Greenspace: Get back to where you once belonged

[wsmorrison]

I was visiting the oldest Ross course in Pennsylvania today and Steve Sayers had a question I couldn't begin to answer.  In our travels, Tom Paul and I have seen many clubs where the greens have shrunk dramatically over time for reasons clear to most.  They definitely have at LuLu Country Club.  My question is how do you recover that green space?  Over many years of mowing practices, I'm sure its not as simple as cutting the grass to green height.  Well then, what  agronomic steps do you need to take to convert the rough around the greens back to green in order to extend them back to original size?
GO EAGLES!  
Regards,
Wayne

[TEPaul]

Wayne:

It's not a complicated process really although certainly there're a couple ways of going about capturing back original greenspace.

First you have to identify what original greenspace was. On a course like LuLu that's so early, or even Gulph Mills, it's remarkably easy since the green pad edges are very easy to identify--they might be considered sort of sheer in some cases, particularly in the rear. Where they aren't that identifiable on the ground, like on some fronts the dimensions can be estimated by scaling off the early aerials LuLu (or GMGC) has.

Some of the later green edges of Flynn, though, may be a bit harder to identify as the sides of his green tended to roll-out much more gradually into their green surrounds making them harder to find with exactness. Shinnecock is a good example but as we know those green drawings are exactly to scale and the edges can be found exactly just through measurement of the original drawings.

Matter of fact, GMGC just did this in the last six months. We gassed our greens entirely with that product that's going off the market soon (although I just heard its cancellation date has been extended), then prepare the greenspace that had  been lost on the edges and regrass everything. Of course it'd been so long we had to reloop the irrigation lines around the greens since they'd been set not that long ago for the shrunken surfaces but this wasn't as big a job as I thought it might be.

The good news is the green expansion back to original greenspace is unbelievably popular with every single member and person involved with the course. This particular element of our restoration I'd consider an bases loaded homerun. The course has not been back in play yet since the original greenspace reclamation but when it is I'd expect it to be even more popular.

PS;

Mike Rewinski at Westhampton actually recaptured some lost greenspace on the edges by just cutting back very slowly and surely over a period of time. I suppose he had to sort of reseed as he went along.

[wsmorrison]

Thanks Tom, that was very helpful.  I agree that different Flynn greens are a bit harder to determine the original margins than an earlier architect or one like Ross that often utilized abrupt dropoffs especially at the rear.  It is indeed fortunate that Flynn's drawings are to such exact scale and can be utilized to reclaim lost greenspace.  But my question was more of an agronomic one.  If the greens have been gassed and the profiles extended that is not a problem as the entire area is reseeded and the course, is of course, closed.  But in the case of LuLu, their greens have quite a bit of poa and some bent while the surrounds are a variety of different grasses.  I don't think LuLu and there may be others with similar constraints can shut down their course to reclaim lost green area.  What can they do to extend the greens (it is obvious that they have shrunk, some quite substantially) without closing down the course?  I don't think mowing it gradually to green height is the answer due to the difference in the grasses between the surrounds and the greens themselves.  

[TEPaul]

Wayne:

I sure can't answer that from an agronomic perspective (although I'm sure some on here can and will). I don't know that much about agronomy and I do need to start to learn more about it. There're some really good resource guys on here for that though.

Maybe a way to do it would be how Mike Rewinski did it--very slowly and carefully (not even sure he made the members that aware of what he was doing).

There can be some other minor problems with just cutting back or even what we did. In some cases on some greens the mowing guys over the years obviously flung clippings off the shrunken greenspace onto the edges (where greenspace used to be) and although we gassed and prepared those old  geenspace areas for regrassing there are a number of them that have slight ridges or "drop downs" from the old greenspace onto the shrunken greenspace areas. Clearly a form of evolutionary build-up from flinging clippings or something like that.

I think that's sort of a neat old evolutionary factor with the restored greenspace but so far no one agrees with me and when the course comes back into play I really don't expect anyone else to agree with me on that either. Not until I tell them what it will likely cost to smooth those areas out and then I expect every single one of them will probably agree with me that it's a neat old evolutionary factor.

I think it will play kinda cool though with those little "drop downs", but on that they'll all probably just keep a tight lip or grin and bear it.

That reminds me of a very useful tactic for all of us to know if we're ever trying to preserve something on these great old courses of ours. If people don't like something and start to complain just tell them it's no problem at all to fix it--except that it's gonna cost a minimum of a million or two. That generally gets their attention and agreement with your position real fast!

Like:

"We need to extend this hole by fifty yards!"

"That's no problem at all--it'll just cost about $859,000 per tee."

What do they know? Sometimes ignorance and lack of education in architecture can be a wonderful thing!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Wayne,

Usually, it's a two to three year process, sometimes more, depending upon the paritcular circumstances with each area.

Fringe can be taken down to green, with the other areas gradually cut down at the proper times of year, over time.
Remember also, that these areas probably haven't received top-dressing and other agronomic treatments that the greens have received over the years, so, special TLC is required to bring them back in harmony with the rest of the green.

I feel that this is a very important process and that several things have to happen to make the process successful.

As TEPaul indicated, accurate identification of the area of reclamation is critical.  And, it's almost better to overestimate rather than underestimate.

The superintendent must buy-in to the goal and the process.

The crew must be "conceptually" educated with respect to the goal, the process and the maintainance of these areas.

Objections from the members should be addressed.  Before, during and after the process and project.

THIS IS THE ONE RESTORATION PROCESS/PROJECT THAT EVERY CLUB CAN IMMEDIATELY EMBARK UPON, WITH LITTLE COST OR INCONVENIENCE TO THE MEMBERS.

[Joel_Stewart]

Some good comments here.  
Tom Doak just did it at San Francisco Golf Club and I was amazed.  Since the 1920's the greens had shrunk a good 10 feet in many places.  They were able to find the original green structures as they carefully peeled the greens back.   With the new greens opened up terrific new pin locations and many new options.  I can't imagine why any club would NOT want to do this except for being cheap.

[Patrick Hitt]

Wayne,
A few courses here in Chicago have reexpanded greens using a combination of changed mowing patterns and sodding. In areas where fairway was recaptured the process took a few years of mowing and tlc including topdressing. The areas that had become rough were sodded with nursery grass. The nursery was the same blend of poa and bent as the existing greens so over time the extensions blended seamlessly with the existing greens. The process took planning and alot of attention from the superintendant - but the end results are impressive.

[Steve Okula]

The gas TE Paul refers to is probably methyl bromide. It is being pulled off the market because it is a contributing factor to the depletion of the ozone layer. I understand the hole in the ozone over the antarctic is now the size of Europe, which I for one find somewhat disconcerting.

I am disappointed to hear that the extension on the use of this product has been extended. There are perfectly viable alternatives. I have used a new soil sterilant called Basamid to rid new bentgrass greens of stubborn bermudagrass.

In most cases the need for soil sterilization, and especially gassing with methyl bromide, is overstated. The green will be contaminated again by the time the grow-in is complete, anyway.

I urge anyone involved to avoid using methyl bromide. The earth's atmosphere is a high price to pay for slick greens.

[TEPaul]

Steve:

We did use methyl bromide and I hope in doing so we didn't add an area the size of Lichenstein to the hole in the ozone layer (and I'm not trying to be facetious). Out of interest, our super did ask that no member come around the course for a number of days following the greenspace gassing with methyl bromide.

Don't forget in the process of reclaiming greenspace if through the process we used to work closely with the super regarding his green transition areas of things like collar and first cut. Talk to him very closely about any alterations he may need to make in machinery with mowing and mowing patterns such as "turning" as it may put needless pressure on future maintenance practices and results if you don't or don't understand what he's telling you.