THE BULLETIN

of the

UNITED STATES GOLF ASSOCIATION GREEN SECTION

Vol. 13

Washington, D. C., August, 1933

No. 4

Contents

Page

Use of Peat and Other Organic Materials on Golf Courses. By John 
Monteith, Jr., and Kenneth Welton........................................................ 90

A Classification of Peats.......................................................................................... Ill

Questions and Answers.............................................................................................. 118

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

Ganson Depew, Chairman, Marine Trust Bldg., 

H. Kendall Read, Vice-Chairman, Philadel­

Buffalo, N. Y.

phia, Pa.

Eberhard Anheuser, St. Louis, Mo.
Robert F. Arnott, Upper Montclair, N. J.

Frederick Snai

H. Chandler Eagan, Medford, Oreg. 
Walter S. Harban, Washington, D. C. 
K. F. Kellerman, Washington, D. C. 
Norman Macbeth, Los Angeles, Calif. 
John Monteith, Jr., Washington, D. C. 
Guy M. Peters, Chicago, Ill.
Havana. Cuba.

RESEARCH COMMITTEE

United States Department op Agriculture
K. F. Kellerman, Chairman; Associate Chief. Bureau of Plant Industry.
F. H. Hillman, Botanist, Seed Investigations.
A. J. Pieters, Principal Agronomist in Charge, Forage Crops and Diseases.
Oswald Schreiner, Principal Biochemist in Charge, Soil Fertility.
W. R. Walton, Senior Entomologist, Cereal and Forage Insects.
Harvey L. Westover, Senior Agronomist, Forage Crops and Diseases.

United States Golf Association Green Section 
John Monteith, Jr. 
Kenneth Welton

ADVISORY

COMMITTEE

William 
H. Aston, Detroit, Mich. 
Douglas 
Call, Richmond, Va. 
Paul N. _________ ___________
Coates, St. Paul, Minn.
W. C. Fownes, Jr., Pittsburgh, Pa. 
A. J. Goetz, Webster Groves, Mo. 
William Harig, Cincinnati, Ohio. 
William R. Hochster, Mamaroneck, N. Y. 
Jas. E. MacCloskey, Jr., Pittsburgh, Pa. 
John Morley, Youngstown, Ohio. 
Alex Pirie, Fort Sheridan, Ill.

Frank H. Wilson,

George Sargent, Atlanta, Ga.
C. A. Sawyer, Jr., Boston, Mass.
John Shanahan, West Newton, Mass.
Stanley B. Sherman, Cleveland, Ohio. 
Harrison Smith, Oklahoma City, Okla. 
Henry P. Smith, Waco, Tex.
Raymond Tower, Tampa, Fla.
C. A. Tregillus, Everett, Ill.
Joseph Valentine, Haverford,' Pa.
Alan D. Wilson, Philadelphia, Pa.

Newton Centre, Mass.

The Bulletin is published in January, February, May, August, October, and December by the 
United States Golf Association Green Section, at Room 7207, Building F, Constitution Ave. and 7th 
St., Washington, D. C.

Address all MAIL to P. O. Box 313, Benjamin Franklin Station, Washington, D. C.
Send TELEGRAMS to Room 7207, Building F, Constitution Ave. and 7th St., Washington, D. C.
Subscription Price: In United States of America, $4.00 a year; in all other countries, $5.00 

a year.

Entered as second-class matter, April 21. 1926, at the post office at Washington, D. C.. under 
the Act of March 3, 1879. Copyrighted, 1933, by the United States Golf Association Green Section.

90

Vol. 13, No. 4

Use of Peat and Other Organic Materials on Golf Courses 
By John Monteith, Jr. and Kenneth Welton

The value of peat and muck for soil improvement has been a sub­
ject of much interest and discussion for many years. These mate­
rials have been extensively used on golf courses for a long period. 
In many cases the results obtained have been favorable but in all too 
many instances damage to turf has resulted from their use. The 
contradictory reports of results have clearly indicated that further 
information is needed on this subject before uniform benefits can be 
expected from these materials. There has been ample evidence that 
the contradictions have been largely due to some improper use of 
the material, or the selection of the wrong type of material. Ameri­
can golf clubs have no doubt wasted many thousands of dollars dur­
ing the past two decades in the application of peats and mucks, or 
their supposed equivalents, to courses. On the other hand, during 
this same period huge quantities of these materials have been profit­
ably used on golf courses. It is the purpose of this article to briefly 
summarize available information on this subject in order that some 
of the large waste of the past years may be avoided and that the 
materials may be used to better advantage and with more uniform 
satisfaction.

A number of years ago an entirely wrong impression of peat 
generally existed among golf clubs. Clubs purchased large quantities 
of this material at fancy prices and used it for some purposes for 
which peat was unsuited and in a manner which caused harmful 
results. With the widespread disappointment following its use it 
fell into general disrepute and it has only been in recent years that 
its proper use has been generally realized.

In past years a great deal of peat was sold to golf clubs for the 
purpose of providing a moisture-retaining layer in putting greens. 
Clubs were induced to put layers of peat several inches thick in the 
greens. These layers, laid from 6 inches to over a foot below the 
surface, were supposed to be for the purpose of conserving moisture. 
This practice for various reasons produced bad results and greens 
thus constructed had to be rebuilt at considerable expense. Peat was 
also used in pure form as topdressing sometimes because it was con­
sidered to be rich in plant foods and sometimes in an attempt to 
soften the surface of hard packed greens. * These layers of peat be­
came buried under subsequent topdressings of soil and, even though 
the layers were thin, caused trouble, especially at certain seasons. 
The troubles arising from these methods of using peat were due to 
the manner of using the material, and they largely could have been 
avoided by using peats in soil mixtures as clubs are learning to do 
today.

Peat was also sold to golf clubs as a valuable fertilizer material. 
As a fertilizer, peat has never been able to produce results on turf 
that would justify its purchase, even at prices much lower than those 
usually demanded. Therefore when it was sold on the basis of its 
fertilizer value it could not long continue to compete successfully with 
the many commercial fertilizers on the market.

The widespread interest in peat and the rather general impression 
that it has unusual plant food value are not based on the performance 
of peat itself but upon the productivity of certain rich soils that are 
confused with peat. River bottom land is usually the richest in any 

August, 1933

91

district. Likewise reclaimed land resulting from drainage of ponds 
or lakes is usually found to be highly productive. Such soils are 
usually dark in color and contain an abundance of organic material, 
so it seems only natural to assume that all soil materials that are 
water-borne or are deposited under water will be extremely produc­
tive when made available to growing plants. This assumption is 
not justified, however, because there is an important difference be­
tween water-borne silt or mucks and peat. The rich black soils that 
are so commonly referred to as peat are in reality classed as silty 
peats. These soils have been made by clay or silt being deposited in 
peat beds. The mixtures of mineral soil and peat, upon cultivation, 
are capable of producing extremely heavy crops. Some golf courses 
have been built on this type of soil and invariably when properly fer­
tilized have soon been covered with a heavy growth of turf which 
has been easily maintained. In some instances soil of this type has 
been used for topdressing putting greens for a number of years with 
entirely satisfactory results. Such experiences have led to the belief 
that all dark colored soils or peats are desirable for golf course turf 
in their natural condition.

Peat, Muck, and Humus Defined

To the layman the terms peat, muck, and humus are usually re­
garded as synonymous. To one acquainted with these materials the 
terms are by no means interchangeable. There is, however, a close 
relationship between them, for the origin of all three is the same, 
namely dead organic material. Peat is past centuries’ accumulations 
of wood, sedges, mosses, and similar material which are packed 
together and preserved, under water or near the water level, through 
the ages in a partially decomposed condition. When peat is further 
decayed it breaks down into a finer form called muck, in which form 
it is usually found mixed with clay or silt. Still further decompo­
sition changes the material into what is commonly referred to as 
humus. It has been estimated that 2 to 6 parts of organic material 
may break down in soil to form 1 part of the residue commonly re­
ferred to as humus. Since peat, muck, and humus represent various 
stages of decay there are no sharp dividing lines between them, and 
since they originated from many different types of vegetation, it can 
be readily understood why there should be such striking variations 
in the material classed under these names.

Peat and muck may be derived from any vegetation, including 
large trees or delicate mosses, which means that the texture varies 
according to the relative proportions of the coarser or finer con­
stituents. Also the texture varies with the stage of decomposition. 
The color, mineral content, and other characteristics vary in differ­
ent peat and muck deposits. All these variations make it impossible 
to predict with any degree of certainty just what results can be ex­
pected from the use of peat or muck on a golf course.

Peat and muck may be black and in general appearance resemble 
well-rotted manure. Rotted manure is full of organisms, including 
bacteria and molds, which are helping the decay of the manure, and 
changing the plant foods contained in the manure so that they will be 
readily available to roots of plants when applied to the soil. In the 
case of peats there are relatively few organisms present and no de­
composition of the material in the natural state. They contain some 
plant food but it is chiefly in a form that is not available to plants 

92

Vol. 13, No. 4

for many months, or even years, after it is applied to soil. There­
fore in spite of the general similarity in appearance and in some 
chemical characteristics of peat and humus to well-rotted manure, it 
should be recognized that they behave differently. Since the final 
stage in the decomposition of peat or muck is humus, just as in the 
case of animal manures, it follows that ultimately they will all have 
some similar effects on soils. Most soils to encourage best plant 
growth require an ample supply of humus, and any material that will 
supply this humus to golf course soil is desirable provided it does not 
at the same time introduce harmful factors.

Organic Material Required in Soils

When most of our agricultural land was first put into cultivation 
it contained ample supplies of organic material. Organic matter is 
necessary for the activity of the microorganisms in the soil which 
are responsible for maintaining the supply of nitrogen. Hence soil 
fertility is nearly always associated with organic matter and under 
suitable conditions, and up to a certain extent, the higher the organic 
content the higher the nitrogen supply. The constant cropping of 
much of this land with faulty agricultural methods has gradually 
reduced the organic content of many of our soils. The gradual loss 
of organic material combined with the losses of mineral plant foods 
through cropping and leaching have resulted in the impoverishment 
of many soils that were once highly productive. In recent years the 
need for the replacement of organic material and mineral elements 
to soils has been generally realized. Golf courses because of certain 
topographical advantages or monetary considerations frequently have 
been built on properties where the soil has long been exhausted, and 
therefore the problem of restoring the organic material and fertility 
of soils is one that is presented to a large number of golf clubs 
throughout the country. Organic material decomposes and is lost 
more rapidly in sandy soils than in clay soils. It also is lost from 
soils in the South more rapidly than from similar soils farther north. 
Therefore on some courses organic material must be constantly re­
placed even though there may have been no great deficiency at the 
time of construction.

Many golf courses are built on land which had been exhausted 
by years of faulty farming methods, and many other courses are 
built on land so poor that it was never worth farming. The fertility 
and organic content of such soils are woefully deficient. On many 
other golf courses faulty methods of construction resulted in the 
burial of good topsoil in making fills and the covering of large areas 
with subsoil or extremely poor grades of topsoil. Some of this poor 
soil has even been used for the surfacing of putting greens. Since 
organic material is an essential ingredient of a productive soil, it 
naturally follows that the problem of supplying even a minimum of 
organic matter to the soil is an important problem on the large 
number of courses where the surface soil is insufficiently supplied 
to provide for even the normal requirements of turf. Many desperate 
and costly attempts have been made to provide the essentials of plant 
growth on golf courses handicapped by poor soil.

In the early days of golf courses in this country the usual method 
of restoring both fertility and organic matter was by the use of 
animal manures. In more recent years, however, the animal manures 
have been more difficult to obtain and more expensive than in years 

August, 1933

93

gone by. It also has been recognized that animal manures are badly 
contaminated with the seeds of weeds that are troublesome in golf 
course turf. The objection of weed seeds can be overcome by proper 
composting, by sterilization, or other methods to destroy the weed 
seeds, but all these methods add to the cost of using manures.

Manure is usually badly contaminated with weed seeds w hereas peat is practically 
free from them. The plot at the left contained peat and soil; the plot at the 
right contained manure and soil. Since the source of that soil was the same in 
both cases it is evident that the large number of weeds in the plot on the right 
was due to the manure.

Commercial fertilizers have been extensively developed in recent 
years and have been rapidly gaining in favor among both farmers 
and greenkeepers. More efficient production methods have resulted 
in a gradual reduction of the cost of commercial fertilizers, so that 
now fertilizer elements can be applied on most golf courses more 
economically in the form of commercial fertilizers than in the form 
of animal manures, especially the bulky types. It has been found 
that in many soils manures rapidly disintegrate. Even where an 
abundant supply may have been worked into the soil before the turf 
was planted there may be little of its organic matter left in the soil 
in the course of relatively few years. Tests with manure applied to 
the surface of established turf have left serious doubts as to its 
greater effectiveness in raising the organic content of the soil as com­
pared with corresponding quantities of fertilizers applied in com­
mercial form. Consequently there has been a constant increase in 
the interest in replacing the organic matter of manure for golf course 
use with some other form of material that is weed-free, more eco­
nomical, and most lasting. All sorts of organic materials have been 
used in an attempt to restore the organic material to golf course soils, 
and peats and mucks have been in common use for this purpose. 
Efforts to build up relatively high organic contents of soil have been 
especially concentrated on the putting greens, where the best turf on 
the course is demanded.

Peat and other forms of organic material have been used on golf 
courses for many years for mixing in the soil during the construction 
period, and for topdressing established turf. Many of the results 
obtained have been entirely satisfactory, but there are many in­
stances where these materials have not only failed to give the desired 
results but where their use actually has proved to be harmful. Such 

94

Vol. 13, No. 4

contradictory results clearly indicate that something is wrong in the 
use of these materials. In some instances it has been apparent that 
the wrong materials have been used, in other cases the methods of 
using them have been at fault, while in other cases the cause of the 
disappointing results have not been apparent. In spite of the ex­
tensive use of materials of this kind and the obviously great wast­
age of club funds due to their haphazard use there has been little 
experimental work done with them to help furnish the information 
needed to determine the proper kinds of material to use under differ­
ent soil conditions and the best method for using them. These at­
tempts have too often given little or no benefit or at least only a 
temporary benefit. One of the outstanding needs of modern turf 
culture is more information as to methods for permanent improve­
ment of these extremely poor soils.

Experiments With Peat and Other Organic Materials

In order to obtain more information on the subject of improve­
ment of the soil for golf courses with the aid of organic materials, 
especially peat, some experiments were undertaken at the Arlington 
turf garden and the Mid-West turf garden by the Green Section in 
cooperation with the Bureau of Chemistry and Soils, United States 
Department of Agriculture. The results of these tests to date will 
be referred to briefly throughout this discussion. These tests were 
designed primarily with the purpose in mind of permanent soil im­
provement, and therefore the observations that shall be made several 
years hence should be of much more interest and practical value 
than these preliminary observations. There are many methods 
known to give rapid and economical stimulation to turf. In the 
case of peat and some other forms of organic matter, however, the 
Green Section feels that the added cost involved can be justified only 
by greater permanence of benefits than can be obtained by the well- 
known cheaper treatments that are now available.

Peat, muck, charcoal, and certain waste products have offered 
possibilities for the replacement of exhausted organic matter in soil. 
Some of these materials are distinctly more economical to use than 
manure, are free from weeds, and have indications of great per­
manence. Unfortunately some of them have possibilities of causing 
harm to turf; others, although not actually harmful, may be of little 
value, either temporary or permanent. It was the purpose of the 
tests to determine some of these advantages or disadvantages.

Series of plots were prepared at the Arlington turf garden and 
at the Mid-West turf garden to test the value of sand and various 
kinds of peat and other forms of organic matter when mixed in the 
top few inches of soil used for putting green turf. Some plots were 
included also to test the use of peat in the pure form as a surface 
mulch. The mixtures were used in surface layers of different depths. 
To accomplish this the soil was removed to the desired depth and the 
subsoil graded at the same slope as the surface of the finished plots. 
The required amount of soil for each plot as well as the peat or other 
materials were screened, with a suitable sized mesh to break down 
aggregates and to put the material into its typical finely divided con­
dition. The soil and other materials were put in a large mixing box 
and turned over several times as in mixing concrete. Boards were 
placed around each plot to keep the mixtures separate and each mix­

August, 1933

95

ture was then put in the plot and leveled, rolled and prepared for 
planting in the usual manner of planting putting green grass.

The materials tested at the Arlington turf garden included two 
samples of sedge peat from different sources, two samples of reed 
peat from different sources, a sample of reed muck, imported moss 
peat, leaf mold, cottonseed hulls, buckwheat hulls, manure, and char­
coal. The materials tested at the Mid-West turf garden included two 
samples of sedge peat from different sources, a sample of raw reed 
peat, two samples of cultivated reed peat from different sources, a 
sample of kiln-dried reed peat, one sample of imported moss peat, 
one sample of domestic moss peat, manure, and charcoal.

It is recognized that peat and other organic materials may be of 
much value in improving fairway and tee turf. The greater interest 
in their use for putting greens and the decided limitation of facilities 
for the tests, made it seem desirable to restrict the tests chiefly to 
putting green conditions. The general application, however, of some 
of the observations obviously can not be limited to putting green turf.
How Organic Matter Helps Soils

Organic matter performs several important functions in the im­
provement of mineral soils. One of the most important of these 
functions is to improve the structure of the soil by making the soil 
more granular and preventing its tendency to become hard and baked. 
Sticky clay soils are particularly benefited in this manner. The sur­
face of putting greens having a plastic clay soil is especially undesir­
able, since such a soil gives a soggy surface when wet and unusually 
hard surface when dry. This condition is decidedly undesirable from 
the standpoint of play, and it is also likely to be troublesome from the 
standpoint of grass growth. Some form of organic material in con­
junction with sand is generally used in changing the structure of 
clay or fine silt for golf course purposes. Various methods have been 
devised for measuring the plasticity or cohesion of soils. Some of 
these methods, together with suggestions for the use of different ma­
terials for changing an undesirable soil structure, are discussed in the 
Bulletin for February, 1932.

On fine textured soils peats exert a most striking effect by im­
proving the structure of the soil. In this respect they are much more 
effective than sand. In fact on certain soils the addition of even as 
much as one-third sand has been observed to make the soil harder 
when dry. Peats improve the granular structure of fine soils and 
seem to lessen their plasticity. Fine soils to which sufficient peat has 
been added offer better growing conditions for the plants and improve 
playing conditions by giving the soil a certain resiliency even when 
dry. Tests conducted by the Green Section showed that a clay loam 
soil became puddled under fine turf conditions and became very firm 
and hard when dry. The same soil treated with peat two years pre­
viously was twice as easy to penetrate with an implement for testing 
the firmness or tenacity of the soil.

Peats also may be used to good advantage on sandy soils although 
for a different purpose than on finer soils. The comparatively coarse 
sand particles form a soil that is too loose and porous. The peat has 
a binding effect and retards percolation, and increases the water 
retention.

Another important function of organic material in soil is to in­
crease the water-holding capacity. The water-holding capacity of a

96

Vol. 13, No. 4

soil is a measure of its ability to retain water against the pull of
gravity. Since water drains away from sandy soils rapidly they have 
a low water-holding capacity. Clay soils, on the other hand, are able 
to retain much larger quantities of water than the sandy soils. Many 
forms of organic material are able to retain huge quantities of water, 
and when mixed with soil these materials generally increase the 
water-holding capacity of the soil. It has long been known that the 
water-holding capacity of a soil is (not an accurate measure of its 
ability to supply moisture to plants, for the reason that much of the 
water so retained is held in such a condition that it is not available 
for use by plants. The amount of this water that is available to 
plants varies decidedly with the different types of soil and especially 
with the different types of organic material contained in the soil.

For many years much importance has been attached to the large 
water-holding capacity of peat. It has been pointed out that some 
peats will hold as much as 30 times their own weight of water. Large 
figures representing the water-holding capacity of some peats have 
been frequently misinterpreted to indicate that such materials will 
provide ample reservoirs of water in the soil which will provide 
plants with moisture during dry periods.

Table 1.—Effects of Different Kinds of Peat on the Physical Properties 
of a Clay Soil.*

Type of prat added to clay soil in equalise
£ ?

proportions by volume

y
n

m
u
m
i
x
a
f

i
d
l
o
h
-
r
e
t
a
c
i

A

y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c

e
r
u

t
s
i
o
M

t

n
e
t

n
o
c

y
r
d
-
r
i
a

n
o

s
s
o
L

n
o
i
t
i

n
y
i

d
e
n

i
a
t
e
r

t
o
o
f

l
i
o
s

e
r
u

t
s
i
o
M

c
i
b
u
c

r
e
p

y
r
d
-
r
i
a

Pounds

Per-
ceutaye
. 38.63 . 14.1

Per-
ern-taye
2.22

Per-
ccntaiic
104.6

Moss peat, poorly decomposed 
Sedge peat:

Poorly decomposed ..............
. 48.75
Partly decomposed ............... . 45.62
. 55.74

Reed peat, partly decomposed 
Reed muck:

Largely decomposed .......... .
Well decomposed ..................
Untreated clay soil....................

. 58.54
. 60.92
. 79.26

16.1
24.4
17.2

20.4
24.4
3.7

2.09
2.81
2.52

3.38
4.07
.76

76.0
88.1
72.4

67.9
76.0
42.1

r
e
t
a
w

t
o
o
f

m
u
m

c
i
b
u
c

i
x
a
M
——

r
e
p

Pounds Pounds

.86

1.02
1.28
1.40

1.98
2.48
.60

40

36
39
39

38
44
33

• Analytical data by I. C. Feustei

The relative importance of the water-holding capacity of peats in 
connection with improvement of soils for putting green purposes has 
undoubtedly been much overrated in the past few years. There have 
been many tests made under control conditions which indicated some 
decided benefits from peat in the growth of grass primarily from 
the standpoint of the increased water-holding capacity of soils con­
taining peat. Some of the experimental work conducted by the 
Green Section, together with observations on golf courses, has indi­
cated that in a practical way a large increase in the water-holding 
capacity of soils by the addition of extremely large quantities of peat 
may not be as great an advantage on putting greens as has been 
claimed. An excessive retention of water in the surface layer of 
putting greens may be decidedhT detrimental, for it keeps the surface 
soggy and in a condition that can be easily marred by footprints, 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
August, 1933

97

which result in unsatisfactory putting surfaces. It has often been 
observed that, in some cases where the water-holding capacity of the 
soil has been increased by the addition of excessive quantities of 
certain peats, some other factor is involved, which leads to a rapid 
escape of the water from the surface layers during dry weather. 
Undoubtedly there are many instances where the additional water­
holding capacity of peat is an advantage on putting greens even 
though many of the present opinions as to the value of this particular 
characteristic of peat are greatly exaggerated.

Table 1 shows the effect of some of the peat materials, used in the 
tests at the Arlington turf garden, on certain physical properties of 
the natural clay soil. Samples were taken a year after the plots were 
planted. It shows the effect of peat and muck in reducing the weight 
of the soil samples. This is partly due to increasing the pore space of 
the soil and partly due to replacement of soil with an equal volume of 
a lighter material. “Loss on ignition” indicates the amount of or­
ganic matter contained in the mixture and shows that the poorly de­
composed materials add less organic material to the soil than do 
equal volumes of materials that are decomposed.

The moisture content of the air-dry samples represents a meas­
ure of the amount of water that would be maintained in the soil mix­
tures if the plots were allowed to thoroughly dry out in a natural 
manner at average summer temperatures. These figures show the 
relative amounts of moisture retained by the different samples. When 
the weight of a cubic foot of the soil or the mixture, shown in the 
first column, is multiplied by the moisture content, shown in the third 
column, the result represents the total amount of water retained in 
a cubic foot of the soil or mixture when exposed to the air for natural 
drying. These results are shown in the fifth column. It will be 
noted that the moss peat mixture when air-dry retained little more 
water than did the clay soil of the check plot. The more thoroughly 
decomposed peats retained more moisture than did the others. The 
small amount of water retained in the peat and poorly decomposed 
sedge peat mixtures, in spite of the large water absorbing capacities 
of these peats, may help to explain the tendency of these plots to dry 
out to such an extent that they fail to take water as readily as the 
other plots. 

It will be noted that the water-holding capacity of the moss peat 
mixture was much greater than the reed or sedge mixtures and 
that these latter were much greater than the check plot. However, 
since the water-holding capacity is based on the weight of the mix­
ture, it is apparent that the figures do not represent the actual dif­
ference in amount of water. In order to show the approximate 
amount of water contained in each cubic foot sample the oven-dried 
weight was calculated from the data in the table and multiplied by 
the figures in the fourth column. The sixth column contains the fig­
ures so calculated. They represent roughly the total amount of 
water contained in a cubic foot of the material when it contains all 
the water it will hold against the pull of gravity. This means the 
amount that is contained in soil when it is thoroughly wet but when 
all excess moisture has drained away. It therefore represents the 
maximum amount of water held in these soils, but plants can not 
use all of this water. It will be noted that in spite of the great varia­
tion in the water-holding capacity figures for these different ma­
terials, the actual amount of water they hold in soil does not vary 

t

98

Vol. 13, No. 4

as much as is ordinarily supposed. Thus in the case of the reed 
peat the water-holding capacity is 72.4 compared with 104.6 for 
moss peat. The actual difference in the amount of water held in 
a cubic foot is only one pound. A comparison of the well-decom­
posed reed muck with moss peat shows a water-holding capacity of 
76 as compared with 104.6. The mixture with the lower water­
holding capacity, however, holds four pounds more water in a cubic 
foot than does the moss peat mixture. It is recognized that there 
are other factors that should be considered to give accurate data 
for such comparisons. Nevertheless, the above calculations are suf­
ficiently accurate to justify serious questioning of some of the claims 
as to superior qualities of certain peats for golf course use primarily 
because of high water-holding capacity of the materials.

Organic material in the soil has an important influence on the 
activities of microorganisms that inhabit the soil. Many of these 
microorganisms have an important influence on the growth of plants. 
They play an important part in the breaking down of plant and ani­
mal refuse in the soil, including the dead roots and leaves of the 
plants that are living on the soil. Directly or indirectly they are 
responsible for many of the chemical changes that take place in the 
soil, and are constantly changing some unavailable plant foods into 
forms that are available for use by the higher plants, such as those 
that form turf. Some of the microorganisms in the soil cause diseases 
in plants and therefore are undesirable. The big majority of them 
that occur in soils are organisms that are beneficial. Rotting manure 
is full of organisms that cause decay, and when such manure is 
added to soil it stimulates the activities of soil bacteria and other 
soil organisms. Peat, on the other hand, is usually not a favorable 
medium for the growth of microorganisms, and when it is applied 
to soil without fertilizers, especially those containing ample nitro­
gen, it usually does not result in the decided stimulation of micro­
organisms, as in the case with manure. When a sufficient supply 
of fertilizer or lime is added with the peat to soil there may be a 
decided increase in microorganisms. This activity may result in 
a complete utilization of available plant foods by these microor­
ganisms and a resulting apparent starvation of higher plants such 
as grass.

Certain forms of organic material when added to soil greatly 
increase the pore spaces and result in better aeration and facili­
tate the movement of air and other gases through the soil. Ade­
quate aeration of soil is considered essential for proper plant growth. 
It is necessary for free circulation of air in the soil to provide 
the plant roots with oxygen. It is necessary for the work of the 
many microorganisms in the soil which produce decay of organic 
matter and supply the nitrogen and carbon dioxide which is neces­
sary for plant growth. Oxygen in the air also effects chemical 
changes which produce soluble mineral nutrients in the soil. Peat 
is most beneficial in fine soils by increasing the porosity of the soil 
and thus allowing the plant roots to easily penetrate the soil and 
grow to greater depths in their search for moisture and plant 
foods. Constant trampling of soil, such as occurs on putting greens, 
tends to reduce the pore space and seriously affects the aeration of 
the soil. In some cases it may be possible to increase the pore space 
too much for the welfare of the plants. In some of the plots at 
Arlington, particularly those where peat moss was used in excess

August, 1933

99

or where buckwheat hulls and cottonseed hulls were used, the mois­
ture seemed to escape too rapidly. This may have been due in part 
to excessive pore space. The effect of peat in increasing the pore 
space may be seen in the illustration of sections of soil and a soil­
peat mixture taken from plots on the Arlington turf garden.

Effect of peat and sand in improving the soil structure. At the left is a cross 
section of turf growing on a mixture of 1/3 clay, 1/3 moss peat, 1/3 sand. At 
the right is a section of turf on a 4-inch layer of */2 clay, */2 moss peat. Beneath 
this layer is the natural clay soil used in these mixtures.

Organic material in soils generally is an aid to root penetration. 
This may be a mechanical aid due to improved soil structure, or 
the indirect aid of better aeration, drainage, or other factors. 
Whatever may be the cause, it is generally found that better root 
development occurs where the soils are well supplied with humus, 
provided there is no toxic material present to inhibit root 
penetration.

Organic material in the soil also has the capacity to absorb cer­
tain chemicals in solution and may at times prevent some chemical 

100

Vol. 13, No. 4

injuries. In some instances this may be due to a chemical change; 
in other instances it may be due to the movement of water through 
the soil. It has been observed at the Arlington turf garden that 
peat in surface soils checks the harmful concentration of salts at 
the surface.

Soon after the seedlings were well established on the series of 
peat tests at Arlington, an attack of brownpatch occurred and in­
jured much of the turf in all of the plots. Dry weather followed and 
it was observed that the grass recovered from the brownpatch in 
the plots containing peat but that in the check plots the grass failed 
to recover. These dead areas were raked lightly and reseeded. Some

Effect of peat in preventing concentration of salt at surface. The turf in the 
damaged plots on the right is growing on bare clay and the healthy turf on the 
left is growing on similar clay to which peat has been added; moss peat in the 
front plot and sedge peat in the rear plot. All the plots were given similar heavy 
rates of fertilizers before planting and all had received similar cultural treatment. 
The soil in the dark patches is frequently covered with a thin incrustation of salts.

seed germinated but was soon killed. This reseeding process was 
repeated several times with equally poor results, even in the fall 
when conditions were decidedly favorable for seeding. It was noted 
that during the dry summer months the dead areas gradually en­
larged. The soil in the dead areas was examined and it was found 
that there was an excessive concentration of salts in the surface layer 
of soil. The highest concentration was in the center of each dead 
patch. At times salts were deposited in a thin crust over the sur­
face of the soil. In all of these plots an excessive amount of fertilizer 
was added at the time of mixing the soil in order to make sure there 
w’ould be no deficiency of plant foods. All the plots, however, re­
ceived the same amount of fertilizer, and it was all thoroughly mixed 
in the soil, just as it was in the soil-peat mixtures. Therefore the 
concentration of salts in the check plots represented a movement 
of the salts to the surface rather than any concentration due to 
careless mixing. Where the concentration of salt in these injured 
areas was sufficient to check grass growth it probably increased 
rapidly, due to excessive evaporation from the bare soil. The nature 
of the injury is shown in the illustration.

Certain forms of organic material have been used as a mulch 
to prevent the excessive evaporation of moisture from the soil. Dif­
ferent types of peat have been used for this purpose. They have 
been used in a general way for many years as a mulch on flower beds 

August, 1933

101

and are used in this manner on many golf courses. They have also 
been used as a mulch on turf immediately after seeding, and even 
on established turf. The chief objection to the use of peat as a 
mulch on golf course turf lies in the fact that it is likely to be blown 
off the bare areas, where it is most needed, in periods of drought, 
and at times of heavy rains it is washed from such areas and piles 
in ridges which may be a great inconvenience to play. In the ex­
periments at the Arlington turf garden where peat was used as 
a mulch after seeding, there was evidence of a stimulation of growth, 
which appeared due to the effect of the peat layer in aiding the re­
tention of moisture in the germinating layer of soil.

Peat Should Not Be Considered As a Fertilizer

As previously stated, peat at one time was used extensively on 
golf courses under the misapprehension that it was a good fertilizer. 
It is now realized that peat does not take the place of fertilizers. 
In fact, chemical analyses of peats show that most of them are de­
cidedly deficient in fertilizing elements and certainly do not fur­
nish these elements in sufficient quantity to justify their prices. At 
times when they are added to soils they not only fail to provide 
the stimulation expected of a fertilizer but they may actually serve 
to reduce the effectiveness of fertilizers for a time at least. When 
they are used on turf, therefore, peats should be supplemented 
with an adequate supply of fertilizer, especially one containing plenty 
of nitrogen. When so supplemented they can be expected to pro­
duce beneficial effects in soil improvement that may well justify their 
use independent of any fertilizer effects. Peat is sometimes used as 
a filler or a base for mixed fertilizers and as such is satisfactory for 
turf purposes.

In one test at the Arlington turf garden moss peat was mixed in 
the top four inches of soil just before planting in early September 
with Kentucky bluegrass and redtop. The plot received a complete 
inorganic fertilizer of the same kind and at the same rate as did 
the adjoining plot where no peat had been used. Germination in 
the two plots was about the same, but the young grass in the plot 
having no peat grew much more rapidly than in the plot contain­
ing peat. During the entire fall and until May of the next year, the 
grass in the plot containing peat appeared yellow and unthrifty, as 
if suffering from a fertilizer deficiency, especially nitrogen. In the 
adjoining plot of the same soil, receiving the same application of 
fertilizer as did the peat plot, the grass continued to grow vigor­
ously and had all the appearance of a well-fertilized turf. In May 
the grass in the peat plot began to grow more vigorously and by 
midsummer the turf in this plot was entirely satisfactory. In later 
series at both the Arlington and Mid-West turf gardens the same 
retardation of growth was observed in many of the peat plots, es­
pecially in the period between late September and early May. Some 
of the plots where the grass appeared decidedly poorer than the 
check plots were divided and part of each plot received a heavy ap­
plication of some form of quickly available nitrogen fertilizer. 
Wherever sufficient nitrogen was added there was soon a rapid 
growth of the grass.

The above observations throw some light on some of the con­
tradictory results obtained with peat on golf courses. In many in­
stances large quantities of peat have been used to improve soil for 

102

Vol. 13, No. 4

golf courses without at the same time adding an ample supply of 
fertilizers. In some cases the peat has been used under the misap­
prehension that peat itself was a good turf fertilizer. In many such 
instances only detrimental responses were observed in the grass, 
and it has been often assumed that the harmful results were due to 
toxic substances in the peat. The above tests demonstrated that 
harmful results can come from using peat with insufficient fertilizer 
wholly independent of any toxic action. It is probable that the peat 
simply locks up much of the plant food in the soil by chemical, physi­
cal, or biological means. Regardless of the cause, however, it is 
evident that large quantities of peat can not be used without taking 
into account the fertilizer requirements of turf. This unfavorable 
response where insufficient fertilizer is available is especially im­
portant in regions where golf courses are used extensively during 
the cool seasons.

In the case of the plots in which as great a volume of organic 
matter in the form of manure was used, as was used in the peat 
plots, there was an excessive growth of grass which was too soft 
and succulent to withstand adverse conditions of summer. This rapid 
growth was probably due to the more immediate availability of the 
plant foods in manure than in the peat plots, even though they had 
been supplemented with commercial fertilizers to make them corre­
spond to the manure plot. In the case of the cottonseed hulls the 
growth of grass was at first retarded but there was some stimula­
tion the second year which apparently was due to the sudden re­
lease of its plant food when the lint and hulls were finally decayed. 
In the buckwheat-hulls plot there was a decided retardation in 
growth which was probably due to some other factor than its effect 
on fertility.

Different kinds of fertilizer were tested in two series of plots, 
one series containing European moss peat and the other series con­
taining American sedge peat. These tests were to determine the 
effect of different types of nitrogenous fertilizers on soil and peat 
mixtures. Some types of peat are decidedly acid in reaction and 
have a tendency to increase soil acidity. It has been assumed that 
under acid conditions these peats are likely to be preserved longer 
than in neutral or alkaline conditions. For these tests three plots 
were used for each fertilizer. One plot contained the natural clay loam 
soil, the second plot contained a four-inch surface layer composed of 
50 per cent of clay loam soil and 50 per cent of moss peat. The 
third plot contained a similar four-inch surface layer of clay loam 
but with 50 per cent of sedge peat instead of moss peat. All of these 
plots received equally heavy applications of superphosphate and mu­
riate of potash thoroughly mixed through the top four inches. Into 
one of these sets of three plots there was well mixed a heavy ap­
plication of sulphate of ammonia. Another set of three plots was 
similarly treated, but instead of the sulphate of ammonia these plots 
received an equal amount of nitrogen in the form of nitrate of soda. 
Three other plots were treated in the same way except that they 
received the same amount of nitrogen in the form of urea. The fourth 
set of plots was an exact duplicate of the third set, but it had added 
to it a heavy application of lime. All of the plots were planted in 
May, 1930. After the first year additional applications of nitro­
genous fertilizers were added whenever the grass seemed to be in 
need of additional nitrogen. No further applications of superphos­

August, 1933

103

phate, muriate of potash, or lime were added. The effect of these 
fertilizers on the acidity of the soil is shown in table 2.

Table 2.—Effects of Moss and Sedge Peat and Certain Fertilizers on the 
Properties of the Arlington Clay Soil*

Treatment of plot

t

h
g
i
e

W

1

n
o

s
s
o
L

n
o
i
t
i

n
g
i

g
n

i
d
l
o
h
-
r
e
t
a
w

m
u
m
i
x
a
M

y
t
i
c
a
p
a
c

e
r
u

t
s
i
o
M

t

n
e
t

n
o
c

)

N

(

n
e
g
o
r
t
i

n

l
a
t
o
T

Lbs. per
cu. ft
Check-urea .................................... . . . 74.27
Moss-urea ...................................
. . . 46.19
Sedge-urea .................................... .. . 56.17
Check-lime-urea ...........................
. . . 76.77
. . . 51.18
Moss-lime-urea .............................
Sedge-lime-urea ........................... . . . 59.29
Check-sulphate of ammonia.... .. . 76.15
Moss-sulphate of ammonia.......
. . . 44.31
Sedge-sulphate of ammonia. . .. .. . 56.17
. . . 74.90
Check-nitrate of soda..................
Moss-nitrate of soda.................. . . . 46.19
Sedge-nitrate of soda.................. .. . 54.92

Per-
centage
3.8
12.0
15.7
3.3
10.7
14.4
3.4
12.1
15.1
3.4
12.1
15.5

Per-
centage
.83
1.44
1.78
.76
1.45
1.72
.76
1.55
1.66
.82
1.64
1.85

Per-
centage
41.2
92 8
72.6
40.3
84.6
72.2
38.7
93.0
68.4
37.3
93.8
74.9

Per-
centage
06
12
.23
.04
.12
.22
.04
.13
.23
.05
.14
.26

* Analytical data by I. C. Feustel.

5: 
A

4 6
4 4
4.2
6.4
5.8
5.3
4.1
4.1
4.2
6.0
5.1
4.7

The table shows the effects, in two years, of the different fertilizers 
on the acidity of the soil and mixtures of peat with soil. The urea 
check plot was distinctly acid, pH 4.6. The lime with the urea 
changed the soil reaction to pH 6.4 which is the least acid plot. The 
sulphate of ammonia changed the soil to a more acid reading of 
pH 4.1. The nitrate of soda reduced the acidity to a reading of 
pH 6.0. The peat made little change in the degree of acidity in the 
two sets receiving urea and sulphate of ammonia. Where the fer­
tilizers used tended to correct the acidity the peat checked such 
changes. In these plots the peat was used in a 50-50 mixture by 
volume, so changes may be regarded as extreme for all practical 
purposes. It will be noted also in the table that the moss peat, which 
is ordinarily more acid than sedge peat and is supposed to have a 
more acidifying effect on soils, actually was far less effective than 
sedge peat in these tests.

In the above table the column headed “Loss on Ignition” repre­
sents the measurement of the organic content of the soil. It will be 
noted that the sedge peat produced a greater increase in the or­
ganic content of the soil than did an equal volume of moss peat. 
This column also serves to emphasize the fact that a large volume 
of peat is required to make any substantial change in the organic- 
matter content of the soil. These figures represent also the organic 
matter contained in the root systems included in the samples.

In the column of the table showing the maximum water-holding 
capacity of the samples it will be seen that there were large increases 
due to the addition of peat. In all cases the moss peat figure is larger 
than that for the sedge peat plots. The moss peat more than dou­
bled the maximum water-holding capacity of the natural soil. It is 
interesting to compare these figures with those in the moisture con­

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
104

Vol. 13, No. 4

tent column, which show more moisture in the sedge peat mixture 
than in the moss peat.

The figures in the column of the table showing the total amount 
of nitrogen show approximately twice as much nitrogen in the sedge 
peat plots as in the moss peat plots, which in turn contained two and 
three times as much nitrogen as did the natural soil. All of the 
plots had received the same amount of nitrogen.

Selecting Peats and Mucks

The large assortment of peats and mucks that are available for 
golf course use serves to complicate the task of selecting the best 
and most economical types for any particular course. In some in­
stances golf courses have paid good prices for peat materials which 
have been hauled in from distant points, while they have had in some 
out-of-the-way corner of their property an equally good grade of 
material in ample quantities that has been available simply for the 
cost of digging and handling. On the other hand some clubs have 
been using peat deposits found on their properties which, because of 
certain unfavorable characteristics, cost the clubs far more than would 
a good grade of commercial peat shipped hundreds of miles to the 
course. Before a wise selection of peat or muck can be made one 
should have an understanding of some of the fundamental charac­
teristics of peats and mucks and should have at least a casual ac­
quaintance with some of the factors that should be considered in 
comparing the relative values of different peats or mucks. The dif­
ferent types of peat are described and classified elsewhere in this 
number of the Bulletin.

The selection of peat for a golf course may be decidedly influ­
enced by the use for which it is purchased. Peats have a lower 
content of decomposable constituents than many other organic ma­
terials such as manure, straw and vegetable matter in cover crops, 
and in this respect reed and sedge peat contain comparatively more 
residue that resists further decay than does moss peat. A coarse 
fibrous and even a woody peat, if available at a favorable price, may 
be used to advantage in the construction of a course where the ma­
terial is to be thoroughly disced into the soil and the coarser particles 
will be left to undergo gradual decomposition. On the other hand, 
the same coarse or woody material is entirely unsuitable for mix­
ture with soil for use in topdressing putting greens. Coarse material 
may be used in compost piles or soil beds with manure or with other 
fertilizers to aid in the decomposition, and after a sufficient time has 
elapsed these materials will provide the necesary organic component 
to make a suitable topdressing mixture. Many cases have been ob­
served where golf courses in the interest of economy have purchased 
a coarse grade of peat containing a large proportion of wroody frag­
ments. This material before being used for immediate application 
to greens in topdressing material has to be sifted. The total bulk 
is greatly reduced when the coarser fraction is removed. The ac­
tual cost of the usable material obtained in this manner after de­
ducting the cost of the discarded fraction and the cost of labor in 
removing it may be greater than that of material sold at a higher 
price. In purchasing peat, therefore, it is important to consider cost 
of the actual material that is usable for the special purpose for wrhich 
it is purchased.

Peat and muck have large water-holding capacities. In compar­

August, 1933

105

ing prices of peats or mucks one should take into consideration the 
amount of water contained in each lot. In many cases golf clubs 
have purchased peat on a weight basis when as a matter of fact 
they have actually been purchasing largely the water obtained in 
the peat. When clubs buy fertilizers wisely they purchase on the 
basis of the percentage of nitrogen, phosphoric acid, and potash that 
the fertilizer contains. These three materials can not be obtained 
without obtaining some inert materials; likewise, in the case of peat, 
it is impractical to obtain the organic material without purchasing 
at the same time some water, because all the water can not be 
driven out of peat without destroying some of its important char­
acteristics. Nevertheless, allowance should be made for the amount 
of water each sample contains.

Some peats and mucks contain substances that are toxic to plants. 
In some instances these toxic substances can be removed or con­
verted by proper handling. Before any peats or mucks are exten­
sively used on a golf course it is well to make sure that they do not 
contain any of these toxic substances. In some instances the exces­
sive quantity of acids that may occur in peat may be detrimental to 
turf development. In some instances, particularly in California and 
certain other western states, deposits may contain alkalies which are 
decidedly detrimental to plant growth, particularly when added to 
soils which already contain too high a concentration of alkalies. Ex­
cessive quantities of iron or other elements or combinations of ele­
ments may occur in peats or mucks and make them unsuitable for 
turf use until such chemicals are removed.

In the experiments at the Green Section turf gardens no toxic 
materials were encountered in the peats and muck tested. At the 
Arlington garden, however, one of the samples of charcoal which was 
tested proved to contain sufficient toxic material to prevent the es­
tablishment of turf.

A set of plots was established for testing the effects of charcoal 
mixed with soil for turf production purposes. A surface layer four 
inches in thickness was prepared by mixing 50 per cent of clay loam 
soil with 50 per cent of granulated charcoal. Charcoal from different 
sources was used for the tests.

One of the plots containing charcoal failed to produce a stand 
of grass even when reseeded several times. Much of the seed ger­
minated but the seedlings soon wilted and died. An examination 
of the soil showed that it contained excessive quantities of alkali. 
The toxic chemicals were traced directly to the charcoal. The amount 
of charcoal used in these tests was more than is ordinarily used on 
golf courses, but the excessive amount was used in order to bring 
out in a striking manner any advantages or disadvantages in its 
use. It is possible that the moderate use of this charcoal on a put­
ting green would have given no such strikingly harmful results as 
was experienced on this plot. Nevertheless, a decided injury undoubt­
edly would have resulted from the use of even small quantities of 
this particular sample of charcoal. It was material that had been 
recommended by the manufacturer for golf course use, and prob­
ably much of it has been used on golf courses, where it no doubt 
has caused damage even though this damage may not have been 
recognized. The other plots containing other samples of charcoal 
showed no signs of injury and produced a turf equal to that pro­
duced in the adjoining check plots. In these tests there was no 

106

Vol. 13, No. 4

evidence of the beneficial results that are so often claimed to be as­
sociated with the use of charcoal in soils for putting green turf.

Regardless of whether charcoal produces more beneficial results 
under certain conditions than has been observed at the Arlington 
turf garden, these results clearly indicate that whenever this ma­
terial is used special precautions should be taken to avoid obtaining 
a charcoal that is a by-product of certain industrial processes which 
are apt to contaminate it with toxic chemicals which may be a detri­
ment to turf and if used in sufficient quantities may entirely pre­
vent any growth of grass.

In purchasing mucks one should make allowance for the amount 
of mineral soils contained in them. In adding these materials to 
soils the chief objective is to add organic material. Some of the 
muck that is purchased by golf clubs actually contains comparatively 
little organic material. It is chiefly clay or silt with a relatively 
small proportion of well-decomposed organic material. Where muck 
is used for the improvement of sandy soils there undoubtedly is 
some advantage in the addition of clay or silt together with the 
organic material to make a sandy loam soil. The relative difference 
in the cost of organic material and of clay or silt justifies a care­
ful consideration of what proportion of the muck that is purchased 
represents organic material and how much of it is simply silt or 
clay. In some cases, particularly with some types of sedimentary 
peats or mucks, there apparently is little relative structural benefit 
derived from adding the material to plastic soils. In some instances 
a black soil is purchased under the assumption that it is peat, when 
in reality it contains no peat whatever and may actually be extremely 
deficient in organic material, for the black color may be due to 
mineral coloring. In the purchase of peats or mucks allowance 
should be made for the differences in weights for a given volume. 
Moss peat, which is poorly decomposed, weighs only 10 to 15 pounds 
a cubic foot; and peat varies from 20 to 35 pounds; cultivated and 
kiln-dried reed peats vary from 35 to 45 pounds; and sedge peat 
varies from 18 to 30 pounds to a cubic foot. These weights are in­
fluenced by the state of decomposition and the moisture content.

Suggestions for the Use of Peat on Golf Courses

It has been found that one of the most effective ways of using 
peat or muck on golf courses is to work it thoroughly into the soil 
before planting. This applies not only for turf purposes but also 
for use on flower gardens and for the planting of trees. For this 
purpose it is well to have the material shredded or pulverized and 
spread over the surface to the desired depth before plowing and 
discing thoroughly.

. When using peat it usually requires the addition of about 15 
to 30 per cent of peat by volume, depending on the organic contents 
of the soil and the peat, to bring the soil up to an organic content 
of approximately ten per cent. Observations and tests indicate that 
this amount of organic matter in putting greens is not too much, 
although somewhat less is probably sufficient for fairways, lawns, 
and flower gardens. If the soil is to be prepared to a depth of five 
inches a one-inch layer of peat should be spread and mixed with 
the four inches of underlying soil. It requires three cubic yards 
of material to spread a layer one inch thick over 1,000 square feet.

August, 1933

107

On some clay or silt soils the addition of 15 to 30 per cent of 
peat does not break down the stickiness or cohesion of the soil suf­
ficiently, in which case the addition of sand may be made until the 
desired texture is reached. Seldom is it necessary, with the most 
compact of soils, to add more than one-third sand when the amounts 
of peat mentioned above are also added.

Use of sand and peat in improving the structure of a clay soil on the course of 
the Augusta National Golf Club. The area to be improved was first covered with 
a layer of sand (above) and this in turn was covered with a layer of peat (below). 
These layers were then thoroughly worked into the surface soil.

The layers of peat or peat and sand can then be thoroughly disced 
into the soil. Before the discing operation is completed it is well 
to add an ample supply of fertilizers containing phosphoric acid and 
potash and to apply lime wherever the soils are distinctly acid. These 
materials are not soluble and it is much better to work them into 
the soil rather than to apply them later when they remain on the 
surface for some time before reaching the plant roots. It has been 
found that it is worth while to take some trouble if necessary, in 
order to thoroughly mix the added layers with the soil and thus avoid 
any layers or pockets which may be decidedly detrimental to the 
turf in later years.

108

Vol. 13, No. 4

If the area is to be planted immediately the large moisture re­
quirements of the peat should be supplied as much as possible by 
watering the area thoroughly a day or so before planting. Also, as 
the peat may reduce, for some time, the supply of available nitrogen 
to the plant, a good application of some organic nitrogen carrier 
should be mixed in the top inch or two of soil or soluble nitrogenous 
fertilizer should be raked into the surface just before planting. Later, 
the planted area should not be allowed to become too dry and should 
receive nitrogenous material whenever the plants show some signs 
of being starved.

If it is practical to do so, it will be found decidedly helpful in 
improving the soil structure in areas to be prepared in advance, or 
in preparing soil to remove elsewhere, to plant a cover crop on the 
land after the peat, fertilizer, and lime have been worked into the 
soil. This cover crop can be turned under and thoroughly worked 
into the soil. The addition of tops and roots of this cover crop will 
not only add further organic material to the soil, but will greatly 
stimulate the activity of microorganisms in the soil, which will be 
a distinct aid in getting the soil into good condition for the plant­
ing of turf.

Poorly decomposed peat is unsatisfactory for topdressing putting greens. The 
turf shown here had been topdressed with a mixture of topsoil, sand and peat. 
A heavy shower floated the peat out of the mixture and deposited it in ridges 
which were extremely difficult to remove.

Peat or muck is sometimes used in the pure form for topdressing 
putting greens, tees, and occasionally fairways. Such topdressings 
in time build up a soft, spongy surface layer which may be difficult 
to keep true for putting surfaces. Also on fairways or other areas 

August, 1933

109

where the turf may be thin, topdressings of pure peat are usually 
unsatisfactory because of the tendency to wash and to form into 
ridges which interfere with the mowing and playing conditions. 
When used for topdressing putting greens, peat or muck should be 
used mixed with loam and sand. For most soils a satisfactory com­
bination consists of one-third peat, one-third clay, or silt loam, and 
one-third coarse sand. Where possible, this mixture should have 
manure or other fertilizers added to it and prepared in a compost 
pile or in a soil bed for a couple of years to assure the proper break­
ing down of the coarser particles of peat. Peat, unless thoroughly 
decomposed, will float out of topdressing during heavy showers and 
accumulate in ridges, which will completely destroy the trueness 
of the putting surface. This condition is shown in the illustration.
Peat or muck can be satisfactorily used in compost piles and 
soil beds to add the necessary organic material to the soil. When 
using it in this manner the material should be used in conjunction 
with some fresh manure or should have added to it sufficient fer­
tilizer and lime to aid decomposition. For more detailed informa­
tion on the preparation of compost, the reader is referred to the 
September, 1930, issue of the Bulletin.

Organic matter is more effective in improving the physical con­
dition of clay and silt soils than is sand, and if the organic matter of 
the pile is brought up to 15 or 20 per cent, the need for sand is 
cut down. Tests may be made to determine the exact mixture of 
soil, organic matter, and sand needed. Methods of testing are de­
scribed in the Bulletin for February, 1932. It usually requires the 
addition of at least 50 per cent, by volume, of organic materials to 
make the percentage of organic matter in the pile as much as 15 
or 20 per cent after it has undergone some decomposition. This is 
because the organic content of soils is figured on a dry-weight basis, 
and many organic materials, such as manure, clippings and other 
vegetable refuse, and some peats, contain as much as 50 or 60 per 
cent of moisture.

Manure, clippings, and the organic matter in sods frequently 
break down so quickly that very little is left by the time the compost 
is ready for use. Peats, however, strongly resist further decomposi­
tion and tend to keep up the organic contents of the compost even 
though the compost has been well heated. It is desirable to have a 
certain amount of manure in compost piles to create bacterial action, 
but the manure may be replaced by at least 50 per cent of peat. Peat 
alone may be used in the pile, and some organic nitrogen carrier such 
as a sewage sludge, cottonseed meal, or a pulverized poultry manure 
may be used to aid decomposition and heating of the pile. The in­
clusion of 5 to 10 per cent, by bulk, of these materials is usually suf­
ficient.

Using Peat or Muck Deposits Found on Golf Courses or Near-by Property
The Green Section frequently receives samples of peat or muck 
representing deposits found on golf courses or somewhere nearby 
and which represent materials that can be obtained at a low cost. 
These samples may prove to be high-grade materials quite suitable 
for the purpose in mind. Many of the samples, however, are of little 
or no value, and if used, would undoubtedly do more harm than 
good. Therefore, before one utilizes any local materials it is well 

110

Vol. 13, No. 4

to make sure that the deposits under consideration are suitable for 
turf-culture purposes.

As a general rule, the first step in the utilization of a local peat 
deposit should be to drain it adequately by means of open ditches 
or by tiles. When the deposit is drained it is well to plow it and 
keep it in cultivation for at least a year. The area can be well fer­
tilized and limed when necessary and can be planted with a cover 
crop or some cultivated crop. This process of cultivation should 
last at least a year and preferably two or three years, and then the 
top layer to a depth of two or three inches can be removed and 
stored for further use.

Material that is obtained in this manner from local deposits can 
be used for mixing in soil or for the preparation of topdressing ma­
terial just as has been suggested above for the use of commercial 
peats.

Toll from Plant Diseases—The average mind can hardly conceive 
of the enormous loss sustained in the United States from plant dis­
eases. The plant pathologist in charge of the plant-disease survey of 
the Bureau of Plant Industry, reports that $1,500,000,000 annually 
is lost in this country alone and that losses in other countries are pro­
portional. Plant diseases are of three classes—nonparasitic, para­
sitic, and virus diseases. Nonparasitic diseases are caused by un­
favorable environment, condition of soil, or air or mechanical influ­
ences, but are not contagious or infectious as is the case with the para­
sitic diseases. Parasitic diseases are caused by the attacks of living 
organisms, plant and animal, and may be transmitted from plant to 
plant by a transfer of the agent. The exact cause of virus diseases 
has not been determined, but these diseases are increasing rapidly 
and have assumed considerable importance among the plant diseases 
of the world.

Control methods, such as preventing the introduction of dis­
eased plants into the country, the eradication of the disease, quaran­
tine of states and territories, and the selection and development of 
plant varieties which will resist the attacks of the diseases, are used 
to combat their spread.

The development of a strain of grass which will resist the attacks 
of dollarspot, brownpatch, spotlight, snowmold and the other turf dis­
eases seems to be the solution of the disease problem with respect to 
golf course turf. In addition to its resistant qualities, the strain must 
of course have the necessary requisites of good turf. Until such a 
turf has been tried, proved, and accepted, we must use such control 
methods as are now in general use if we are to have desirable greens.

The migratory locust of northern Africa, western Asia, and east­
ern Europe is a large, long-winged grasshopper that flies in swarms 
so vast as to darken the sun. When a swarm settles on a field or 
orchard it often wipes out every trace of green leaf and stem in 15 
minutes or less. Fortunate it is that golf courses in the United States 
are troubled with insects no more voracious than the Japanese beetle, 
June beetle, May beetle, mole cricket, and a few others.

August, 1933

111

A Classification of Peats

The increasing interest in peat for soil improvement during recent 
years has led to the utilization of numerous deposits in different parts 
of the country. Golf clubs which contemplate purchasing peat find 
that there are numerous kinds of peats sold under various names 
which are decidedly confusing. Claims of superiority are made for 
many of these special kinds of peat and the consumer has had little 
information to indicate to him the relative merits of the different 
types of peats. The new Circular No. 290 issued by the United States 
Department of Agriculture contains a description of different types 
of peat. Since this circular should be of interest to all clubs that plan 
the purchase of peats, we are extracting freely from it such parts as 
are of chief concern to golf clubs.

It is pointed out in the Circular that the peat importations from 
Europe are increasing and now reach an annual value of nearly 
$1,000,000, while the domestic production in 17 states is reported 
to be greater than the imports. This estimate does not include the 
large amounts of peat and muck that are obtained and used locally 
on golf courses or similar areas wherever small deposits of this ma­
terial occur on the property or nearby.

Under natural conditions peat deposits as a rule consist of differ­

ent layers of peat which vary in composition.

“Areas of peat represent different stages in a process of develop­
ment which in many instances has proceeded since the close of the 
ice age and is still in progress. They vary in size and depth, in the 
number and thickness of layers, and in such characteristics as color, 
reaction, height of water level, and the features with which each 
layer is preserved, making identification possible.”

Distribution of Peat Deposits in the United States

Peat and muck deposits are found widely distributed in the United 
States. “The peat deposits of the United States have been broadly 
divided into three major groups, differing in important character­
istics and regional relationships to surface vegetation, climatic condi­
tions, and time relations. The geographic limits established for each 
group must necessarily be arbitrary, and each group unit includes 
areas of peat of a transitional character.”

“The first main group comprises areas that contain a surface 
layer of moss peat varying greatly in thickness and in amount of 
woody material. It includes flat and raised bogs, heaths, and conifer­
ous swamp forests, as well as peat areas of an intermediate character. 
The deposits are generally acid in reaction, more or less poorly de­
composed, and deficient in plant nutrients. The group is confined 
chiefly to the cool and humid northern portion of the New England 
and the Great Lakes States and along the Pacific coast from northern 
Washington into Alaska. The peat materials are more or less leached, 
lack available nitrogen and mineral salts, notably lime, but have a 
moderately high content of decomposable organic matter. They are 
of relatively recent origin and do not appear to have undergone 
decomposition to so great a degree or to so great a depth as in the 
more southern states.

112

Vol. 13, No. 4

Varieties of Sedge and Reed Peat

(A) sedge muck; (B) radicellate sedge peat; (C) coarsely fibrous sedge peat; (D) reed muck; 
(E) partly fibrous reed peat; (F) coarsely fibrous reed peat. Each variety is shown here in 
natural size from air-dry sample. (From Bulletin 1419, U. S. Dept. Agriculture)

August, 1933

113

“The second major group includes areas of peat from New Jersey 
westward to Ohio and toward South Dakota. It comprises conti­
nental deposits that have a more or less complex structural develop­
ment. The various layers consist of fibrous peat derived from reed 
and sedge marshes and of woody materials from swamp forests of 
mixed conifers and hardwoods. Some of the layers of peat are darker 
in color and partly decomposed. Lime, phosphorus, and nitrogen 
may be present in varying quantities owing to the greater depth at 
which decomposition has taken place favored by a modifying influ­
ence from the underlying mineral soils of the region, by evapora­
tion and warm summers. A belt of peat deposits, represented by the 
Dismal Swamps along the Atlantic Coastal Plain from Virginia to 
Georgia, has been included in this main group. These peat areas are 
predominantly woody and acid in reaction. Their relationships and 
possible uses are not well known, but their basic economic utility is 
that of timber production.

“The third major group consists of deposits of peat containing 
fibrous material derived from saw grass, cane, tuie, and other marsh 
vegetation subject to periodic flooding. They are generally neutral 
to alkaline in reaction and show varying degrees of decomposition. 
Outstanding members of this group are the subtropical Everglades 
of Florida, the areas of peat in the valley of Mississippi River, the 
semiarid peat lands of California, and the deposits in the valleys of 
the Klamath and Willamette Rivers in Oregon.”

Principle Classes of Peat

Peat deposits have in the past been classified in several different 
ways. Like all classifications these have had certain advantages and 
disadvantages. The chief classes now used by the Department of 
Agriculture are based largely on the origin of peat.

Sedementary Peat.—“In any shallow lake or pond, such as may 
be seen rather generally in the Northern and Central States, the his­
tory of a peat deposit begins with a stage of vegetation associated 
with the open water.

“It consists of microscopic organisms, submerged plants, pond 
weeds, waterlilies, and similar forms of plant life. The yearly addi­
tion of decaying bodies of such organisms, deposited in depressions 
and basins, accumulates in the form of a soft, oozy, structureless peat. 
It contains plant remains that are recognizable and material which 
has lost all traces of its origin and has become changed into an 
amorphous residue. With these variations are associated gases such 
as methane, hydrogen, carbon dioxide, and others produced by the 
activity of certain (anaerobic) microorganisms that decompose the 
organic matter.

“Sedimentary peat is fine-textured, plastic, and often gelatinous 
when wet, but hard and horny when dry. In some localities it occurs 
compacted into a dense, impervious organic sediment; in other places 
it contains bits of tissue from roots and leaves, a variety of seeds, 
wind-blown pollen, quantities of shells from mollusks, diatoms which 
have siliceous skeletons, or sand, silt, and clay. Some varieties of 
this organic material are nearly alkaline in reaction and compara­
tively high in lime but others range from acid to neutral.

“The significant feature of the organic content of sedimentary 
peat is that in a plastic colloidal state it performs the function of a 

114

Vol. 13, No. 4

binding material with a soil. It is the seat of important chemical 
reactions and absorbs and exchanges dissolved substances from solu­
tion. When air-dried it shrinks greatly and becomes relatively inert. 
Owing to this tendency to unfavorable compaction and hardening, 
sedimentary peat with a high content of organic matter of the size 
of colloidal particles does not offer a satisfactory material for decreas­
ing the cohesion or plasticity of certain soils when mixed with them. 
The evidence available at present indicates that, in general, the 
characteristics of sedimentary peat do not have the value for impart­
ing changes in granulation, aeration, and other desirable properties.”
Reed and Sedge Peat.—“The second stage in the development of 
a peat deposit is generally associated with the encroachment of marsh 
vegetation upon the lake or pond in which the free water surface is 
disappearing by the filling process of the aquatic plants. In this case 
the dominant vegetation consists either of sedges such as wire grass, 
saw grass, tule, rushes with cattail and others, or of reeds, canes, and 
reedlike grasses. The plants make little demand for nutrients. They 
can grow in water containing considerable proportions of mineral 
salts in solution, tolerate partial submergence, and root themselves 
into the soft, miry ooze. They possess a habit of excessive root 
growth, which in time builds up a firm, coarse-to-felty fibrous and 
porous peat layer, made of an interwoven network of underground 
stems and roots. The plant remains restrict the movement of water, 
and this in turn raises the water level, excludes air to a large extent, 
prevents oxidation, reduces microbial activity, and thus preserves 
the accumulation of roots, rhizomes and residue.

“Poorly decomposed plant remains generally form a considerable 
proportion of the fibrous layer; but in certain cases it may contain 
dark-colored, structureless residue, derived from more easily decom­
posing leafy tissue by a complex series of microbiological and chemi­
cal changes. Fibrous types of peat are often designated as fen peat, 
low-moore peat, and high-lime peat. They are here separated and 
classified either as sedge or reed peat, depending on the nature of the 
flattened rootstocks that predominate in the organic material, and can 
be recognized by the eye or under the microscope.

“Characteristics which meet the requirements of a good grade 
of reed or sedge peat are based on degree of decomposition, color, 
reaction, low ash content, and absence of objectionable matter such 
as coarse woody fragments and injurious mineral salts of iron and 
sulphur.

“A poorly decomposed grade of reed or sedge peat is reddish to 
yellowish brown in color, acid or neutral to slightly alkaline in reac­
tion, and distinguished by its more or less porous, coarse-to-finely 
fibrous structure. When air-dried, the mass is brittle and the finer 
root material tends to break into powdery particles that absorb air 
and become almost impervious to water. Under moderately moist or 
drained conditions reed and sedge peat favor the activity of an appre­
ciable number of micro-organisms, especially fungi. They decompose 
more or less rapidly when their moisture content is favorable, and the 
recognized nutrient deficiencies are remedied by the addition of 
potash and phosphate fertilizers. Applications of nitrogen and lime 
are not always required, but should vary according to climatic condi­
tions and soils.

August, 1933

115

“When reed or sedge peat is in a moderately advanced state of 
decomposition or has undergone cultivation, the material is partly 
fibrous, and the residual organic matter is dark brown to black in 
color, fine-grained in texture, and slightly acid to neutral in reaction. 
This grade crumbles easily and is generally referred to as reed or 
sedge ‘muck.’ It shows marked transformations in comparison with 
the original parent material. The changes are characterized by an 
increase in the content of ash and organic complexes that are more 
or less resistant to further decomposition. There is present also a 
higher content of nitrogen, mainly as a result of the activity of micro­
organisms, but phosphorus and potassium are found in small amounts 
and should be reinforced by the use of commercial fertilizers.

“Fairly definite inferences may be derived from the information 
presented above. Grades of reed or sedge peat that are fibrous and 
poorly decomposed, when prepared by shredding and sieving, and 
well mixed with a mineral soil, may be expected to improve the mois­
ture relations, to be more effective as a source of organic matter for 
microbiological processes, and to develop an organic complex that 
possesses the characteristics of soil humus. They may thus render 
possible the development of a crumbly structure in sticky or hard- 
packed, clayey soils and to that extent exert desirable physical influ­
ences. On the other hand, partially decomposed and cultivated grades 
of reed or sedge peat should be valuable primarily for supplying a 
relatively inert, organic residue; they may be used more effectively 
for improving the physical condition of any mineral soil in need of 
structural changes.”

Woody Peat.—“The final stage of native vegetation that estab­
lishes itself upon a layer of reed or sedge peat under natural condi­
tions is a swamp forest of conifers, together with deciduous trees. 
The gradual accumulation of peat above the water level of the orig­
inal lake, moderate aeration, and a vigorously active population of 
microorganisms, as well as differences in evaporation and shading 
through tree growth, modify the character of the surface of the 
marsh and eventually result in new peat-soil features.

“The invasion of shrubs and trees into a marsh reaches its great­
est development with the subsequent segregation of the swamp forest 
vegetation into dominant deciduous trees and subdominant trees of 
conifers, a diversified undergrowth of shrubs, and a ground cover 
of perennial herbs, ferns, some mosses, wood-destroying fungi, and 
the like.

“Under forest conditions the principal source of organic matter 
is an accumulation from fallen logs, branches, and roots varying in 
size and degree of decomposition. Additional marked effects of the 
influence of a swamp forest are indicated by the litter from leaves 
and needles, by a considerable contribution of bits of twigs, bark, 
cones, and fruiting bodies, and by an appreciable amount of crumbly, 
granular residue (duff or leaf mold) matted together by a meshwork 
of roots and the mycelium of fungi. This type of organic mixture 
is classified as woody peat.

“Coniferous woody peat derived from spruce, tamarack, cedar, 
evergreen shrubs, and others has a marked acid reaction, and trans­
formation of the organic matter is very slow. Decomposition changes 
are mainly the work of fungi, and the peat material remains as a 
more or less sharply defined, coarse, woody layer, brown or dark 
brown in color, correspondingly poor in mineral nutrients and basic 

116

Vol. 13, No. 4

constituents. In the presence of a sufficient supply of lime and other 
mineral bases to maintain a neutral to slightly alkaline reaction, 
changes result mainly through the agency of bacteria, earthworms, 
and similar organisms. The dark-colored, granular woody residue 
may extend to considerable depth, and the peat deposit is then in its 
final phase, in which the principal trees are maple, ash, elm, and to 
a less extent conifers such as tamarack and cedar.

“Because of the presence of tree stumps and many coarse, woody 
fragments, and the practical difficulty involved in separating the 
variable quantity of granular residue, woody peat does not constitute 
a suitable source of organic matter for soil improvement. The chief 
value of swamp forests and their woody peat seems to be in the tree 
growth which they are capable of producing.”

Moss Peat.—“Many of the deposits from Maine to Minnesota 
illustrate a more northern type of peat, which differs markedly in 
character and composition from the kinds of peat previously de­
scribed. It is formed predominantly by the small stems and leaves 
of sphagnum mosses.

“Layers of moss peat of varying thickness occur most commonly 
in the cool and moist northern region of the United States. Some of 
the peat areas are flat heath bogs, while others, especially those of 
northeastern coastal Maine, have a surface which rises from the 
margin of the deposit to the center, and on that account are known 
as ‘high moors.’ The native surface vegetation is made up largely 
of various species of Sphagnum and a scattered growth of sedges 
and small heath shrubs, principally leatherleaf, Labrador tea, laurel, 
blueberries, together with scrubby, dwarfed black spruce and tama­
rack. There is not much timber growth, owing to the very low 
amount of soluble mineral and organic constituents in the water 
retained by the mosses. A layer of moss peat generally overlies a 
layer of woody peat, but it may occur superimposed upon sedge and 
reed peat.

“The reaction of moss peat is strongly acid. The material is, as 
a rule, poorly decomposed, spongy-fibrous, light yellowish brown in 
color, and consists mainly of the remains of sphagnum mosses. It 
has a uniformly low content of mineral matter and nitrogen and 
supports a very limited population of fungi and other microorgan­
isms. This is due in part to the high capacity of the tissue of stems 
and leaves of mosses to conduct and retain water in the meshwork 
of elongated, absorbing capillary cells.

“The chemical composition of these cells does not offer a favor­
able organic material to microbial activity. It cannot be utilized by 
them in the absence of oxygen and in a cold, acid, water-logged 
environment. These conditions account also for the heavy expense 
involved in reducing the moisture content of moss peat by artificial 
means. Similar considerations apply to the decomposition of the 
material when intermixed with a mineral soil. The rate of change 
is very slow unless the acid reaction is corrected by the use of lime, 
and its nutrient deficiencies are remedied by an application of nitro­
gen in an available form or by the use of a complete commercial 
fertilizer.

“Coarse-textured fibrous moss peat is supplied to the trade in 
several grades based mainly on the degree of fineness of shredding 
the material. It is customary to make a separation of the mechan­
ically shredded moss peat by sieving. Moss peat for stable bedding 

August,. 1933

117

and poultry litter is relatively coarse and lumpy, while particles of 
smaller size serve horticultural uses. The finely shredded fraction 
affords a more satisfactory material for soil improvement because 
it exhibits certain well-defined properties of organic matter that 
are most important from a soil standpoint.

“Moss peat which has undergone a moderate degree of decom­
position is brown in color, partly fibrous, contains an appreciable 
quantity of dark-colored residue, small woody fragments, and coarse 
fibers from cotton grass; it is considerably more resistant to further 
decomposition than the less altered, younger material.”
Classification According to Degree of Decomposition

Any of the above classes of peats may show considerable varia­

tion due to their stage of decomposition.

“To express the degree of decomposition that has taken place, it 
has been found practical to employ an arbitrary scale of five divi­
sions. These represent certain more or less definite values to indi­
cate grades of (1) poorly decomposed peat, (2) slightly decomposed 
peat, and (3) partly decomposed peat, and grades of (4) largely 
decomposed muck to (5) well-decomposed muck.

“Color is one of the important aids to the recognition and descrip­
tion of different grades of peat. There is generally a progressive 
darkening in color as peat material decomposes to muck. This can 
be well illustrated by comparing the material of a peat deposit ex­
posed in an old open ditch with a freshly cut vertical section, or by 
examining portions of a peat area that have been under cultivation 
for different periods of time.

“The natural color of a peat material is a characteristic which 
assists judgment of quality and value. Light reddish- and yellowish- 
brown colors almost invariably predominate in poorly and slightly 
decomposed peat materials. These colors characterize grades that 
have a relatively low content of mineral matter and tend toward 
an acid reaction. Mottled yellow and red colors are indications of 
differences in plant remains and in the rate at which decomposable 
substances are developing a residue under fluctuations of water con­
tent. Mottling is rarely due to the presence of minerals such as iron 
or its oxidation products.

“Partially decomposed grades of peat are usually slightly acid to 
neutral in reaction, and brown. A shade of gray deserves closer con­
sideration. A grayish tint indicates as a rule the prevalence of 
mineral matter and to a certain extent the presence of soluble salts. 
Black tints originate naturally from residual organic matter, but in 
some cases they are produced by anaerobic conditions and hydrogen 
sulphide.

“Very dark brown and black colors serve as the general basis 
for estimating grades of largely decomposed to well-decayed plant 
remains. They are the result of active oxidation of a high propor­
tion of residual material contributed chiefly by the activity of micro­
organisms.

“Greenish colors may be attributed to the presence of compounds 
of sulphur and iron, such as marcasite, while a bluish color may be 
due to vivianite (phosphate of iron). Red colors may also occur in 
peat and muck containing varying proportions of iron compounds.
“Broadly speaking, it may be said that the most marked changes 

118

Vol. 13, No. 4

from dark to light colors are found in the peat material nearest the 
surface of a deposit. The differences in color are much less distinct 
in areas which have been subjected to drainage and in peat deposits 
of relatively greater age. The colors stand out sharply and are 
more strongly contrasted in deposits that are of recent origin or are 
water-logged and in which the active agents remove oxygen from 
the organic material.”

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

All questions sent to the Green Section will be answered in a letter to 
the writer as promptly as possible. The more interesting of these questions, 
with concise answers, will appear in this column. If your experience leads 
you to disagree with any answer here given it is your privilege and duty to 
write to the Green Section. While most of the answers are of general 
application, it must be borne in mind that each recommendation is intended 
specifically for the locality designated at the end of the question.

Preparing putting green beds for spring planting.—The beds for 
our greens are now (November) plowed. What time in spring is 
best to start planting? Will it help to apply fertilizer in November? 
Our soil is black and heavy. (Vermont)

Answer.—Late summer or fall is the best time to plant putting 
greens. Frequently there is considerable trouble from weeds in con­
nection with spring planting. For that reason you should apply fer­
tilizer just previously to planting so that the seed or stolons may get 
a vigorous start and thus be able to compete better with the weeds. 
Since your soil is heavy it would be well to apply lime during winter, 
broadcasting it at the rate of 50 to 100 pounds to 1,000 square feet. 
If you can obtain some coarse sand it would also be well to disk that 
in during winter. Do not work the soil until it is free from moisture 
in the spring, and then apply 50 pounds of some good organic nitrogen 
carrier to each 1,000 square feet, raking it into the soil just before 
planting. Pulverized poultry manure, activated sludge, and bone 
meal are good fertilizers to use at the time of construction.

Injurious layers resulting from top-dressing with pure ma­
terials.—In planting our putting greens with stolons of the Washing­
ton strain of creeping bent we covered the stolons with about i/o inch 
of good soil, and when they began to come through the soil we cov­
ered them with 1/4 inch of sharp sand. Is this a sufficient covering 
of sand? (Indiana.)

Answer.—The quantity of sand you have applied is too much 
for one application. Layers of pure sand or pure organic materials 
like peat and muck on putting greens are liable to cause injury in 
after years. In your further use of sand for top-dressing it should 
be mixed with sufficient soil to make a material having the consistency 
of a sandy loam.

August, 1933

119

Seed guarantees.—Our sample of South German mixed bent 
seed which you reported showed a purity of 80 per cent and a germina­
tion of 67 V2 per cent was from a lot which the seller guaranteed to be 
90 per cent pure and to germinate 90 per cent. Do you consider that 
under the circumstances the seller could be asked to redeem this 
seed? (Ohio)

Answer.—It would seem that the seller of the seed in question 
simply guessed at its purity and germination, as it is extremely ex­
ceptional when the percentages of purity and germination of mixed 
bent seed are equal and when either purity or germination is 90. The 
average purity of lots of mixed bent seed is about 80 per cent, but a 
germination of 67^2 per cent is somewhat low. On the whole, your 
sample is not much below the average. It does not contain much red- 
top. If a sample of German mixed bent seed should contain more 
than a small percentage of redtop, the redtop would be considered an 
impurity. It is a poor practice for companies to guess at the purity 
and germination of seed in making a guarantee, and we believe the 
company from which you purchased the seed would be willing to 
make an adjustment. Companies should either have their seed an­
alyzed or else not make a point of high purity and germination of 
the seed. Your dealer, by guaranteeing 90 per cent purity and 90 
per cent germination, is indicating that the seed is of very high 
quality, whereas it is found to be only ordinary.

Cocoos bent as compared with Washington bent.—What advan­
tages, if any, has Cocoos bent over Washington bent? Is it true, as 
some claim, that Cocoos bent requires less water than other bents and 
is less liable to be injured by brownpatch? (Missouri)

Answer.—Cocoos is the trade name for seaside creeping bent 
grown in Oregon. It can sometimes be purchased more economically 
as seaside bent than by the trade name. Seed of Washington creep­
ing bent is not on the market, but nursery stock may be purchased. 
The nursery stock is composed of vegetative material, or stolons, 
which are chopped up and planted the same as seed, except that the 
chopped stolons must be topdressed to a depth of 1/3 inch. Stolon 
planting is more expensive than planting by seed. There is not much 
difference in the winter requirements of seaside creeping bent and 
Washington creeping bent, nor is there much difference between the 
two in drought resistance. Washington creeping bent is more sus­
ceptible to dollarspot than is seaside creeping bent, but is more re­
sistant to brownpatch. With either seaside creeping bent or Wash­
ington creeping bent you would have to use a fungicide to control 
fungus diseases during the summer months, and there would be very 
little in favor of either of these strains of creeping bent as far as 
resistance to both of these diseases is concerned.

Growing putting turf in greenhouse.—Will grass grow under glass 
thicker or less thick than in the open? How low a temperature would 
be sufficient to grow grass in a greenhouse satisfactorily for putting 
turf? (Illinois.)

Answer.—Grass grown in a greenhouse produces a much thinner 
and poorer turf than that grown outdoors. A temperature of 40 to 
50 degrees would be sufficient to grow putting turf in a greenhouse.

Let us not pray for a light burden, 

but a strong back.

—Theodore Roosevelt.