[Doug Siebert]

I like it providing:

1) it is at least partially wispy.  If its uniformly unplayably and unfindably dense it may as well be dense woods, unless you see your ball bounce or roll in you'll never find it

2) it is limited in areas where a player is likely to hit into it and not see it land from the tee.  This is my one major gripe with Lawsonia, the far side of the doglegs (that have turning points that are now too short for modern equipment) are often blind from the tee, leading to easily lost balls for relatively small mistakes off the tee.  Next time I'm there I intend to leave driver in the bag a lot more often to avoid this issue...

3) in areas with better soil (like here in Iowa) it is burned each fall to prevent matting that allows balls hit into it to duck down under the thatchy undergrowth and be unfindable even if you step right on it.  This generally isn't a problem for traditionally poor linksland soils.

[Tyler Kearns]

Mike,

As it relates to Kingsley, which I imagine prompted this post, I found the fescue roughs very reasonable. We hit a bunch of balls into it over the 3 rounds, but only a handful were lost. The result of a found ball was a plethora of lies, ranging from very good, to hack it out sideways. That is the kind of unpredictability I expect from fescue rough. I think as long as it is located beyond the range of the irrigation system, it should play in this manner.

TK

[Nathan Cashwell]

I personally think that low maintenance native areas are great when used properly.  The problem is people don't understand them.  First off they are not "no maintenance" they are "low maintenance" there is a huge difference.  If you let it go then it will be overrun with volunteers, weeds, and other non-desirable vegetation, which in some "real" out of play areas might be fine.  But in areas where balls can go in, and quite regularly, then those areas need to be treated differently.  Like Tom D. said much of it stems from the initial planting where they are planted too heavily in order to get a stand up fast.  But once the stand is up it needs to be controlled with growth regulators, mowing and even burning in the proper timelines, limiting the fertilization that is thrown (and washed) into these areas.  I don't know how many times I've seen people scratching their heads as to why their native areas are so overgrown when you can see where they have driven the fertilizer truck right next to, or worse, in the native areas and have the irrigation set to run with the surrounding heads.  This is not playing turf that needs to be more dense and hearty, therefore it should not be treated as such.  Each area might need a slightly different maintenance plan based on its location, i.e. in shade vs. sun, on hillside vs. top or bottom of hill, near a water source, near a green, adjacent to dense woods, etc.  The point is that these areas can be a real plus aesthetically, strategically/ playability, and environmentally, but they need to be planned, planted, and maintained properly.  Think "low and smart maintenance areas" instead of "no maintenance areas".

[Garland Bayley]

Jeff,

If your missing by fairways by 20 plus yards then you should expect a severe penalty.  Thats a big miss.  Since you've played the course before this would be more of a fault of bad play then fault within the course.  You should have known what to expect when playing there, and as such don't blame failed execution on the course.

Fescue not only looks good, but when maintained right can provide some really fun and interesting lies, particularly around greens.  I'm not opposed to real thick fescue, either.  It's easily apparent to the eye and anyone of any mental capacity knows to avoid it.  I love fescue, hay, be it whatever you call it.

Jordan

So you come down on the side of golf shouldn't be fun!  Also, on the side of I don't know what it's like to miss a fairway by 20+ yards with a 6 iron!

Can we expect you are trying to embark on a golf torture chamber career?

Seriously Jordan, I think you need to rethink, and also to drop the comments about mental capacity.

[Norbert P]

What's so Fine about tall Fescue?

Mike

Tall Fescue is not classified as a fine fescue.

"Tall fescue was introduced into the United States from Europe in the early 1800's. The grass can be found growing in low, damp pastures and wet meadowlands throughout Europe, North Africa and North America.

In the United States, tall fescue is found from the Pacific Northwest to the southern states in low-lying pastures. Although it grows best in moist environments, tall fescue has good drought tolerance and will survive during dry periods in a dormant state. Tall fescue is adapted to a wide range of soils, but does best on clay soils high in organic matter.  . . .

Description. The fescues (Festuca spp.) compose a large genus of about 100 species of grasses. Tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea) is a deep rooted, cool season perennial grass. The plant produces vigorous growth in the spring and fall and its extensive root system helps it withstand drought conditions. Tall fescue does produce short rhizomes but has a bunch-type growth habit - it spreads primarily by erect tillers. Individual tillers, or stems, terminate in an inflorescence, reach 3 to 4 feet in height, and have broad, dark green basal leaves. Leaf blades are glossy on the underside and serrated on the margins. The leaf sheath is smooth and the ligule is a short membrane. The inflorescence is a compact panicle, 3 to 4 inches long with lanceolate spikelets one-half inch or more long. The grass flowers in the spring and seed mature in early summer. Seed are 4 to 7 mm long, elliptic and awned."

[Sean_A]

astavrides,

We played the North Course at Charleston Springs, a Monmouth County Course. While that would sound benign enough, it was anything but. With a slope of 121 off the Gold Tees (the 2nd longest set) it felt like an episode of the twilight zone. I'm not a low handicap golfer, but I'm beyond the level of hacker and have been playing off 9 to 10 for some time. I wouldn't expect to find a muni with a 121 slope to be too penal to enjoy, but that was 100% the case.


Scott,

Naturally, the distances aren't uniform, but the narrow areas were typically most pronounced in the landing zone for a decent drive. After shooting some distances in google earth, a typical fairway was 30-40 yards wide, with 10 yards of rough on either side; more and less than that in a few places, but not many as there really wasn't a lot of variety to the course. While the holes are not isolated, there was not a single hole on the course where you could miss the fairway by more than 20 yards and have a reasonable expectation of finding your ball, and in places the fairways would pinch to well under 30 yards wide.

Throughout most of the course the cartpath would delineate the boundary of the rough and native areas.  I haven't downloaded the photo yet, but in some places where the playing corridors were wider than typically found on other holes, areas between the cartpath and fairway were allowed to go native as well, maintaining that fairly uniform 10-15 yards of rough, even when it would seem that the architect intended otherwise.

50-60 yards sounds like a reasonable width, but it did not seem reasonable when the penalty was so severe, there is no ability to bailout since it exists on both sides of the hole, and it is present on every single shot of the day. I've played golf at this complex in the past and the grasses were present, but not nearly as impossible. The constant rain is certainly a contributing factor, and the fallout was an $80 round of golf that was pure drudgery.

Jeff,

If your missing by fairways by 20 plus yards then you should expect a severe penalty.  Thats a big miss.  Since you've played the course before this would be more of a fault of bad play then fault within the course.  You should have known what to expect when playing there, and as such don't blame failed execution on the course.
Jordan

Jordan

While I would agree with you to some degree if we are talking about top ams or pros, that degree lessons the further back on the food chain we go.  Of course, we could be disagreeing about what a severe penalty is, but one of the things which I like most about golf is finding the ball quickly and hitting it.  This is why I was so impressed with St Georges Hill.  It isn't any better than a handful of other top heathland courses, but I like it more than most because its so darn hard to lose a ball or struggle hard to find one.  Its the courses like this when well designed impress me the most.  In fact, people go on about Pinehurst's greens, I thought they were a bit overkill.  What I liked most about the course was the width.  I understand that in some way the greens are related to the width, but often times, it didn't feel like that.  Meaning I often didn't think there really was a best place to attack the greens from.  At my level, it was more a case as to ignoring the pin and figuring out where the best place to miss was.  Not a lot of fun if you ask me, but its great watching the US Open there.

Ciao

[Jordan Wall]

Jeff,

If your missing by fairways by 20 plus yards then you should expect a severe penalty.  Thats a big miss.  Since you've played the course before this would be more of a fault of bad play then fault within the course.  You should have known what to expect when playing there, and as such don't blame failed execution on the course.

Fescue not only looks good, but when maintained right can provide some really fun and interesting lies, particularly around greens.  I'm not opposed to real thick fescue, either.  It's easily apparent to the eye and anyone of any mental capacity knows to avoid it.  I love fescue, hay, be it whatever you call it.

Jordan

So you come down on the side of golf shouldn't be fun!  Also, on the side of I don't know what it's like to miss a fairway by 20+ yards with a 6 iron!

Can we expect you are trying to embark on a golf torture chamber career?

Seriously Jordan, I think you need to rethink, and also to drop the comments about mental capacity.

Garland,

Of course golf should be fun, and opining I think otherwise is quite an irrational statement. 

At Cypress Point, if you miss a fairway by twenty plus yards, you are in deep trouble, often worse then any fescue.  If you think thick fescue is bad, try finding a ball in the midst of large sand dunes, with random footprints and bushes spread all over. Yet, in discussion of the course, I have not once heard complaints that a shot hit twenty yards off line is unplayable, slightly deteriorating the quailty of the course.  The reason why, is that a shot so far off line should serve an equal punishment. Each golf course should be judged with the same crieria.  This muni which Jeff speaks of, in my opinion, sounds like it is doing things well by punishing off line shots.  There is never much interesting about golf courses that offer easy shots after missing the previous one by so much.

I stand by my statement that any player with any mental capacity should know to avoid fescue, because it's true. Fescue is meant to punish the bad shot.


Sean,

I agree golf is meant to be played quickly and balls should be found but I also believe errant shots deserve punishment equal to how bad the shot was. If this means thick fescue, then so be it.

In regards to the pros, I do believe golf courses are set up more difficult for them, hence their skill level.

[JeffTodd]

Jeff,

If your missing by fairways by 20 plus yards then you should expect a severe penalty.  Thats a big miss.  Since you've played the course before this would be more of a fault of bad play then fault within the course.  You should have known what to expect when playing there, and as such don't blame failed execution on the course.

Fescue not only looks good, but when maintained right can provide some really fun and interesting lies, particularly around greens.  I'm not opposed to real thick fescue, either.  It's easily apparent to the eye and anyone of any mental capacity knows to avoid it.  I love fescue, hay, be it whatever you call it.

Jordan

Jordan, clearly you have a better sense for what lay on the ground at the course than I do, probably due to your mental capacity. I would point out, however, that I’m surprised you did not note that the 20 yard figure was given as the maximum cushion found on any hole, that I had not played the course before but had only played at that complex (the mention of a North Course within the context of a "complex" might imply, to some, that more than one course exists). Further, you somehow missed the post where I stated that I was not missing fairways and did not lose a single tee shot all day.

I could go on to mention that a more detailed examination of the course reveals that I actually over estimated the cushion of rough, and in many places the margin of safety beyond the fairway was as little as four yards in the landing zone. Or I could elaborate on the total absence of doglegs, or the lack of an angle on a single tee shot where one could widen the landing area by taking an aggressive line, but you seem to have such a firm grasp on the experience so I will refrain from burdening the thread any further.

Perhaps you enjoy option-less, penal, bowling alley golf. I suppose those with a higher mental capacity can find enjoyment and stimulation without superfluous bells and whistles like a strategic option, a risk-reward opportunity, multiple lines of attack, a bailout option, the chance to risk shaping a shot, or just a simple hole where one can swing away. Personally, I like those things in a golf course.

The fact that you talking about a course like Cypress Point in this context truly indicates you’re missing the point, no pun intended. Aside from the myriad angles and options at CPC, the holes near the water have fairways that are, themselves, 60 yards wide. A shot that lands on the extreme right or left side of those fairways is lost on the course I described, since one cannot miss the centerline by 30 yards and expect to find their ball. Name me a good course where one must play up the centerline on every shot except one, and one cannot miss that centerline by more than 30 yards (with many less than 30 yards) on any hole except one?

I do agree that fescue can look good and provide fun shots, but even you provided the caveat that it should be maintained properly. If you cannot find a ball without stepping on it, as I clearly stated was the case quite frequently, does that provide a fun shot after you’ve assessed yourself a penalty? Or is the shot so fun that the penalty is worth it?

 

[Tim Pitner]

I stand by my statement that any player with any mental capacity should know to avoid fescue, because it's true. Fescue is meant to punish the bad shot.

Jordan, have you ever hit a shot that did not go where you intended?  Mental capacity doesn't have much to do with it.  

Sean,
I agree golf is meant to be played quickly and balls should be found but I also believe errant shots deserve punishment equal to how bad the shot was. If this means thick fescue, then so be it.

That's a pretty formulaic approach.

In regards to the pros, I do believe golf courses are set up more difficult for them, hence their skill level.

Jordan, I believe you have this exactly backwards.

[Sean_A]

Sean,

I agree golf is meant to be played quickly and balls should be found but I also believe errant shots deserve punishment equal to how bad the shot was. If this means thick fescue, then so be it.

In regards to the pros, I do believe golf courses are set up more difficult for them, hence their skill level.

Jordan

I spose we shall have to agree to disagree.  My idea of ideal rough is where it is inconsistent and is therefore unpredictable as to what sort of lie will be drawn.  Sometimes one can be lucky and other times one is dead.  That said, I don't often want the guy dead because of his lie, I want him dead because of the shot he left himself.  If we are going to try and pre-determine someone's lie with harsh rough we have to risk slowing the game way down to look for balls and hack out.  This sort of golf has its place once or twice in a round just for the sake of variety, but not much more than that.  In truth, this sort of rough is the biggest negative about links golf.  The powers that be don't adjust fairway widths to take into account abnormal wind, firm ground and rough - a combo which can make for a long day on the links if fairways are 35-40 yards wide.   

Ciao

[Bradley Anderson]

Honestly, I think a lot of that "long fescue" look is done by superintendents simply to present the APPEARANCE of being environmentally conscious.  I'm not sure it has that much of a positive effect.

Tom I think you are dead on.

At my former course I let some "out-of-play" areas go without mowing, because it gave the appearance of being more environmentally friendly, and because it saved money. It did save on the cost of mowing for two or three years until it became infested with volunteer cottonwood trees, thistles, and several other wild weeds that were less than attractive. When we began to send people in with back-pack sprayers and saws to control invasives, it really began to cost more to maintain.

We ended up restoring it to standard rough cut. As far as habitat was concerned, we may have lost a few field mice when we brought it back to rough height, and I suppose that might have effected the hawks and owls, but I don't think there was really that much loss to nature when we put it back to a maintained area. Mowers actually do a good job of reducing the amount of chemicals that are needed to maintain turf. Wild areas require far more chemicals that mowed rough.

Also these areas are rarely "fescue". Ussually these are areas of bluegrass, poa annua, and bent, with some fescue in the mix. All you are seeing is the dried out seedhead stalks in the wind, and those give the impression of being fescue. But real fescue areas are actually not that easy to develop.

[Tom_Doak]

Jordan:

I agree with Sean.  If you take your argument to its logical conclusion, then the hacker who frequently hits bad shots will often find himself in dire trouble, and he'll quickly quit the game.

[Joe Hancock]

Bradley,

I, like you, converted some areas to "no mow". I went the other route, however. I sprayed Roundup, then tilled after die back. Then I sprayed Roundup again before seeding hard and red fescues along with some little bluestem and coreopsis and purple coneflower. I mowed it down or burned it every spring and had little problem with lost or unplayable balls. After 10 years, I all but forgot about the pesticide applications and labor to establish.

Joe

[RJ_Daley]

Joe and Bradley certainly get to the heart of the question, I think. 

Take Lawsonia for instance... I would have to say that the 'hay' there is infact primarily just areas that used to be heavily bluegrass rough, among previous treed areas where the trees were taken out, and the primarily bluegrass rough was allowed to go 'native' and then with seasons of succession, became some broadleaf weed and such.   And, they still run a green chopper or hay cutter through it in fall and siderake and bail it, if I'm not mistaken.  That really isn't what I'd call good native or 'fescuelike' native area management.  It gets way too unplayable and unfindable in areas like between 12-13 and 15-16-17-18. 

I think Joe is 100% right on how to do it the correct way.  I played a ~10 year old course yesterday that I haven't been to in 2 years.  It was originally planned and planted with a good mix of hard and red fescue and whatever else.  It looked pretty poor for more than 2 years on the shaped out mounding between FWs and other roughs due to sparse and slow grow in maturity.  But, I was mesmerized by the beauty of it yesterday.  The knarly and nested way the understory grows and lies in spaghetti like twirls, with sparse and clean stems and seed top is just great looking.  Our foursome only lost one ball in the stuff, and about 3 in ponds that were dug to get shaping material for the rest of the course features. 

In a similar attempt to measure a golf course's maintenance meld like John Kirks time of ball in motion from strike to end of roll out for firm and fast, I might have to consider a proper way to measure or quantify the quality of the 'fescue' areas.  What we were experiencing yesterday in what I consider some of the best 'native rough areas' I've seen in a while, one should see the ball bound or hop in the native a time or two, and have a very good chance to find it often on top of the swirly mess of nested fescues to be able to put a club head on the ball for an out.  I think you know it is good stuff when the ball readily and visably bounds when it lands and you find it most often.

[Norbert P]

. . .   I sprayed Roundup, then tilled after die back. Then I sprayed Roundup again before seeding hard and red fescues along with some little bluestem and coreopsis and purple coneflower. I mowed it down or burned it every spring and had little problem with lost or unplayable balls. After 10 years, I all but forgot about the pesticide applications and labor to establish.

Joe

  Sounds like the right decision was made.  Proper preparation prevents poor performance.  Are the coreopsis and coneflowers still reseeding after ten years?  Any other color plants showing up?  What area of country are you in? 

[Joe Hancock]

. . .   I sprayed Roundup, then tilled after die back. Then I sprayed Roundup again before seeding hard and red fescues along with some little bluestem and coreopsis and purple coneflower. I mowed it down or burned it every spring and had little problem with lost or unplayable balls. After 10 years, I all but forgot about the pesticide applications and labor to establish.

Joe

  Sounds like the right decision was made.  Proper preparation prevents poor performance.  Are the coreopsis and coneflowers still reseeding after ten years?  Any other color plants showing up?  What area of country are you in? 

Slag,

The area has really gone low maintenance as I sold the golf course 1 1/2 years ago, and is golf no more. Up until that time, the coneflower was still around but less abundant than 5 years ago. The coreopsis was doing OK. The golf course is in Michigan. The areas were quite flat with a foot or so of silty loam over sand and gravel.

Joe

[Alan FitzGerald CGCS MG]

Ah fescues/native areas... how do you define them? Well native areas are indigenous, i.e. whatever was already there, Pine Valleys native areas are just that (although some plants like the forsythia were added to them over the years). Most modern golf courses use fescue to mimic the 'native areas' of, I guess, Links courses as their native areas do at least partially contain fescues however they also have other grasses that won't work in an inland environment. Anyway as for their usage in modern golf course design, when maintained properly they look good and provide an additional hazard/challenge to create a penalty that can still give you the option of recovering from. To a limited point they save money time on mowing, however the cost to maintain these 'non-maintenance' areas are very high.

As was mentioned Tall Fescue is a different plant to the tall fine fescues usually found in 'native' areas. One of the biggest issues with fescue areas is grass selection. Most use Creeping Red or Chewings Fescue or a combination of both. These are creeping grasses and quickly become the thick nasty crap that most of you associate with fescue areas. Again the extra fertilization of these areas during construction accelerates this narliness. The main reason that these are included are to create a 'turf' that can hold itself together. The best fine fescues are Blue, Sheeps and Hard Fescues. These are bunch type plants which means each one is an individual plant; when these are used they create a much better hazard as they cannot become thick (no creeping) and have gaps between them where the ball can lie while the plants themselves give the illusion of a thick hazard as the seed stalks grow up and blow in the wind. The only disadvantage is these 'gaps' may be dirt so the lie might not be great, then again it’s supposed to be a hazard. Little bluestem works great also as it also is more of a bunch type grass, however it is very slow to get established and the seed is quite expensive.

As for being 'low maintenance areas', the only 'low maintenance areas' are the ones that are not touched which never happens... As for maintaining fescues, to keep them weed free and of a low enough density suitable for play they require a lot of spraying and selective mowing etc and one also has to consider that these areas are usually not easily accessible to equipment which means this maintenance has to be done by hand which drives costs up also. The low inputs/maintenance misnomer comes from the need to mow less, water less and fertilize less.

[Norbert P]

Nice post Alan.

[Carl Johnson]

More narrowly, my question is:  

Are such natives:

1. An indigenous natural element? or
2. A cultivated aesthetic? or
3. A pragmatic erosion control? or
4. A ruse perpetrated by golf ball manufacturers? or
5. A ruse perpetrated by orthopaedic surgeons?

Bogey

In the U.S. the answer would generally be "a cultivated aesthetic."  Also, a variety of hazard.  Beyond that, depending on what you mean by "such natives" they could, in rare situations, be 1, "an indigenous natural element."

[Steve Lang]

   Oops, I first thought this was a thread about HighPointe.. we drove in to see if we could see anything, but its just no trespass signs and what looks like fairways used for harvesting hay...

Tom Doak, if you read this.. where does that seasonal road just left of the entrance to Highpointe lead to. the range and back 9??

p.s. i'm not so enamored of the fescue, beyond looks, as it seems too penal when you'd rather be in a trap..

[jeffwarne]

Bradley,

I, like you, converted some areas to "no mow". I went the other route, however. I sprayed Roundup, then tilled after die back. Then I sprayed Roundup again before seeding hard and red fescues along with some little bluestem and coreopsis and purple coneflower. I mowed it down or burned it every spring and had little problem with lost or unplayable balls. After 10 years, I all but forgot about the pesticide applications and labor to establish.

Joe

Spraying 2 rounds of poison and burning is ecofriendly?
Not picking on Joe.t just shows mowing is often less maintenance than "native" grasses, which are rarely native and are eventually competing with true natives (volunteers)

[Joe Hancock]

Bradley,

I, like you, converted some areas to "no mow". I went the other route, however. I sprayed Roundup, then tilled after die back. Then I sprayed Roundup again before seeding hard and red fescues along with some little bluestem and coreopsis and purple coneflower. I mowed it down or burned it every spring and had little problem with lost or unplayable balls. After 10 years, I all but forgot about the pesticide applications and labor to establish.

Joe

Spraying 2 rounds of poison and burning is ecofriendly?
Not picking on Joe.t just shows mowing is often less maintenance than "native" grasses, which are rarely native and are eventually competing with true natives (volunteers)

I assume you are aware that Roundup(glyphosate), while quite toxic to plants, is one of the least toxic herbicides to humans and other animals.

Do you know how your local superintendent keeps all those mowed areas weed free? Herbicides. Usually applied annually, likely much more toxic to humans than Roundup(glyphosate)

Part of the reason natural prairie areas used to thrive was due to lightening-started fires. Burning hydrocarbons three times per week vs. an annual fire? I don't know the facts enough to know which is more friendly.

Joe

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()