•

USGA GREEN SECTION
RECORD

A Publication on Turf Management 
by the United States Golf Association

USGA GREEN SECTION
RECORD

A Publication on Turf Management by the United States Golf Association

© 1967 by United States Golf Association. Permission to reproduce articles or material in the USGA 
GREEN SECTION RECORD is granted to publishers of newpapers and periodicals (unless specifically 
noted otherwise), provided credit is given the USGA and copyright protection is afforded. To reprint 
material in other media, written permission must be obtained from the USGA. In any case, neither arti­
cles nor other material may be copied or used for any advertising, promotion or commercial purposes.

VOL 5, No. 4

NOVEMBER 1967

Turf Management Through Genetics by Holman M. Griffin .................   1

Municipal Golf Course Operations—Areas of Concern

by Grover C. Keeton ............

6

Turfgrass Conferences: Should Superintendents Attend?

by Ben J. Chlevin ______

What’s Best for Overseeding Bermuda? James B. Moncrief ___________ ____ ___ _ 12

Turf Twisters

Back Cover

Published six times a year in January, March, May, July, September and November by the UNITED 
STATES GOLF ASSOCIATION, 40 EAST 38th ST., NEW YORK, N. Y. 10016. Subscription: $2 a year. 
Single copies: 35$. Subscriptions and address changes should be sent to the above address. Articles, 
photographs, and correspondence relevant to published material should be addressed to: United 
States Golf Association Green Section, P.O. Box 567, Garden Grove, Calif. 92642. Second class postage 
paid at Rutherford, N. J. 07070. Office of Publication: 40 East 38th Street, New York, N. Y. 10016

Editor: William H. Bengeyfield 

Managing Editor: Robert Sommers

THE GREEN SECTION OF THE UNITED STATES GOLF ASSOCIATION
Green Section Committee Chairman: Henry H. Russell, P.O. Box 578, Perrine, Fla. 33157.

Green Section Agronomists and Offices

EASTERN REGION 
Northeastern Office: P. 0. Box 1237, 
Highland Park, N. J. 08904
Alexander M. Radko, Director, Eastern Region 
Holman M. Griffin, Northeastern Agronomist 
Lee Record, Northeastern Agronomist
Richard A. Slater, Northeastern Agronomist

Southeastern Office: P. 0. Box 4213, 
Campus Station, Athens, Ga. 30601

James B. Moncrief, Southeastern Agronomist

MID-CONTINENT REGION
Southwestern Office: Texas A&M University, 
College Station, Texas 77843
Dr. Marvin H. Ferguson, Director, Mid-ConU^ri
Region and National Research Coordinate®®

Mid-Western Office: Room 905, 
211 East Chicago Ave., Chicago, III. 60611

James L. Holmes, Mid-Western Agronomist

WESTERN REGION
Western Office: P. 0. Box 567, 
Garden Grove, Calif. 92642
William H. Bengeyfield, Director, Western Region

Cover Photo: Dr. C. Reed 
Funk and Sang-Joo Han, 
Rutgers turf breeding spe­
cialists, examine selected 
varieties of new blue­
grasses which are to have 
their chromosome numbers 
determined.

Holman M. Griffin, Northeastern Agronomist, USGA Green Section; Dr. C. Reed Funk, Rutgers 
University turf breeding specialist and Sang-Joo Han, graduate student in turf breeding at 
Rutgers; examine new bluegrass variety under test.

Turf Management

Through Genetics

by HOLMAN M. GRIFFIN, Agronomist, USGA Green Section

Why not develop an all-purpose turfgrass which 

would grow well in wet or dry soils, hot or cold 
weather, sun or shade, and be wear-, disease-, 
and insect-resistant as well?

You might say, “Just what the doctor 
ordered." And why not? For years the doctors 
(geneticists) have been improving field crops by 
means of breeding programs, and have developed 
many strains which are highly superior to the 
parent materials.

While the development of such a turfgrass 
with all the attributes listed above is most un­
likely, it is not impossible. We could certainly 
improve our present turf varieties a great deal.
Most of the turf varieties now available are 
the result of the selection of superior types of 
grasses from old turf areas where nature was the 
principal geneticist. Until recently, interested in­
dividuals selected, collected and tested these 
plants with little thought of any improvement by 
means of a breeding program. These gifts of 
nature, were sought as a finished product rather 
than as a source of superior characteristics 

which could be combined genetically to produce 
turf adapted to specialized requirements.

Merion Kentucky bluegrass is an excellent 
example of a natural hybrid which was selected, 
tested and accepted by the turf world as a 
superior variety. For years now Merion has been 
the standard by which bluegrasses are measured, 
but at the same time the inherent weaknesses 
of this grass have been realized.

Other superior plants might also be “found," 
as Merion was found growing in a natural state, 
but the possibility of such plants occurring in 
nature is quite low, and the probability of these 
plants being noticed and selected for testing 
further reduces the odds. Progress dependent 
upon such happenstance is extremely slow and 
unpredictable.

Surveys conducted in several states during 
the last four or five years indicate that the pro­
duction and maintenance of turf is a multi­
million dollar business ($4 billion according to 
the first edition of “Turf-Grass Times” in 1965). 
Nevertheless, the money being spent on turfgrass

NOVEMBER, 1967

1

Individual bluegrass plants being grown in greenhouse from seed in preparation for field trails.

research is insignificant when compared to the 
total expenditure on this crop. It amounts to 
something less than one per cent.

Although turf research programs are gaining 
in popularity and support faster now than ever 
before, we have a long way to go before the 
expenditures for turf research approach anything 
near the three to six per cent of gross income 
reportedly spent by progressive industries on 
product research.

Breeding Programs Neglected

The foregoing paragraph is a general picture 
of the meager allotments for general research on 
turf. You might well imagine that the portion 
allotted specifically for research on turf breed­
ing is small, indeed. Until approximately five 
years ago, turfgrass breeding programs were 
either nonexistent or largely neglected in the 
general turf program. Fortunately, a number of 
universities, seed and sod growers and govern­
mental agencies have begun to realize the value 
of turfgrass in our society and the possibilities 
of substantial improvement in turf through 
breeding programs.

Yes, interest in turfgrass breeding is in­
creasing in the United States but we are still 
lagging behind Europe. Holland and Sweden in 
particular have developed and released a num­
ber of named varieties of bluegrass, fescue, rye­
grass and bentgrass. Some of these grasses show 
promise for use in this country, but varieties 
better adapted to our own climate and needs 

could no doubt have been developed if we had 
had similar programs here.

Studies in genetics, botany, physiology, path­
ology, entomology, taxonomy, ecology, chemistry, 
turf management, and plant breeding are all es­
sential to the development of a well-rounded 
and progressive turf breeding program. These 
programs must culminate in the development of 
breeding and evaluation procedures specifically 
adapted to the plant species involved and the 
particular requirements of the turfgrass industry. 
After the development of the appropriate breed­
ing method, the greatest need is the develop­
ment of faster and more efficient methods of 
evaluation and screening of new and potentially 
better turf varieties.

Obtaining Improved Varieties

Essentially improved varieties of turf are 

obtained through three methods. They are:

(1) Selection of superior plants occurring 

in nature.

(2) The use of radiation and other mutagenic 

agents to produce variants.

(3) Hybridization of promising selections.
Regardless of the method employed, it usual­
ly takes at least 10 to 15 years to develop 
properly a new turf variety to the point that it 
becomes commercially available. Much of this 
time is required for evaluation and testing: thus 
the need for more efficient methods of screening 
to separate the good from the bad.

We have already discussed the natural selec-

2

USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

Flats of bluegrass seedlings ready for the field. This will constitute a portion of next year's nursery 
plants to be evaluated in the breeding program.

tion method by which most of our present turf 
varieties were obtained, and its obvious limita­
tions. Next we should consider the use of radia­
tion and mutagenic agents to create genetic 
variations. This method offers the plant breeder 
a chance to work with the most outstanding 
varieties, and alter their genetic composition in 
hopes of producing an even better plant, or of 
endowing the variant with a superior, transmit- 
tible characteristic. Also, it allows the breeder 
to produce his own source material rather in­
expensively in the laboratory without depending 
on extensive travel or donations to obtain plants 
for evaluation.

Although this method of altering plant 
material has some distinct advantages, the 
breeder is still unable to control the genetic 
changes he brings about in the plants, and the 
probability of producing superior plants is again 
extremely low.

The third method for obtaining improved turf 
varieties is hybridization. Without doubt this is 
the most promising. The first two methods of 
deriving superior plants are normally used simply 
as a starting point for plant breeding.

Reproduction is Complex

On the surface it would seem simple to 
collect different plants (source material), screen 
this material for the desired characteristics, and 
then cross the plants having these individual 
characteristics until a superior plant containing 

all the desirable features present in the source 
material is obtained.

However, it is much more complex than this. 
For one thing, the specific method of reproduc­
tion of different varieties of turfgrasses and the 
techniques of hybridization must be clearly 
understood for each variety. As an example, Ken­
tucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) reproduces both 
sexually and by apomixis. Apomixis is a process 
whereby seed is formed vegetatively without the 
union of the germ cells (egg and pollen). Seed 
produced apomictically is genetically identical 
to the parent plant and for this reason a high 
degree of apomixis is sought in new varieties.

Merion Kentucky bluegrass is extremely 
apomictic, producing only about 4% of its seed 
sexually, and can therefore be propagated from 
seed as a pure strain. A grass of this type in 
which each plant is genetically identical to the 
others leaves much to be desired, however, be­
cause every plant in the planting is subject to 
the adversities of disease and environment to 
the same degree as all the others. Figuratively 
speaking, we have all our eggs in one basket with 
a grass such as Merion, and some turf breeders 
now feel that the best bluegrass turf of the 
future will come from a mixture of highly apo­
mictic and compatible strains.

Now that we have discussed some advantages 
of apomixis, we must also acknowledge that this 
process is a great handicap to the turf breeder. 
The reproductive process of apomixis is neither

NOVEMBER, 1967

3

between two plants which differ in only one 
gene (the unit of inheritance which controls the 
development of character in all life forms) would 
produce the desired plant which possessed both 
of the desired genes in a frequency of one in 
each four plants in the second, or F2 generation.
When you consider that bluegrasses may 
have from 38 to 150 chromosomes, each of 
which contains numerous genes independently 
assorted and capable of independent combina­
tion, the chance of the ideal plant being pro­
duced with only 20 different gene pairs concern­
ed would be one in 1,099,511,627,776 plants.

To overcome such odds, the turf geneticist 
must be highly skilled in breeding techniques, 

Ryegrass plants being evaluated both to deter­
mine characteristics of individual plants, and 
for seed production.

and must have a keen eye so that he can select 
and evaluate plants which show promise. In 
addition, he must be persistent, dedicated, and 
it would help if he were just plain lucky.

Generally, a progressive bluegrass breeding 

program might be outlined as follows:

First and Second Years

Collect source material and evaluate it. Pro­
duce seed from which vegetative or clonal 
nurseries are established of the more promising 
strains.

At this point I would like to make a par­
ticular point in the interest of better understand­
ing between the researcher and the man in the 

Dr. C. Reed Funk checks new seed, placed 
under ice pack to break dormancy prior to 
planting in flats such as seedlings behind him.

clearly understood nor presently of use to the 
geneticists except as a means of maintaining the 
purity of a strain once the proper result has 
been achieved. All progress with cross breeding 
is totally dependent upon sexual reproduction.

The techniques and possible combinations 
for crossing plants are too complex and too 
numerous to cover in this article, except to say 
that the goal of such a program is a plant with 
superior qualities for turf which may be main­
tained true to type by its seed or by the less 
desirable means of vegetative propagation if the 
plant is not apomictic.

A Tedious Process

Dr. C. Reed Funk, associate research special­
ist in turfgrass breeding at Rutgers University, 
annually screens and evaluates some 50,000 in­
dividual plants of bluegrass, fescue, ryegrass and 
bent. Each year a large portion of these plants 
is discarded and replaced with new plants. Those 
with some superior characteristic will be retained 
for further evaluation.

Such large numbers of plants are necessary 

because of the difficulty of obtaining all desired 

characteristics in one plant. This is illustrated 

by the fact that if three independent, desirable 

characteristics were present in some of his cross­

breedings in a frequency of one per 1,000 plants, 
the plant which he would be looking for, and 

which possessed all three characteristics would 

exist at a frequency of one in 1,000,000,000

To further illustrate the problems of genetics 

with an extremely simplified example, a cross 

4

USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

field. The field men or turf managers are ex­
tremely valuable to the researcher when they 
provide source material which they have found 
to be outstanding. However, once the material 
has been donated, these individuals, being nor­
mally anxious about their discovery, quite often 
express concern that progress reports on their 
selection were either vague or nonexistent. The 
explanation for this seeming disinterest on the 
part of the researcher is that preliminary screen­
ing and evaluation takes anywhere from one to 
five years. Under these circumstances, when a 
geneticist is cornered at a conference or turf 
meeting he can hardly be expected to remember 
and recite a detailed evaluation of a particular 
plant which is only one of thousands.

If your selection has merit, I am sure you 

will be informed as soon as possible. However, 

this may take years rather than months, depend­

Progeny test. Bluegrass seedlings developed 
and evaluated as individual plants in spaced
nursery.

ing upon how your material is evaluated and 

Eighth Year

how it is used in the program.

Screen superior progeny and establish mass 

Third and Fourth Years

The promising selections must be screened 
for disease and superior characteristics. This 
may be done in a green house, growth chamber 
or in the field.

Fifth and Sixth Years

Determine the degree of apomixis and estab­
lish vegetative nurseries of individual plant 
selections.

Seventh Year

Cross superior plants in the greenhouse and 

replant their seed in the nursery.

Different types of plants produced by the same 
parent growing in nursery row for evaluation.

seeded plots for evaluation.

Ninth and Tenth Years

Evaluate the solid seeded plots and vege­

tative nursery.

Continuation

After the 10th year the program would pro­
gress into the second and third cycle in which 
the superior plants from the 10-year program 
are further improved by repeating the procedures 
carried out in the seventh through the 10th 
years.

The program outlined above could most cer­
tainly produce some highly superior plants; how­
ever, it requires a considerable amount of time. 
In addition to the time required for the breeding 
program, commercial fields must be planted and 
brought into production. This process increases 
the time required for seed to become available 
to the consumer.

This article has dealt largely with bluegrass 
because this is one of the more complicated 
species. There is gross oversimplification of many 
genetic principals and breeding techniques, but 
this material is presented solely as a basic in­
troduction into the field of turfgrass breeding, 
to provoke thought in this direction, to create 
a better understanding of the problems confront­
ing the turf breeder, and to generate support 
for his efforts.

Footnote: The cooperation and assistance of Dr. Reed 
Funk, Associate Research Specialist in Turfgrass 
Breeding, was an invaluable aid in the preparation of 
this article and is hereby gratefully acknowledged.

5

Municipal
G-olf Course
Operations

AREAS OF CONCERN

by GROVER C. KEETON, Superintendent of Special Activities, City of Dallas Park and Recreation 
Department, Dallas, Texas

|n operating a municipal recreation facility, the 

facility should be designed to meet the re­
creational needs of the community. A municipal 
golf course should follow this philosophy if it 
is to fulfill the requirements of golfers of all 
age groups. Figures compiled by the National 
Golf Foundation indicate that municipal golf 
operations represent only 14 per cent of the 
nation’s golf courses, and yet they serve about 
40 per cent of the country’s players. Play is in­
creasing, and the greatest increase is from jun­
iors and lady players.

The number of players has grown to the ex­
tent that public golf course operators must adapt 
their thinking and operations toward the design 
of the course, the construction, the rules and 
policies regulating play, and the training of 
operating personnel. Increase in leisure time 
means an increase in play and traffic.

Some of the major areas of concern which 
we have experienced in operating a municipal 
golf course in order to welcome this traffic in­
cludes:

Design
Construction 
Maintenance 
Personnel
Player Educational Programs 
Record-keeping

DESIGN

Golf facilities today are being designed and 
constructed on land which is less desirable for 
other types of development, and yet many times 
a golf course will beautify and convert a rugged 
real estate problem into an attractive open-space 
area for the community.

Designers of municipal courses should con­
sider the attractiveness of a course to 250 or 

more players per day. Designers must also con­
sider the time available for playing the course. 
It must not be too difficult; it should allow the 
player to have an encouraging score. Concern 
for the safety of players and for the movement 
of traffic on the course are also a part of the 
designer’s job.

CONSTRUCTION

It is most desirable to use a golf course 
architect in planning and designing. If it is 
necessary to reduce cost, reduce it in areas 
other than in the construction of the greens and 
irrigation system. A definite plan should be fol­
lowed in the construction of greens. These plans 
should include specifications for size, soil mix­
ture, drainage, seed bed, surface drainage and 
contours. These are all essential items regardless 
of who is to operate the course. On a municipal 
golf course, as well as on all others, the putting 
green is the principal attraction. It should re­
ceive the principal attention during construc­
tion.

The tees may be designed, constructed and 
maintained as a part of the fairway. They should 
blend with the natural terrain and slope of the 
fairway. Such a layout will enable placement of 

tee markers at many locations and will better 

distribute the traffic.

As in the case of tees, the fairways may 

also be constructed to be played with a mini­

mum of hazards and a continuous, safe move­

ment of play. As noted previously, it is not 

practical to reduce drastically construction costs 

in the fairway irrigation system.

One of the most controversial features of a 

municipal golf course is the location and num­

ber of bunkers. This presents a condition which

6

USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

Tenison Memorial Park Municipal Golf Course - West Course, showing No. 17 fairway in foreground 
and approach to green; upper left is adjacent fairway No. 11 with three trees protecting green. 
This view illustrates a typical layout of adjoining fairway screening with trees, rapid fairway mow­
ing, attractive relaxing view by public links player, and faster movement of traffic on the course.

is, in all probability, unique to each golf course 
operation.

MAINTENANCE

Maintenance of any golf course will include 
such items as mowing, aerifying, vertical mow­
ing, tree maintenance, irrigation, fertilizing, 
equipment care, chemical treatment, etc. How­
ever, on a municipal course these responsibili­
ties are increased to include the maintenance 
of the clubhouse area, parking lot area, curbs 
and gutters. These areas receive heavy use and 
must be maintained while the golf course is 
being played seven days a week with an average 
daily play of 250 to 300 rounds.

It is difficult in a municipal operation to es­
tablish different standards of maintenance for 
greens, collars, aprons, tees, and bunkers. There­
fore, we concentrate on greens, tees, fairways 
and roughs. The secondary areas such as aprons 
and collars cannot be treated separately.

Golf cars have become an added service to 
the golfer, and public golf course maintenance 
must adjust accordingly. We have made provi­
sions for golf car paths, signs and housing 
facilities.

Today, public golf operations must also be 
concerned with course beautification. For exam­

ple, trees and shrubs may not contribute to 
lowering scores, but they do affect the attractive­
ness of the course and add to greater enjoy­
ment of play.

Trees offer an additional safety advantage 
on public golf courses by providing barriers 
between fairways.

We emphasize in turf management that soil 
is the foundation of the golf course. Soil has 
four functions to perform for the grass plant. It 
provides support, serves as a source of nutrients, 
air, and water. While performing these functions, 
soil must also resist compaction under daily 
traffic and/or adverse weather conditions.

A good fertilization program is also stressed 
because it is one of the equalizers to traffic 
damage on turfgrasses. The use of three R’s is 
an important guide—RIGHT AMOUNT OF THE 
RIGHT KIND AT THE RIGHT TIME. Depending 
upon a number of factors, such as the fertility

Correction

A caption under a picture on Page 13 of the 
September issue of the Green Section Record 
incorrectly identified injury to the turf pictured 
there as “fungicide injury.” The caption should 
have read “herbicide injury.”

NOVEMBER, 1967

7

Tenison Memorial Park Municipal Golf Course showing clubhouse and one of two parking lots 
and park drive. Note approximately 150 parked cars which would indicate approximately 450 
players on 36-hole course on a week-day at 4:00 p.m.

level of the soil, species grown, clipping man­
agement, leaching losses and others, turfgrasses 
need relatively large amounts of nitrogen, phos­
phorus and potassium to meet the increased 
play on public golf courses today.

It has been said that irrigation is so im­
portant that the golf course should be con­
structed where the water is, rather than bring 
water to the golf course. However, it is noted 
that you can do as much damage to turfgrasses 
by watering too much as by watering too little. 
Too much water in areas of heavy traffic aggra­

vates compaction. Therefore, overwatering, plus 
heavy traffic is a double dose of compaction to 
the turf. The soil probe used to check the de­
sired amount of moisture in the root zone is one 
of the most important instruments on the muni­
cipal course.

PERSONNEL

It is impossible to mention special areas of 
concern on a municipal course without mention­
ing personnel, employment, training, and super­
vision. I suppose this is equally important in 

8

USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

any golf operation, but there is a special em­
phasis in the case of public course work be­
cause we are serving many people of all ages, 
with varied interests and with varied economic 
backgrounds.

The personnel in the clubhouse and on the 
course must operate as a team and as a unit 
with complete and thorough communication with 
one another through proper channels. Because 
of these conditions, we have found it desirable 
to publish a golf course operator’s manual out­
lining rules, regulations, fees, and policies which 
apply to the golf course. It is made available 
to all personnel.

PLAYER EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM

An important area of concern today, and this 
is possibly unique in public golf course oper­
ation, is an educational program to encourage 
public links players to take care of the golf 
course by replacing divots, observing course 
etiquette and using the putting greens properly. 
New golfers should not only learn how to play 
the game, but also learn how to use the course 
through this educational program.

Particular emphasis is given to a litter con­
trol program. All golf course personnel must 
learn that this is an area of concern, and yet 
one that we must live with. A golf course with 
no litter does not have many players. Our player 
educational program also disseminates informa­
tion to the players through brief notices on score 
cards, signs on the course and in the clubhouse.
I don't know of any golf course which can 
completely eliminate vandalism—either thought­
less (majority of such acts) or malicious. Our 
experience shows that most vandalism involves 
the putting surface, drinking fountains, and rest­
room facilities. The best approach we have found 
to vandalism is to recognize that it will occasion­
ally occur, to remove the evidence as quickly 
as possible, and to have a preventive program 
in order to minimize these acts.

RECORD-KEEPING

Written records and reports are a necessity! 
This is not a task to be done annually, semi­
annually or monthly, but, in most cases, daily. 
Record-keeping should encompass items such as 

labor, materials, equipment, rounds of golf, and 

receipts. The advantages are many. Of primary 

importance is determining how maintenance 

money is spent, and assembling data for annual 

planning and annual reports. These reports be­

come increasingly important for future compara­
tive studies. Written reports and record forms 
should be prepared so that they can be easily 
compiled and used as a reference for operating 
conditions.

A few years ago we had the pleasant experi­
ence of participating with the USGA in standard­
izing golf course record-keeping. This was a 
valuable experience. We now use the following 
standard measurements in preparing and sub­
mitting written records:

1. Labor—man hours to determine the 
amount of work on any part of the course.

2. Fairways and roughs—use “one acre” as 

a unit of measurement.

3. Putting greens—use a standard measure­

ment of “1,000 square feet .”

4. Liquids—liquid ounces, pints, quarts and 

gallons.

5. Solids—ounces and pounds.

In conclusion, public golf course operations 
do not present problems simply because they 
are public. The problems we have are the result 
of increased play from all age groups: from 7 to 
87. Of course, our concern would be even greater 
if we did not have this kind of problem. So, let’s 
just say that municipal operations today present 
a challenge; and we aim to meet it!

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Grover C. Keeton, Superintendent of 
Special Activities, has been with the City of 
Dallas Park and Recreation Department for 
22 years. He is a member of the USGA Green 
Section Committee, a member of the National 
Parks and Recreation Association and is a 
former President of the Texas Turfgrass Associ­
ation.

NOVEMBER, 1967

9

Turfgrass Conferences:

Should Superintendents Attend?

by BEN J. CHLEVIN, Executive Director, Golf Course Superintendents Association of America

The 39th annual International Turfgrass Con­

ference and Show will be held in San Francisco 
on February 18-23, 1968. The educational pro­
gram will cover four and a half days and will 
feature nearly 40 speakers, among them research 
scientists, agronomists, golf course superinten­
dents, and officials of other golf agencies. Two 
special “clinics” are planned, one on irrigation, 
the other on small engines.

Have conferences such as this any value? 

Should your superintendent attend them?

To the veteran golf club official or green 
chairman who takes for granted his golf course 
superintendent's attendance at the Turfgrass 
Conference and Show as one of the superinten­
dent’s responsibilities, the answer is obvious.

Indeed, he might even rephrase the question 

as a statement:

“Golf Clubs should insist that their superin­
tendents attend the International Turfgrass Con­
ference and Show!”

These comments then, are directed to the 
new club official or green committee chairman 
who may be unaware of benefits that accrue to 

both the golf course superintendent and the 
Club through the Annual Turfgrass Conference 
and Show. And they are directed to the super­
intendents who have never attended the Annual 
Golf Course Superintendents Association of 
America Turfgrass Conference and Show.

Without doubt attendance at the International 
as well as at local conferences and turf clinics 
adds to the superintendent’s knowledge and 
value to his Club. Today, in the face of rising 
costs of materials and labor, scarcity of labor, 
heavier golf traffic sharply reducing the time 
available for maintenance, the golf superinten­
dent must be skilled in many areas.

He must know what equipment is available 
and what new equipment is being developed so 
that he can further automate his present mainte­
nance practices in order to offset the high cost 
of labor, or the serious lack of labor, efficiently 
and economically.

He must be aware of the rapid increase in 
the number of chemicals and other materials 
available to combat the many new problems de­
veloping as a result of an increase in play, less 

io

USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

time for maintenance work, and increasing de­
mand for finer, more closely manicured, and 
longer-lasting turf.

He must not only know how to use the equip­
ment and plan its use for efficient maintenance, 
and know chemicals and their application for 
best results, but he must also know how to ex­
plain the need for equipment, materials and 
other aids. When he asks for money to produce 
results—he must be able to explain in terms 
understandable to the businessmen-officials of 
his Club the very technical reasons why every 
item on his budget is necessary.

Like all business and professional men, the 
golf course superintendent has certain specific 
avenues through which he can keep abreast of 
rapid developments in his field. They include 
membership in his local Golf Course Superinten­
dents Chapter, membership in his national asso­
ciation, reading his national association maga­
zine, The Golf Superintendent, and attending 
the annual International Turfgrass Conference 
and Show. Of these, probably the most direct 
avenue is the Turfgrass Conference and Show.
It is through the conference that the super­
intendent meets other superintendents and com­
pares notes on techniques, ideas and problems. 
For example, a superintendent from an area 
suffering through an extended period of drought 
shares his experience with a superintendent who 
may have yet to face such a problem. By this 

contact, the second superintendent can antici­
pate and plan for future contingencies.

Through the equipment show, which features 
everything that is new and best in turf main­
tenance equipment and materials, the superin­
tendent can speak directly to the manufacturer, 
and in many instances the designers and engi­
neers responsible for the equipment.

Fully as important as the actual information 
presented in the educational program is the in­
spiration drawn from the speakers, as well as 
from his fellow superintendents. The golf course 
superintendent comes away with a better ap­
preciation of his own value to his community 
and the importance of his work through his 
contact with the leaders in his profession.

The question becomes not “should Clubs 
send their superintendents to the International 
Turfgrass Conference and Show?” but rather 
“can a Club afford not to send its superinten­
dent?”

While the superintendent personally benefits 
by the acquisition of more knowledge and 
through a broadening awareness of new infor­
mation and techniques, it is his Club that is 
the real beneficiary. It is the cheapest insurance 
a Club can buy to keep up-to-date on rapidly 
moving new developments in machinery, chemi­
cals and techniques that keep today’s golf 
courses the finest in the world for the world’s 
most demanding golfers!

COMING EVENTS

TEXAS TURFGRASS CONFERENCE

December 4-6, 1967, Texas A & M University 
College Station, Texas 
Chairman—Dr. George McBee

MINNESOTA ANNUAL TURF CONFERENCE

December 6-7, 1967 
Normandy Hotel, Minneapolis, Minn. 
Chairman—Mr. Carl Anderson, Woodhill C.C., 
1419 Linner Rd., Wayzata, Minn.

ILLINOIS TURFGRASS CONFERENCE

December 7-8, 1967
University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois 
Chairman—Fred F. Weinard

OHIO TURFGRASS FOUNDATION CONFERENCE 
AND SHOW

December 11-13, 1967
Sheraton-Cleveland Hotel, Cleveland, Ohio 
Chairman—Robert W. Miller, 1827 Neil Ave., 
Columbus, Ohio

WISCONSIN TURFGRASS SYMPOSIUM

December 13-14, 1967
Pfister Hotel, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 
Sponsors—Wisconsin GCSA & 
Milwaukee Sewerage Commission

NEW JERSEY TURF COURSES— 
RUTGERS UNIVERSITY

Winter Turf Course—20 weeks January 3-
March 8, 1968 & January 6-March 14, 1969
Three-day Turf Course—January 15-17, 1968 
(Lawn, Athletic Field and Utility Turf)
Golf and Fine Turf—January 17-19, 1968

VIRGINIA TURFGRASS CONFERENCE

January 23-24, 1968
Golden Triangle Motel, Norfolk, Virginia
Chairman—Dr. R. E. Schmidt

GCSAA INTERNATIONAL TURFGRASS 
CONFERENCE & SHOW
February 18-23, 1968
San Francisco, California
Host—GCSAA, 3158 Des Plaines Ave., 
Des Plaines, Illinois

NEW YORK TURFGRASS CONFERENCE

February 26-29, 1968
New York State College of Agriculture, 
Ithaca, New York
Chairman—Dr. J. F. Cornman

NOVEMBER, 1967

11

Outfield tests by some experiment stations, such as those Virginia Polytechnic Institute had at 
James River Country Club, Newport News, Va., were conducted by Richard E. Schmidt.

Whafs Best for

Overseeding Bermuda?

by JAMES B. MONCRIEF, Agronomist, USGA Green Section

Not too many years ago ryegrass was used 

use of finer leaf grasses for overseeding:

almost exclusively for overseeding bermuda 
greens for winter play. It is still used on many 
courses today.

However, during the past six years, several 
different types of grass seed have been used, 
and the result is improved putting surface 
quality. Single grasses and combinations of 
grasses have been readily adopted.

Much of this change has been effected by the 
Milwaukee Sewerage Commission, which estab­
lished outfield plots on country clubs where ber­
mudagrass is used on greens. Some experiment 
stations have done research along this line and 
have even overseeded plots in their experimental 
areas. But as a whole, they have not carried on 
extended outfield testing on golf courses.

There are several reasons for interest in the 

1) Finer leaf grasses hold their color better 

under severe cold weather.

2) Poor transition in the spring is a constant 

problem in the upper South.

3) Ryegrass is very competitive with ber­
muda, but if hot weather prevails it will die 
rather fast.

4) In the past, disease problems with rye­
grass overseeding were great, but fungicides and 
improved management techniques are largely 
controlling this in most cases today.

The finer grasses also give a more desirable 
texture and better quality putting surface. 
Similarly, the transition in the spring has not 
been as objectionable as with ryegrass. One of 
the plots at the Athens Country Club, Athens, Ga., 
included 90 pounds of ryegrass per 1,000 square 

12

USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

feet This gave quick coverage, but it was still 
ryegrass. Fortunately this heavy rate coincided 
with a mild winter and the transition in the 
spring was good on this plot.

Where there was a loss of bermuda this year, 
ryegrass gave a poor transition; a more satis­
factory transition was given by Poa trivialis, 
Pennlawn fescue and bent. In fact, small 
amounts of bent, fescue, or Poa trivialis were 
still present in some greens as late as August 1, 
1967. This year bermuda in these areas will 
make a complete cover in time for a month or 
six weeks of play, and then overseeding starts 
again.

Cost definitely influences the type of seed 
used for overseeding. This has caused some clubs 
not to use the finer grass seeds. Ryegrass is a 
large seed and more pounds per 1,000 square 
feet are required. For instance, the cost of seed 
per 1,000 square feet can be deceptive, as 
shown in the table below.

MERITS OF GRASS MIXTURES

Some merits of these mixtures and reasons 

for overseeding are:

1. They will withstand close cutting, and in 
most cases withstand very cold weather without 
losing color. Ryegrass at zero degrees Fahrenheit 
or below appears to suffer most, but this may 
vary with the selection.

2. Even before the desired putting surface 
is obtained from the fine-textured grasses, the 
ball rolls true and the putting surface progres­
sively improves.

3. Ryegrass appears to withstand more wear 
in areas of excessive traffic, but this depends a 
great deal on management.

It is doubtful that ryegrass will be completely 
eliminated from overseeding. However, for a good 
quality putting surface and to withstand ex­
cessively low temperatures, it would be more 
satisfactory to include Poa trivialis (weed free) 
or Pennlawn fescue when ryegrass is used for 
overseeding bermuda greens. Ryegrass develops 
fast, but the finer grass seed should be included 
to fill in the voids of the ryegrass.

If a fast growth is desired, it is suggested 
that ryegrass at 20-30 pounds per 1,000 square 

feet be used. Poa trivialis, Pennlawn, and bent 

develop slowly and in most cases are seeded 

together. It takes longer for a mature putting 

surface to develop, but the transition in the 

spring is not as abrupt as with ryegrass alone. 

Finer grasses tend to linger longer in early 

summer and yet offer less competition to the 

bermuda than ryegrass.

Progress has been made in the overseeding 

of bermudagrass greens. Try grasses other than 

rye.

Type of Seed

Cost per pound

Amount needed 
per 1,000 square feet

Cost per 
1,000 square feet

Ryegrass

Colonial bent

Poa trivialis

Seaside bent

8C

60$

60C

$2

40 pounds

5 pounds

10 pounds

5 pounds

$ 3.20

$ 3.00

$ 6.00

$10.00

The grass seed alone or in mixtures being used most in the South now are:

SUGGESTED MIXTURES

Poa trivialis 
Pennlawn fescue 
Bent 

Poa trivialis 
Pennlawn 

Poa trivialis 
Ryegrass 

Ryegrass 
Pennlawn fescue 
Bent (Penncross) 

Poa trivialis 

Ryegrass 

4-6 
15-20
3-5

6 
20-24

4-6 
30

25 
15
3

10 

40 

pounds

per 1,000 square feet

pounds

per 1,000 square feet

pounds

per 1,000 square feet

pounds

per 1,000 square feet

pounds per 1,000 square feet

pounds per 1,000 square feet

NOVEMBER, 1967

13

USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD
40 East 38th Street, New York, N. Y. 10016

TURF TWISTERS

SALTY SOIL?

Question: Our club has been advised to use calcium chloride on fairways to counteract 

high pH and an accumulation of sodium in the soil. Do you agree? (Colorado)

Answer: You may expect that the use of calcium chloride will bring about some exchange 

of calcium for sodium in the soil. It appears that beneficial results, however, will depend 

upon an ability to flush out the sodium which is displaced by calcium. The success of 

such treatments requires good drainage. If good drainage is not possible, the result may 

be simply an increase in the salinity of the soil.

COLOR ME GREEN?

Question: I have been told that I should apply Epsom salts to my greens. Is someone 

pulling my leg? If not, how is this done and at what rates? (Maryland)

Answer: Epsom salts (Magnesium sulphate) acts very much like iron sulphate to give the 

turf a green color quickly. This is usually mixed with a fungicide or other spray material 

at the rate of one ounce per 1,000 square feet. The magnesium in Epsom salts and 

dolomitic limestone acts directly on the chlorophyll molecule of the plant to improve 

color. Although the material is relatively safe in every respect at this rate, it should be 

used sparingly as you would use any other secondary or trace element.

GREEN VELVET?

Question: Is Velvet bentgrass adaptable in the Midwest? We have numerous spots on our 

greens and we think it's great. (Minnesota)

Answer: We have observed, especially in the more northern parts of the Midwest where 

greens were originally seeded to South German bentgrass, that large patches of Velvet 

bentgrass have persisted. Indeed, they are beautiful and present a desirable putting 

surface. Nonetheless, farther south and away from the immediate shores of the Great 

Lakes, this type of bentgrass is severely damaged as a result of disease activity. Velvet 

bentgrass is extremely slow to recover from such damage and has not proven suitable 

as a turf cover.