What happens when designs conflict with Mother Nature or why I prefer

[Patrick_Mucci]

flat bottom bunkers.

A few days before the Walker Cup I played a nearby course that I've been playing for 20+ years.

It's a terrific course, but the prevailing bunker style is sand faced bunkers.

On the Tuesday prior to the Walker Cup torrential rains hammered the East End.

I was shocked by the damage done to the sand faced bunkers.
They were basically mud filled tubs.

The rain had washed the dirt down into the bunkers.

I estimated that it would take about a month and a lot of labor and money to restore them.

But, restoring them will still leave them vulnerable to another storm.

How much of design is dictated by Mother Nature ?

And where do/does design come into conflict with Mother Nature ?

Can you design what you can't maintain ?

[Rich Goodale]

Pat

Bunkers are natural only in sand based soil, which means that ~99% of all bunkers in the world of golf are unnatural.

Rule #1, "Don't fool with Mother Nature!"
Rule #2. "If you do fool around with Mother Nature, be prepared to spend lots of dosh to please her...."

Rich

[Jud_T]

Rule #3- Build courses on sand-based soil...

[Jeff_Brauer]

Patrick,

Nice thread.  Good week for you!

While I love the high flashed bunkers, I come to the same conclusion you do - flat sand and steep banks makes for the best playing and maintaining bunkers, even if, as Billy Crystal would say, the McKenzie style bunkers look "Mahvelous."

What I am working hard on now is making sure builders get from 3-5% pitch uphill in the bunker base to at least make them visible, rather than in a hollow.  At the very tops, within the last five feet of the bunker, I find I can flare up to as much as 12% without wash.  17% seems to be the absolute max, at least here in DFW with our combo of sand and rain.  It might be flatter as close as Houston!  Even those would wash in a really big storm (we had 5" the other day...I didn't check any of my bunkers, but I bet they washed under those conditions)

Also, one thing those 50's guys did better than currently (in my experience) is to make sure no water uphill of the bunker drains into the bunker at all.  If enough surface water enters the bunkers, even flat sand can wash.  So, I am really reducing my backing mounds for bunkers to no more than a foot or so above the sand, and making very sure that there is at least a 6" lip on all areas.

I know many here will shake their heads at my answer, but that is how a gca must think, as the old saying is "form follows function" (not aesthetics at all costs) and "the devil is in the details."  If you aren't worried about these kinds of things, then you are really just an amateur architect playing in the sand box.

And, as Rich hints, not only is it not nice to fool mother nature, its damn near impossible!  Bunker liners and what not help, but its obviously so much better to design within what mother nature tells us the materials will do on slopes.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I have also found that most better players prefer the flat sand/steep bank combo, providing of course, that the bank grass is short enough to kick the ball in the bunker.

Their theory is that with flash sand, you can miss the green by five feet and be buried in a steep slope - almost an impossible shot.  However, if you miss by 10-20 feet, you probably find a flat bottom bunker without any buried lie.  As a result, the green side bunker is not "proportional punishment."

By the same theory, I suspect most find the really deep grass around some of the currently popular styled bunkers beyond ridiculous, although I haven't taken an in depth survey.  Others must find it a religious experience, since I hear shouts of the Lord's name all the way across the golf course when golfers find that gunch.........

[Pete_Pittock]

I was up at Sagebrush earlier this month. They had their second severe thunderstorm rain with washed out bunkers. Norley, the superintendent said they spent 500 manhours restoring the bunkering to normal appearance.

[Tom_Doak]

Patrick:

I guarantee you that it will not take a month to get those bunkers back in shape.  If it did they would have been changed many years ago.  I think you're underestimating the strong backs of the crew there.

Bandon gets 80 inches of rain a year, and washouts in the sand-faced bunkers there are rarely a problem.  [Wind erosion is another story entirely.]  Washouts are much worse when there is surface water from above the bunkers draining into them ... which, as Jeff says, is a major construction mistake that you find on some older courses.  If you're careful about that, then even highly flashed bunkers will only wash out in the heaviest of rains.

I'm not sure why so many people (including Jeff) think that flashed-sand bunkers and deep grass go hand in hand.  We've combined them a lot on our courses, but only where the bunker is creating the separation between mowed grass and the native rough around the edge of the course.  [Bunker or no, the native rough was going to be there anyway, the bunker is just stopping you from getting to it quite so often.]  However, this can be the source of washouts, as it's difficult to build the bunker right into the native edge without having some surface water washing down into it ... if you build a lip to keep the water out, then there's a bit of maintained grass between the bunker and the native which spoils the effect.

[David_Tepper]

In terms of ongoing maintenance, which is a bigger burden, having to deal with occasional washouts on sand-faced bunkers or regularly having to fly-mow grass-faced bunkers?

[Tom_Doak]

In terms of ongoing maintenance, which is a bigger burden, having to deal with occasional washouts on sand-faced bunkers or regularly having to fly-mow grass-faced bunkers?

It depends a lot on how many big rain events you see in a year in the given location.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

How do you extract the mud from the sand, or do you just leave it and mix it in with the sand, creating a new texture for some bunkers ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

In terms of ongoing maintenance, which is a bigger burden, having to deal with occasional washouts on sand-faced bunkers or regularly having to fly-mow grass-faced bunkers?

It depends a lot on how many big rain events you see in a year in the given location.

Tom,

Less than a year ago, Hurricane Sandy hit Long Island, but, I think it was more wind and surge than rain.

While the storm that hit the East End on the Tuesday before the Walker Cup was severe and perhaps out of the norm, the location of the bunkers and their acting as the low point for water runoff, seems like an attractive nuisance in terms of tendencies and probability.

Since Sebonack isn't far away, I wonder what their experience was.

NGLA suffered, but, not like Atlantic.

[jeffwarne]

Patrick,
That was some serious, torrential,rain.but....

a month?

[Jeff_Brauer]

In terms of ongoing maintenance, which is a bigger burden, having to deal with occasional washouts on sand-faced bunkers or regularly having to fly-mow grass-faced bunkers?

That varies a bit from superintendent to superintendent, and from site to site (as TD mentions, number of rain events per year) but most of the supers I know would go with fly mowing steep banks as easier than shoveling up washouts.  The primary reason is that they can schedule that, whereas they cannot schedule shoveling (and it always seems to happen at the worst times, like Saturday morning....)  

Also, they can get some help from growth retardants, and sometimes newer mowers that can mow steeper banks, etc. to minimize mowing.  Lastly, there are very few cape and bay flash bunkers that don't require some hand mowing of the tongues down in the bunker for best results, and most stay away from putting the riding mowers right on the edge of bunkers to avoid long term decay of the edge, and voila, you still have a bunch of hand work around nearly any style bunker, save those beauties from Robert Bruce Harris......

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

To get them back to their original, pre-storm state ?    Yes

With all of he mud mixed in with the sand, the question is, will the bunkers ever be the same ?

Or will they have to be excavated with ALL of the sand replaced ?

[CJ Carder]

So just to tack onto the original question and take it one step further, how do most courses handle it?  Short of completely reconstructing the bunkers, what can a superintendent do to make them more playable?  

I've seen a number of comments already that reflect my long-standing, biggest complaint with my home course - there's just too much damn sand in the bunkers.  Yet for whatever reason, our club's solution seems to be to add more sand, not remove it.  I've seen older pictures of the club when it was first built and we had some nice flat-bottom / grass faced bunkers.  However, when they renovated the course back in 1999-2000, they put in a number of big flashed bunkers.  I don't normally see a problem with the erosion, but frequently will climb into a bunker and sink down to my ankles.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jeff,

To get them back to their original, pre-storm state ?    Yes

With all of he mud mixed in with the sand, the question is, will the bunkers ever be the same ?

Or will they have to be excavated with ALL of the sand replaced ?

Patrick,

Without liners, the answer is they aren't ever really the same once sand mixes with underlying silt or clay.  I have seen sand replaced in as little as 2.5 years due to contamination.  Bigger exit tiles might help a little, to drain faster without allowing fines to float up in temporary puddles.  Why not 6" instead of the typical 4"?

That said, its an endless battle between the soil that always wanted to be there and the imposter we bring in.  Native soil wins out!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

I think this leads to another question and that's the location of a bunker.

Aesthetically and from a playability perspective, location "A" and "B" might be ideal, but, from a maintenance perspective, both locations might be disastrous.

Hence, I would imagine that there's a conflict in terms of location and configuration.

Inserting a bunker into a hillside, while tactical and perhaps attractive, might cause unending maintenance problems..

It's an interesting dynamic/problem that you have to identify and solve

[Jeff_Brauer]

Patrick,

I have had a few steep hillsides where I fit a bunker in without building the diversionary mounding/ridge above it.  They are always trouble, so you are right.  On the other hand, that water might also have drained right down on the green itself, or fairway.

Those are tough choices.  What bothers me about a lot of modern construction is we got so many guys in the biz, or we got so busy that there are many bunkers where it was quite possible to divert drainage around, but somehow, it didn't get done.

Mike Young and I were visiting a rather famous modern course where this was the case.  Struck us as just a bit unprofessional.  Like I say, if you don't solve those technical issues more times than not (should be always, or nearly so) you really aren't a golf course architect.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

What I also observed, in addition to the accumulated mud from the runoff, was the destruction and washout at the upper edge of every bunker.

While it wasn't my golf course, I think one of the things I would have done is taken photos of the damage and subsequently upon on site inspection and photo review, considered either reconfiguring the bunker or relocating it or both.

That storm won't be the last storm to hit that area.

How many times do you have to get bunker washouts before you question the architectural wisdom of their configuration and location ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff & Tom,

Do you ever design a bunker with a deflection plate/berm above it ?

[William_G]

How many times do you have to get bunker washouts before you question the architectural wisdom of their configuration and location ?

ONCE, but it's called maintenance for a reason

at Merion the creekside location of bunkers, greens and golfcourse lead to job security and constant restoration, repeat, repeat

ANGC built flood control to stave off flooding of the creekside greens and bunkers

"In analyzing Tralee's construction, the Club’s instructions to architect Ed Seay should be considered: build us as many spectacular holes as possible. On more than one occasion, Ed Seay had to be talked into some of the final green placements. He advised them that the third green out on a promontory would need to be replaced virtually every year." RM

furthermore, how often will they rebuild the Boardwalk at Atlantic City

how about the subways of Manhattan flooding?

Fallingwater in West PA is FLW great design yet a nightmare for maintenance

w/o maintenance you get "natural golf"

[Peter Ferlicca]

I will answer the question for which is worst, having to fix washouts or having to constantly flymow bunkers?  

I am the new assistant superintendent at Tonto Verde Golf Club in Scottsdale, AZ.  We have had some horrible monsoons the last couple of weeks here.  They practically flooded all the washes, which made a mess and tons of cleanup.  

When it comes to flymowing, most courses are going to send out a bunker edging crew regardless once or twice a month.  They edge the bunker lips (especially with bermuda grass), pick out any runners, and blow out all the clippings.  To add flymowing to this task is not that big of deal and would probably add on a total of 1 hour to the task over all 18 holes.  That is of course if you have normal grass faced bunkers.  If you are dealing with a Pete Dye course, or something with a ton of huge grass faced bunkers, then that is a different animal.  For example the grass faced bunker on 16 at PGA West Stadium Course, that will take probably 2-3 hours just to flymow that thing, they must have a flymow on a rope to handle that 20 foot grass faced slope.  

Now when you have washouts, which was just had a couple in two weeks, that is a big problem.  You have to get your sandpro with a blade on the front and constantly push up the sand back up the faces.  It doesn't sound that bad, but it is a long task and takes a while to get it to the way you would like.  Lets put it this way, if you have a huge washout, it isn't the kind of thing that you can fix that morning so that all the members don't notice, it is a 2-3 day project to fix it.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pete,

Thanks

"Washouts" from heavy rains usually involve just redistributing the sand, but the condition I witnessed was an enormous amount of surrounding soil being washed into the bunker, creating a bathtub of mud.

[Jeff_Brauer]

How many times do you have to get bunker washouts before you question the architectural wisdom of their configuration and location ?

ONCE, but it's called maintenance for a reason

When you have to bid it out to contractors to fix, its actually called "reconstruction."

I have told this story before, but a contractor once used me for a reference and had put some pictures of their/my bunkers in the portfolio.  A famous gca called on the reference and complimented me on how well the bunkers looked.  My comment was that they were very similar to his, but a lot less steep for practical reasons.  He joked that they knew their bunkers would be rebuilt in a few years, and they were most interested in getting their marketing photos.  But, he wasn't joking.  Recently, the same gca told me that "things were different" than back in the old days when they never had to consider maintenance.  

That's my experience, too.  Try selling old fashioned flash bunkers to a struggling club/course!  They aren't buying these days.   This period is actually a pretty good indicator of how the economy affects architecture.  No surprise of when the best courses being built in the 20's and 90's with the middle being a bit of a dark era.  Those guys, and gca's now stripped architecture down to its more practical roots.  Maintenance was a much bigger consideration when the economy tanks.  Mostly because who can afford to max out building a course, and then have to come back in three years to fix their bunkers, re-grass their greens, etc.