Shrinking Greens... Yikes!

[DCronan]

We have recently employed a GCA to do a master plan for our course. Together, we reviewed an aeriel map from 15 years ago and one that was recently photographed. To my amazement, our greens have shrunk, on average, upwards of 25% and some upwards of 40%.

Is this normal?
What can be attributed to the shrinkage?
Who, if anyone, is responsible for such shrinkage?

Thanks for any/all insight.

[Randy Thompson]

What type of grass to you have on the greens and what is the grass on the suirroundings? It happens, why is it important to point a finger and hold somebody responsible?

[Brad Tufts]

Not that I have ever been voted "most likely to answer green maintenance questions," but I believe the commonly-held attribution of green shrinkage over time is that it's easy for your run-of-the-mill grounds crew greens mower to run the edges of the green without strict attention to detail.

Many classical (and new modern courses) have great detail in green shape.  Older or traditional courses tended to have squared-off greens.  It's easier to mow in a circle with one pass around the green's edge.  Over time, this circle becomes smaller and smaller, until the green has shrunk around the edges, losing the detail around the edges that once existed.

To answer your questions, I think it is normal, and no one can really be blamed for it.  One of the more ingenious ways implemented to combat this was during Fazio's or Rees Jones greens work on Pinehurst #2 in the 90s/early 2000s when metal wire was laid under the ground at the green edges.  These wires can always be found in the future by a detector if there is any confusion as to where the green edge was originally.

[Tyler Kearns]

David,

Green shrinkage is very normal, and it takes some diligence on the part of the superintendent and grounds crew to avoid it. Basically, if the guy cutting the green scalps the fringe, the members will notice as it looks bad. Therefore, guys will err on the side of caution, and keep to the inside of the fringe. If you lost 1/4" around the perimeter every week, that adds up over the course of many decades.

TK

[John Moore II]

David,

Green shrinkage is very normal, and it takes some diligence on the part of the superintendent and grounds crew to avoid it. Basically, if the guy cutting the green scalps the fringe, the members will notice as it looks bad. Therefore, guys will err on the side of caution, and keep to the inside of the fringe. If you lost 1/4" around the perimeter every week, that adds up over the course of many decades.

TK

That is about the best description. Guys don't want to scalp down the edges so it ends up tapering in over time. That is why so often bunkers wind up way back away from the green surface. It is fairly difficult for a green crew to keep the size the same over a long period of time unless they are willing to scalp down the edges a little bit at least once or twice a week. I would also say courses which hand mow may experience the problem slightly less because it is a bit easier to get closer to the edge than with a riding mower.

[Randy Thompson]

Randy,

The greens are bent, the surrounds are rye. And I don't know if it is attributed to the turnover of greens crew over time, the person overseeing them, Mother Nature or something else?

Is that type of shrinkage "normal"? I've no clue.....
[/quote


Yes its normal but 25 to 40 percent is realy high especially with the grasses your club is using. Usually you have a collar of one or two walking greens mowers width and every couple of months clubs remark this using dots of paint to maintain that width and thereby maiking it easier to maintain original green size. The bent and the rye should be holding there original position and without much engrouchment from either species so it should be fairly easy to recuperate them to there original size. The bent grown at higher hieght over time will have more thatch and that should be dealt with over before lowering to greens height. Gradual top dressing and gradual lowering and they you can get them back to original size and height. Its all about attention to detail!

[Tyler Kearns]

David,

As to how quickly green surface can be lost without adequate supervision, consider the following;

If you have a circle shaped green, 90' in diameter, we have an original area of 6,359 sq.ft.
If the golf course is open 10 months a year, and we lose 1/4" around the perimeter per month to shrinkage for the reason I described earlier, that is 2.5" lost in the first year, leaving a new area of 6,300 sq.ft., or a loss of about 1%.
While this doesn't seem like much, unabated, the green will be down to 5,783 after a decade, or a loss of 9%, and to 5,236 after 20 years, or a 17.5% loss.


TK

[Ian Larson]

I don't see 25-40% as being normal at all. That's way too much and shows that time wasn't taken to go out once a month or every three months to remark the original edges. How long does it take for one guy to walk around the perimeter of a green with a green spray paint can and make a dot every ten feet to get the mowers back on track? About 2 hours. And it takes one guy an average of one day to do the same with fairways. "it happens" isn't a correct description for 25-40%. that much says "it didn't happen".

[Neil Regan]

Ian,

  I think you are spot on. The notion of creep disguises neglect.
  At Winged Foot, we lost significant percentages.
  But most was not creep.
  It was a conscious cost-saving by reducing man-hours on the mowing in the 1930s,
  the Great Depression.

  We were fortunate that our original contours were not altered.
  Thus, our restorations in recent years have mostly required only stripping of turf
  and merging of soil profiles with very minor massaging of transitions.

[corey miller]

Shouldn't a diligent Superintendent be monitoring this?  I can understand the problem with "run of the mill" grounds crew but isn't it a "run of the mill" Super that allows this to happen over time?

[Ian Larson]

Yes Corey he should be, that is if he gives a crap. It's a detail that is super important yet super easy to maintain. I can't think of an excuse for it unless it's like Winged Foot intentionally doing it for cost reduction in the '30s

[Jeff_Mingay]

Tyler's given a good description of why green shrinkage is very common.

I'll simply add that the introduction of ride mowers had an affect at some older courses, too. The turning radius of ride mowers is comparatively wide. These machines can't accommodate certain green shapes, which then "had to" change with the introduction of this new equipment. As a result, sections of original putting surface was lost.   

[David Sneddon]

The Donald Ross designed Roseland GC, has deliberately reduced the greens area on all greens over the past 5 or 6 years.  They have also narrowed all the fairways to the point that several sprinkler heads are now a couple of yards into the rough.
They lost a couple of hundred trees due  to the Ash-bore(sp?) which made the course much more playable, but of course now they are on a program of tree replanting.

It is a municipal course and the BoD haven't a clue and their Supt couldn't care less.  Jeff Mingay tried to help them  out a few years ago, but alas, his efforts fell on deaf ears.

[Ken Fry]

Isn't shrinkage just a normal part of the aging process??

(Sorry guys, I couldn't resist....)

Ken

[Bill_McBride]

What type of grass to you have on the greens and what is the grass on the suirroundings? It happens, why is it important to point a finger and hold somebody responsible?

Randy, if it's the greenkeeping staff accidentally shrinking the greens over time through careless practice, wouldn't that be important to know?

I think that's why you see these little silver rings around greens, to identify the perimeter.  I remember them at Cuscowilla.

[Mike_Young]

Bill,
The little thing at cuscowilla was there for edging....and to try to keep the bermuda from encroaching the bent....
As for why greens shrink....greens don't shrink....people shrink them....

[Craig Sweet]

25-40 percent is outrageously huge! I find that difficult to believe. The theory that someone posted...1/4inch per month is just that...a theory. Typically if you have a different person mow each day you might have 1/4 inch along the edge not mowed today, but the guy mowing tomorrow might cut 1/4 inch into the collar, and the person mowing on the third day might leave a nice trim edge...

Yeah, over time greens shrink for all sorts of reasons....some connected to top dressing and dragging.....but to lose 25-40 percent is absolutely unbelievable!

[Bill_McBride]

Bill,
The little thing at cuscowilla was there for edging....and to try to keep the bermuda from encroaching the bent....
As for why greens shrink....greens don't shrink....people shrink them....

Yeah, but wouldn't it also permanently outline the green?  Could serve two purposes!

[Randy Thompson]

Bill,
My point was the that 25 to 40% is to much but why spend the effort in trying to put the blame on somebody, I tried to be positive and say just go out and fix it and explained how and make sure measures are inacted which i also explained to not let it happen again in the future. In a pást thread I made a past comment that massive turf loss can usually be more attributed to human error than enviromental error and got my butt reamed for three days, so don´t expect me to point any fingers. Peace and Love to all!

[Craig Sweet]

David, I am not going to call you a liar, but I do find that incredibly hard to believe.  I assume you mow collars and around bunkers at your course?  And you are now telling me what was once a collar and green is now a collar and nearly 20ft of rough...and this just sort of happened because someone was not diligent? Sorry....I do not buy it.

[Bill_McBride]

Bill,
My point was the that 25 to 40% is to much but why spend the effort in trying to put the blame on somebody, I tried to be positive and say just go out and fix it and explained how and make sure measures are inacted which i also explained to not let it happen again in the future. In a pást thread I made a past comment that massive turf loss can usually be more attributed to human error than enviromental error and got my butt reamed for three days, so don´t expect me to point any fingers. Peace and Love to all!

"Peace and Love to all!"   I love it, you old hippie!   

But look, if you don't assign blame responsibility, how do you tell whoever was doing it wrong to start doing it right?   

[Ken Moum]

Craig,

 A GCA who has worked on courses such as Colonial, Southern Hills, Philadephia Cricket Club and Baltimore Country Club and has been on our site a half dozen times, has pointed this out to yours truly. It is simply stunning. On almost all of our greens, the bunkers are anywhere between 3-8 paces off the collars.

Our greens now total approximately 76,000 sq. ft. At one point in the 1990's, they were measured at 108,000 sq. ft.

David, one of the things people over look is that when you lose diameter of a circle, it cuts into the area VERY quickly.

For instance, on a 40-yard wide, circular green, losing 10 feet around the circumference cuts the area from ~35,500 square feet to ~24,600 sf.

That's a 30% reduction.

And I've watched several of the greens at my home course drop in size by 5+ feet of radius over the last 10 years... with a super who has gone out and tried to reclaim lost area.

People talk about losing 1/4" a month, but with triplex mowers, going 6 or 7 days a week, I think it's possible to lose an inch or more a month. Based on aerial photos, I think a couple of our greens might have less than half the area they did in 1971.

K

[Randy Thompson]

Bill,
My point was the that 25 to 40% is to much but why spend the effort in trying to put the blame on somebody, I tried to be positive and say just go out and fix it and explained how and make sure measures are inacted which i also explained to not let it happen again in the future. In a pást thread I made a past comment that massive turf loss can usually be more attributed to human error than enviromental error and got my butt reamed for three days, so don´t expect me to point any fingers. Peace and Love to all!

"Peace and Love to all!"   I love it, you old hippie!   

But look, if you don't assign blame responsibility, how do you tell whoever was doing it wrong to start doing it right?   

Bill,
But we both know where the responsibility lies, were just not going to say it, because everybody else knows it too!

[Craig Sweet]

I know there are members that swear the greens are shrinking....BUT....I do not buy it.  The mowing lines from the previous year are very visible in the Spring when mowing begins.....David said the greens at his course have shrunk by 25-40 percent over 15 years...I've  only been in the business for 8 years, but there is no way our greens have shrunk by 10-20 percent....

Look, I am not saying greens do not shrink...it's pretty impossible for them not too....but the shrinkage David is talking about seems unreal....How long has the Super been there? Are people out to get him....in other words is there another agenda at work here?

[Ken Moum]

I know there are members that swear the greens are shrinking....BUT....I do not buy it.

Craig, I have had the same sort of conversation with our superintendent, who I think a lot of.  In this case it was about narrowing fairways.

My wife and I were gone from the club for two years, and in the first month of our return, I kept hitting shots that I thought would be in the fairway, only to find them several yards in the rough.  I was royally pissed off because I KNEW someone told him to do it to make the course play tougher.

Having been around the business as long as I have, I never talk to my superintendent friends with anything but a gentle touch.  So it took a while to find an opportunity chance to bring it up. When I did, he said he did it--to save money.

Now, three seasons later, I was BSing with him about something, and mentioned that the narrow fairways had made the course almost unplayable for most of the guys I play with (a bunch of seniors with 15-25 handicaps).  He basically denied that the fairways were EVER where I remember them to be.

In several cases, there was less than 10 feet of rough between cartpath and fairway, and now there's 15+ yards.

The same is true of our green creep... I showed him USGS aerials of the course that show old green contours that are HUGE compared to what we have now, and he said the pictures, "aren't right."  We also have some color photos of the course hanging in a hallway (They might be 20+ years old), and on one of the holes in question, the green is now barely half the diameter of what you can see in the photo.

Re. the fairways, I brought this up to several friends, and they all had missed it, because they were there all the time.  It took my 2-year absence to see it.

With green creep, I believe it happens so slowly that someone like you who is there every day simply cannot see it without a photgraphic record.

K

[Tags:]

Tags: