearances....is the course still going to "look nice".....when in reality, they should ask....will the course be healthy(ier)?

[Chris Tritabaugh]

CraigS post #150 sounds very familiar as this was the exact situation I inherited two years ago. We did the same thing my first year and the results were, "ugly". I don't know that my job was in jeopardy but I know there was a portion of the membership who wondered what the hell I was doing.

Here is how the course looked in the middle of August 2007.



Using many different communication methods both directly to the membership and through committees and the BOD most of the membership was able to, if not like the condition of the course, understand why it was this way and where it was headed in the future.

The photo above is the MSN maps aerial view of Northland. While I have not found an updated aerial view from 2008 the follow photo below was taken at roughly the same time of year in 2008. This photo shows the 15th fairway looking back from the green. The same hole can be seen in the aerial, running from the top left corner to the green in the middle of the top.



The biggest drawback to going with this approach is obviously the reaction of memberships/customers to these types of conditions. From a maintenance standpoint and this is only my opinion on my own personal situation. It took me looking at turfgrass management in a whole new way.

When I first took over at Northland my definition of an "organic program" was the use of organic granular fertilizer, as has been discussed on this topic. My definition of an "organic program" today is far different. Our "organic program" consists of applications organic residues, such as seaweed extract, organic humus, fish hydrolysate, black-strap molasses, yucca extract, soybean extract, etc., etc. While I am only beginning to understand how these products fuel a powerful, symbiotic biological system within our soil. I know, understand and have witnessed enough to know this type of program works. Applications of organic residues improve soil health and water holding capacity, increases the plants ability to withstand stress, and provides fertility to the plant in forms and amounts the plant can use. While there is not a lot of research showing the benefits of organic programs on turf other areas of horticulture have been using these practices for years with great success.

This program is saving us money. It allowed me to drastically reduce fertility and pesticides across the course. For the Superintendents out there, we applied only 2/3 lb. of N to the fairways last season. From a pesticide standpoint we are not planning to apply a fungicide to our fairways at any point in the coming season. Our climate has a lot to do with this but the organics play a huge role as well.   

[Craig Sweet]

Chris...great post. 

The situation I described had two desired outcomes...first, the course had been over watered and over fertilized for years...all in the name of keeping the poa alive and the course looking like Augusta....you can imagine what was happening...heavy thatch, weak grass, etc....so the super wanted to  change that...and second, he wanted to make the poa suffer to the pont of death....

He explained his plan to the members, but apparently they were a bit shocked by what happened....now...three years into it, bent grass is taking over where the poa died...the course is drier..day in and day out...hand watering hot spots has increased...regular verticuting, hydoinjecting arefication, top dressing, all have increased...the program is not organic...and probably won't be...but less water, less chemicals seem to be working.

[TEPaul]

Chris Tritabaugh:

That's a wonderful last post of yours. I would like to see anyone (particularly supers) critique and/or question what you've said in your post. If they don't it would seem this entire thread is beginning to reach a type of goal I was hoping for it.

[SL_Solow]

Tom;  This is one of the best topics in a long time.  I am fortunate enough to serve on the Chicago District Golf Association Committee that works with greenkeepers at clubs in our organization.  Each year I moderate an educational program in which several greenkeepers, our staff agonomist/plant pathologist, a USGA greens section employee and an architect discuss issues for an audience of Green Chairman from various clubs.  My conclusion remains that the "Augusta syndrome" continues to drive the memberships and therefore the greenkeepers.  I can assure you that as the moderator I have pushed an agenda to have clubs consider striving for less use of water etc and to achieve firmer conditions.  I think we are making a little headway but progress is slow.  I reiterate, the problem is not the professionals, it is the consumers.  Given the current economy, it will be interesting to see this year's attitudes.  On the one hand, the promise of cost savings will be attractive.  However some clubs may believe that in order to retain members, they must compete for the dwindling numbers who are willing to pay by offering "first rate" conditions.  If the Augusta look" is still deemed first rate, the problem may continue.  I'll report back after the seminar which is scheduled for March 7 at Medinah.

[RJ_Daley]

Shel, maybe it is the ambiance at the venue where you hold this meeting.  Maybe switch the meeting to an assembly gathered around the Coke machine at the Jans National...

But really, it is encouraging that folks like yourself do have an input or moderate direction into the ongoing considerations.  Sharing the info of posts like Chris's don't hurt. 

[SMay]

Tom Paul , some great discussions. Chris Tritabaugh seems to have something great going at his club. Once one starts seeing  some results ,usually they ask "what else is out there ?"  I urge everyone to look into the connection between minerals for both turf health and more importantly personal health.  Rock dust Minerals and minerals from organic fertilizers and sea weed extracts are in my perspective the missing link. Remember "simple solutions to problems don,t make money."  With good soil chemistry -comes good soil biology and healthy plants capable of some pretty impressive performance. While working with this perspective one has to look at all options to reduce water use. An overwatered organic based program will give this approach bad press. In my case with basically topsoil geens we do every thing possible not to water them. They get wet when it rains. Playing conditions change with the weather. It's far from boring.  The one book that has a ton of wisdom in it is called"  Ecological golf course management" by Paul  health is "Death by Diet" by Dr. Barefoot. He claims that 95% of degenerative deseases are preventable and or can be turned around with proper minerals , including  the big C .  After much research i believe it!

[SMay]

Sorry, I'm in touble now. I used Scott May's handle to do my 1st post  .... Scott Anderson

[TEPaul]

Am I understanding those last two post?

Is that you Scott Anderson???

If so welcome aboard.

I owe you a phone call, by the way.

I'd like to see this thread keep on going, even if some may try to grill you on your program and ideas----actually particularly if they try to grill you on your program and ideas. Is that OK with you, ScottA? Essentially, I thought that was the point of this thread and you wanted to see.

I believe in your program but I think it needs to go through a massive vetting process with others who may not understand it very well, don't you?

[Kyle Harris]

I'm I understanding those last two post?

Is that you Scott Anderson???

If so welcome aboard.

I owe you a phone call, by the way.

I'd like to see this thread keep on going, even if some may try to grill you on your program and ideas. Is that OK with you, ScottA?

Scott/Tom,

I'll go over and gladly type for him. When I saw Scott May had posted on here, I got happy then realized it was old hunt and peck Anderson.

The book is Ecological Golf Course Management by Richard Luff.

[TEPaul]

"An overwatered organic based program will give this approach bad press."


ScottA:

That is a remark I believe you made to the group over at my place on Dec. 17. That got my attention, for sure. So, could you elaborate on what the bad press would be about?

I believe you also mentioned that underwatering a course that was largely dependent on lots of chemicals would be dangerous too. Would you elaborate on why you think that is so and what the negative result would look and play like?

[Mike Sweeney]

As we head to Augusta for another green Masters, I came across this great article about the Organic methodology of The Vineyard Golf Club by Hal Phillips:

https://www.gcmonline.com/course/environment/news/vineyard-golf-club

“As a result, we’re just not as firm and fast as many clubs,” Banks continues. “Once the course matures, I see us achieving that goal. But our membership understands the program here, and that’s so important, that communication. Maybe we’re not as firm and fast, but we topdress like anyone else, if not more. We’re growing the greens out of disease, adding sand multiple times per week, and relying on other cultural practices to achieve the firmness.”

I work at a community with a Biodynamic Farm and the Farmers work very hard to maintain those standards, especially considering we sit 21 miles from the George Washington Bridge. I am surprised with the popularity of Whole Foods, Wegmans and local Organic food chains that Organic Golf Course Maintenance has not risen in popularity. I have not been to The Vineyard Golf Club for years, but it seems like it works there. Obviously it was mandated by the local authorities, but it works??





Thanks Hal Phillips

[Alan FitzGerald CGCS MG]

Mike,


I think the biggest issue is that organic pesticides are still somewhat unreliable on turf. If the club buys into it (and/or are forced to) like the Vineyard then there will be a tolerance for those times when they don't work. As I said in an earlier post on this, the membership have to fully buy in for a switch to happen.


Then of course there is the issue of you just can't turn it off. Ie if you go organic, the soils have to readapt (for want of a better word) as the soil food web balances itself out from the use of artificial chemicals and fertilizers. So there could be a few years of pain for a club as that happens also. The Vineyard has been maintained organically from day one, so the soils/plants etc have adapted to it's environment over the years so it is way ahead of others. I like to use the analogy of a triathlete and a sumo wrestler - both are athletes but one is trained for a specific purpose, while the others health regime means they can be successful in multiple different disciplines, even those beyond what they specifically trained for. All living things are the same, you'll get though life fine being fat and lazy but with the right diet and training, you can handle a lot more - plants are no different. 


Turf also isn't the same as agriculture as in ag the end game to is to harvest, retill and essentially start from scratch, so it's a different situation than keeping the same plant heathy on the surface (and one that is being beat on/stressed out by traffic, low mowing heights etc). The tilling negates the scourge of all golfers - aeration - as it fully open up the soil (whereas we try and replicate that with an aerator). Of course then theres the debate that tilling also messes up the soil food web by destroying the soil structure.


Europe has been forced to go more organic than the US but I can see in time it happening here. The good thing is that the newer chemistries are extremely low rate and less toxic to non-target pests so while it's not ideal, it certainly isn't like it was say even 30 years ago, let alone 50 years ago. I know there are companies working on better organic control products (actually I'm hoping to get my hands on one to play with this summer) so if they work, I can see the switch starting soon than later.


I have a lot of other thoughts and rants on this subject but they are too much to post......

[Craig Sweet]

Alan, but turf is the same as agriculture. The soil is what matters for both.

[Alan FitzGerald CGCS MG]

Alan, but turf is the same as agriculture. The soil is what matters for both.

Name a golf course that plows its crop up every year and reseeds? Soil & water (quality) matter the most (assuming the climate is applicable to the crop) but how the soil is/can be worked is different between the two.


Saying that, it seems like ag is starting to go more of a turf route for better yield (ie micromanaging it), as turf is starting to look at ag (ie measuring growth as yield) so there is a lot of common ground and in time I see it becoming closer, with the happy medium being more organics and minimal artificial inputs only as needed.

[archie_struthers]

 




Had the great pleasure of talking to both the "emperor" Tom Naccarato and my good friend TEP just the other day.


Here's hoping they continue to flourish and make the world just a little more fun for us golfers


 

[Mike Sweeney]

[quote author=Alan FitzGerald MG link=topic=38289.msg1704006#msg1704006 date=1649330143



Saying that, it seems like ag is starting to go more of a turf route for better yield (ie micromanaging it), as turf is starting to look at ag (ie measuring growth as yield) so there is a lot of common ground and in time I see it becoming closer, with the happy medium being more organics and minimal artificial inputs only as needed.



Alan,


I promise you I am a novice on BOTH sides of this conversation: AG vs GOLF.


You mention "better yield" and I simply ask - "For who?". A "better yield" for "The Consumers/Eaters", "The Golfers", or "The Owners/Investors" of either/both?

[Alan FitzGerald CGCS MG]

Mike,


the simple answer to your question is how much the grass (crop) has grown over a period.


In the early days of turf management, they had to rely on what was done in ag as there was no research on managing turf. Obviously over the years, that has changed due to a lot of research on growing turf and turf agronomy is looked at differently (largely because we don't harvest the plant). In ag it is all about the yield - the more plants you can get from a plot of land the more money you can make. Now ag is starting to look at what turf is doing to get better yield, and do it by using less inputs (ie giving the plants just what the need). Now turf managers are starting to look at what ag is doing. In essence our yield is the turf growth (the difference is we are not removing all of it!) so by monitoring our yield, it makes us more efficient - le the goal is to try and match the inputs to minimize the growth while still maintaining a full crop. In turf, more yield (ie growth/clippings) isn't necessarily a good thing as it means lower green speeds and you may be over fertilizing/watering etc.