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

©1978 by United States Golf Association. Permission to reproduce articles or material in the USGA GREEN 
SECTION RECORD is granted to publishers of newspapers and periodicals (unless specifically noted other­
wise), 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 articles nor other material 
may be copied or used for any advertising, promotion or commercial purposes.

VOL. 16, No. 1 

JANUARY 1978

The Numbers Racket — A Better Angle? .................................................... 1

by William S. Brewer, Jr.

Water Conservation at Oakland Hills Country Club .................................. 6

by Ted W. Woehrle

Everything You’ve Always Wanted to Know About Fairy Rings 

(But Were Afraid to Ask) ................................................................. 7

by Carl Schwartzkopf

“Three Years of Experience with a USGA Green” ..................................... 11

by Bob Phipps

Turf Twisters ................................................................................... Back  Cover

Cover Photo:
A beautiful par-3 
at Mauna Kea, Hawaii.

Published six times a year in January, March, May, July, September and November by the UNITED STATES GOLF ASSOCIA­
TION, Golf House, Far Hills, N.J. 07931. 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, Suite 107, 222 Fashion Lane, Tustin, Calif. 92680. Second class postage paid at Far Hills, N.J., and other locations. 
Office of Publications, Golf House, Far Hills, N.J. 07931. Subscriptions: $2 a year.

EDITOR: William H. Bengeyfield 

MANAGING EDITOR: Robert Sommers

ART EDITOR: Miss Janet Seagle

GREEN SECTION COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: Will F. Nicholson, Jr.

Colorado National Bank Bldg., P.O. Box 5168 T.A., Denver, Colo. 80217

NATIONAL DIRECTOR: Alexander M. Radko

P.O. Box 1237, Highland Park, N.J. 08904 • (201) 572-0456

GREEN SECTION AGRONOMISTS AND OFFICES:

Northeastern Region: P.O. Box 1237, Highland Park, N.J. 08904 • (201) 572-0440

Stanley J. Zontek, Director, Northeastern Region
William S. Brewer, Jr., Agronomist
James T. Snow, Agronomist

Southern Region: P.O. Box 4213, Campus Station, Athens, Ga. 30601 • (404) 548-2741
James B. Moncrief, Director, Southern Region

Mid-Continent Region: P.O. Box 592, Crystal Lake, III. 60014 • (815) 459-3731

Carl Schwartzkopf, Director, Mid-Continent Region

Mid-Atlantic Region: Suite M, 7124 Forest Hill Avenue, Richmond, Va. 23225 • (804) 272-5553 
William G. Buchanan, Director, Mid-Atlantic Region

Western Region: Suite 107, 222 Fashion Lane, Tustin, Calif. 92680 • (714) 544-4411

William H. Bengeyfield, Western Director and Publications Editor

Ik
NumBers 
RacI<et

by WILLIAM S. BREWER, JR., USGA Agronomist

TODAY’S GOLF COURSE superintendents are 

being called upon to do more and more with 
less and less! Would you agree? At least this is the 

consistent impression I receive after attempting to 
contribute to effective turfgrass management 
programs and trying to solve some golf course 
operational problems. And it is very much to the 
superintendent’s credit that, in the majority of 
cases, he has been able to beat the squeeze play! 
It is also to the good fortune of the golfer and the 
game.

“The golf course never looked better,” is a 
comment often heard over the past two years. The 
people who make such remarks sincerely believe 
what they say, based upon what they have seen. 
Meanwhile, the superintendent manages only a 
weak smile and a mumbled, “Thanks,” in reply. 
He is waiting anxiously for the other shoe to drop. 
He knows there is a great deal that the golfers do 
not see, that the squeeze play being put on him is 
making his behind-the-scenes operation shaky.

Some examples? Labor turnover is very high, 
in some cases 100 per cent a year; and, the size of 
the crew is decreasing. This means operating with 
fewer men who have fewer skills. Yet the work 
volume and the demand for quality may actually 
have increased. At least a part of the reason for 
this trend is an unreasonably low wage scale. It is 
increasingly difficult to find good men to work the 
odd hours, often under less than comfortable condi­

tions, for what often approaches minimum wage. 
Mistakes and damage to the course and equipment 
are on the rise because even experienced men 
make mistakes in trying to outdo themselves.

Equipment inventories are beginning to look 
more and more like a collection from Fred San­
ford’s junkyard. “You can get another year out of 
those 1959 fairway units, can’t you?” “See if you 
can rebuild that 1967 triplex.” “It’s too bad that 
the old aerifier keeps breaking down, but maybe 
you can borrow one next year.”

Renovation programs are often thrown out the 
window. A top-dressing program is judged too 
expensive. The labor budget won’t permit a full 
crew for giving everything a thorough aeration. 
The money is not there for overseeding.

The materials budget gets the treatment too. 
I have actually been asked, “We have not fertilized 
fairways in two years. Do you think they need it 
this year?” And, “That brown patch, it doesn’t 
seem to be doing all that much damage, does it?” 
Or, “The last time we had the pH tested several 
years ago it was 5.5. That’s not too bad, is it?” Or, 
“How much can a little cutworm eat anyway?”

All of this is by way of preface to some arith­
metic exercises which, to my way of thinking, 
indicate there is no justification for giving the 
golf course superintendent the short end of the 
stick. The one central assumption one must make 
is that the golf course is basic to the existence of

The Shop — the hub of maintenance.

the club — it was the reason for the founding of the 
club; it continues as the club’s most important 
activity; that, without the golf course, the club 
itself would cease to be.

None of the figures to follow are real in the 
sense that they represent actual figures from a 
club’s balance sheet, but they are of the proper 
order of magnitude for the majority of clubs now 
confronted with a maintenance squeeze. If your 
club’s numbers differ significantly, there may be a 
very good reason, but it may also indicate the 
source of a problem needing attention. For in­
stance, the golf cart is an important element in 
this thesis. If your club is one of those dwindling 
few where the golf cart is being resisted, this 
article has less to do with reality in your case.

The figures we need to know more about are: 
Golf Course Maintenance Costs; Golf Course Ex­
penditures for Capital Improvements; and The 
Revenue Properly Attributable To Golf Course 
Operations.

MAINTENANCE COSTS

From the annual national survey of clubs con­
ducted by the accounting firm of Harris, Kerr, 
Forster & Company of New York, comes the figure 
of $9,000 per hole as a nice round number within 
reason as an ideal operating budget for most clubs 
in most areas of the country. Certainly there will 
be deviations from place to place — slightly higher 
in metropolitan areas and perhaps significantly 
lower where cold weather limits the golfing 
season.

Nine thousand dollars per hole represents ex­
penditures for labor (including payroll taxes and 
employee benefits), course supplies, contracts for 
other than capital projects (for example: tree 
maintenance, bulk lime application, etc.), and 
routine repairs to equipment, buildings, and the 
irrigation and drainage systems. It does not in­
clude improvements of a capital nature (enlarge­
ment of tees, rebuilding greens, extensive drain­
age, tree planting, development of improved water 
resources, etc.). Nor does it include property taxes, 
expenses incurred by the golf shop, or golf cart 
connected costs.

Concrete cart path.

2

Old equipment and still going.

Multiplying $9,000 per hole by 19 holes (to 
include the practice facilities) gives $171,000 with 
which to maintain a golf course for one year in its 
present condition, allowing for routine renovation 
programs.

CAPITAL EXPENDITURES OF A 
CONTINUING NATURE

A sum equal to 15 per cent of the maintenance 
budget is an appropriate amount to be spent 
annually on the equipment inventory and in 
handling minor building and construction projects 
such as tee enlargement, the refacing of bunkers, 
and the erection of a topdressing storage area). 
Add this $25,650 to the $171,000 for a total course 
budget of $196,650. But let us round this off to 
$200,000 as a figure that might hold for a year or 
two into the future. Other numbers in this article 
have also been rounded off since it is not our aim to 
be excessively precise.

REVENUES — DUES, GREEN FEES AND 
CART RENTALS

Information from various sources suggests a golf­
ing membership of 300 as probably representative 
of what is or easily could be the case at a majority

of private clubs. And, to enable revenue estimates 
to be generated for play on private, semi-private 
and public courses alike, $15 a round (including 
both the green fees and cart rentals) is suggested 
as a reasonable number to work with in spite of 
the fact that actual charges for non-members at a 
private club frequently are much greater. (Let us 
divide this $15 per round as $10 for a green fee 
and $5 per person for a cart rental. At any particu­
lar course the distribution may differ, but the total 
of $15 is probably reasonable for those taking a 
cart and paying on a per round basis.)

What to do with these numbers? At our hy­
pothetical private club with 300 members, to 
generate sufficient income in support of the golf 
course budget of $200,000 and cart fleet expenses 
of $50,000 (see later), the average member must 
spend $833 per year on the golf course. At $15 a 
round, this means each member (including his 
family and guests) would need to account for 55.6 

More old equipment still being used.

$200,000 of profit. That excess income will build a 
lot of cart paths, even rebuild some greens and 
pay for a new maintenance building complex, etc., 
over the years. Perhaps also a portion of it would 
be properly applied toward paying the club’s 
property tax assessment annually.

Someone is surely saying, “I look at my club’s 
financial report and it doesn’t look that way at all.” 
Am I naive? I guess I am for I certainly have found 
no club which prepares its annual report to reflect 
this type of golf course income. Nor have I been 
able to find a club charging $556 in dues for golf 
(the allotted 55.6 rounds x $10 a round green fees) 
and providing in return a superbly conditioned 
course, the kind which can be reasonably demand­
ed of a superintendent who is given a $200,000 
budget, with extra funds for major capital expendi­
tures.

Perhaps many courses do not charge enough 

for golf? If they worked the equation:

Golf Course
Profit

Golf Course 
Budget

Cart Fleet 
Expenses

Average Charge per Round 
(including Dues,* Green Fees 
and Cart Rentals)

Rounds of Golf per Year

‘Percentage of dues allocated to the golf course, that is.

rounds a year. Even over the course of a six-month 
season, most clubs (public and private) can 
certainly expect to generate the 16,680 rounds of 
golf these figures would demand as a break-even 
point in support of golf course maintenance and 
the cart fleet.

How about working this problem in reverse? 
Take the figure of 30,000 rounds per year that is 
by no means unusual on golf courses today. Deter­
mine to arrange the charges so that the average is 
$15 of revenue per round. What would such a 
course bring in? $450,000!! Subtracting $50,000 
for cart maintenance and $200,000 for the golf 
course budget, such a golf course would realize 

they would likely come up with much less than 
$15. Chances are very good therefore that the golf 
course is not getting its proper share of golf course 
generated income. Dues may not be apportioned 
so as to ensure adequate support of course mainte­
nance. Golf cart profit may not automatically go to 
the golf course. Or, to look at the situation another 
way, in the cases wherein the maintenance budget 
does not approach what has been suggested as 
ideal, members may not be fully supporting the 
golf course, the very reason for its existence. When 
that other shoe does drop, as it already has for a 
number of clubs this year, who then will be at 
fault?

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1978

3

THE GOLF CART

We’ve worked the golf cart into the foregoing dis­
cussion as if it were commonplace for it to be con­
sidered as a revenue producer for the golf course. 
This is generally not the case at present. Although 
the annual industry surveys in Golf Business 
Magazine document a trend away from retention of 
golf cart income by an individual, and, although 
we have found that two or three per cent of the 
clubs we visit do allocate a small percentage of 
cart revenue toward cart path construction, we 
have yet to discover a club which acknowledges 
that the golf cart has very little to do with any 
facet of the club operation other than the golf 
course and that, therefore, the profit from the 
cart fleet should be utilized first in meeting the 
needs of the golf course operation.

The initial application of funds from this 
source might best be spent for having carefully 
planned and well-built cart paths and mainte­
nance roads installed. Profit from a single season 
may well be enough to have professionally con­
structed 8' to 10' wide roadways installed. It is 
important to recognize that, once this system has 
been installed, the golfing season (thus the 
'revenue for all departments) will be increased, 
perhaps as much as 10 to 15 per cent, without 
overly risking damage to the course. In fact, course 

conditions will almost assuredly begin to improve 
due to the decrease in traffic over the turf.

Just how much money may be involved? Even 
in the cool Northeast, it has been possible for clubs 
to realize a yearly profit of $1,000 or more per cart. 
Let’s illustrate this with a return to our hypotheti­
cal 30,000 rounds-per-year golf course. Over a 
30-week season (1,000 rounds per week) assume 
as little as 70 per cent of the play to be from golf 
carts, all doubles. Thus each cart in our 50-cart 
fleet must go out seven times a week. Three 
hundred fifty cart rounds a week for 30 weeks 
amounts to 10,500 cart rounds a season. If our 
club charges $10 for each double round, the total 
revenue would be $105,000 for the year or $2,100 
per cart. Earlier a figure of $1,000 a cart was sug­
gested as sufficient to cover annual expenses. The 
breakdown in Table 1, purposely estimated on the 
high side, works out to $1,030 a cart. Thus, the 
bottom line reads $1,070 profit per cart ($53,000 
for the fleet)!

Although a fleet not used to its maximum po­
tential would tend to show a lower profit-expense 
ratio, a number of factors can be manipulated to 
keep the profit realization high. For instance, one 
authority noted the appearance of higher cart 
rental fees. Another made the observation that, 
“cars are a luxury, and should be priced accord-

TABLE #1
Per Cart Yearly Expenses1

$ 510

Ownership Costs

Five-year loan on $2,000 cart [includes down payment 
(25%), principal and interest (12%) averaged over five 
years].

15

15

75

25

60

Personal Property Taxes

Physical Damage Insurance

Batteries

Parts

Electricity

100

Administration Expenses

230

Cartman & Assistant

Assume liability coverage under clubhouse or course 
policy.

Replacement of three batteries per year.

Estimated average over five years.

An actual figure. Theoretically should be about half as 
much (approximately 210 charges at 13.6G each).

Includes apportioned salary for handling rental transac­
tions, billing and recordkeeping (about $50 per cart) as 
well as a management fee for the club employee charged 
with overseeing the entire cart operation-.

A) Cartman at $5/hour x 40 hours/week x 30 weeks 
($6,000 per season) plus benefits at 40% of salary rate 
($2,400 F.I.C.A., unemployment insurance and tax, vaca­
tion and sick pay, health insurance, pension plan). Total 
of $8,400 per season, about $170 per cart, unless also the 
fleet administrator.

B) Assistant(s) at $3/hour x 30 hours/week x 30 weeks 
($2,700 per season) plus benefits at 10% of salary rate 
($270 F.I.C.A., unemployment insurance and tax only). 
Total of $2,970 per season, about $60 per cart, unless also 
involved with rental transactions.

$1030 TOTAL

’Average for 50-cart fleet operating 30 weeks a season.

4

USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

ingly.” A further possibility would be to make fuller 
utilization of the cartman by assigning him the 
fleet administration duties. He may also have time 
to help out with the maintenance of golf course 
equipment, particularly during the off-season.

Is anyone going to be the loser should the cart 
fleet and its revenue be handled in this way? At 
one time it might have cut seriously into the 
revenue of the golf shop, but, as noted earlier, 
once clubs became aware of the amounts of money 
involved, they began to shift toward depositing 
cart fleet profits into a general fund. In effect, 
then, we are suggesting that the profits go instead 
back onto the golf course. The course will benefit 
from the increased budgetary support and the 
decrease in turf traffic once paths are installed. 
Every department will gain when there are fewer 
days when the course must be closed because of 
adverse weather and its effect upon cart traffic 
over rain-saturated ground. As the effects of a 
more ideal budget and decreased turf traffic be­
come felt on the course, its prestige and the 
demand to play it will also continue to grow.

We have tried to show that at most clubs, pub­
lic and private, the money is both needed and 
available for the golf course. One can also look to 
the Industry Survey published in 1974 by Golfdom 
Magazine for some interesting data. Using their 
figures, it can be shown that golf courses earned in 
green fees and cart rentals about twice the amount 
spent for maintenance. Even with the property tax 
assessment included in the maintenance budget, 
golf course revenue exceeded expenditures by a 
factor of 1.6. Compare this with the clubhouse 
figures where 2.4 times more was spent than was 
recorded as income. Compare the figures for 
capital improvements. The clubhouse outdistanced 
the course by better than three-to-one in this cate­
gory. Compare management salary levels. Less 
than 1/10 as many golf course superintendents as 
clubhouse managers were paid at least $20,000 
a year!

It would appear that golf course profits are 
keeping membership costs within bounds. How­
ever, should the course be permitted to decline, 

Modern equipment; part of the total operational cost.

it is more than likely the amount of play will drop. 
Revenue in all departments will be down. Dues will 
have to rise. Membership will fall off. As any 
number of clubs can attest, it is a longer and more 
costly process to bring a golf course back after a 
period of neglect and more difficult still to restore 
a tarnished reputation.

A very successful daily fee course owner once 
told me that it is a mistake to undercharge a golfer 
for a day of enjoyment. Golfers are willing to spend 
the necessary amount, but you must give them their 
money’s worth by ensuring that due emphasis is 
continually placed on the golf course operation. 
The philosophy that “these golfers don’t deserve 
anything better’’ leads only to trouble and a dead 
end.

REFERENCES

1. Anon 1974

Golfdom’s 6th annual golf industry market­
ing and research report. Golfdom 48(2): 
26-74.

2. Balfour, R. L. 1974

Golf car batteries. Weeds Trees & Turf 13(1): 
CC.
3. Brown, D. 1974

Golf cars — private vs. club ownership. 
Weeds Trees & Turf 13(1):DD.
4. Harris, Kerr, Forster & Company 1976 
Clubs in Town and Country. 17 pp.

5. Josephs, D. C., Jr. 1976

Smart management and golf car profits — 
making a good thing better. Golf Business 
50(11 ):37-40.

6. Morgan, E. S. 1972

Golf Car Manual. Metropolitan Golf Associa­
tion, N.Y. 20 pp.

7. Newell, R. A. 1976

Analysis shows owning golf cars more prof­
itable than leasing. Golf Business 50(11); 
26-34.

8. Slaybaugh, D. J. 1977

Profile of the industry. Golf Business 51(4): 
21-27.

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1978

5

Water Conservation at 
Oakland Hills Country Club

by TED W. WOEHRLE, CGCS and President of the
Golf Course Superintendents Association of America

FOR MANY YEARS the water used to cool the 

air conditioning units in our massive clubhouse 
was not recycled; instead, it was simply dumped 

into the storm drain which flows from our property. 
At peak use we were using and wasting 300 gallons 
per minute. In the past this was not a concern 
because of ample water in our wells and inexpen­
sive electricity. As the cost of utilities increased 
and the water levels in the wells continued to drop, 
the club became concerned and investigated 
methods of conserving these valuable resources.

In 1973 we proposed a plan that would allow 
us to reuse the water being discarded from the air 
conditioners. We intercepted the discharge line 
with an underground sump (4' x 8') containing a 
71/2-HP submersible pump. The pump is controlled 
by a float that turns it on and off as the supply 
increases and decreases.

The installation was begun in 1974 with the 
laying of a 4-inch underground PVC line. The dis­
tance from the clubhouse to our irrigation pond 
was around 1,600 feet. We installed 1,300 feet of 

pipe to a hill behind our 16th Hole. There the water 
was pumped into a holding pond at the top of the 
hill. Because the water is quite warm after being 
used to cool the air conditioners, we decided to 
pass the water over a few small rocks and falls to 
cool it to air temperature. Once at the bottom of 
the hill (some 130 feet), we installed another hold­
ing pond before allowing the water to complete its 
journey to its eventual destination; the irrigation 
pond. The water temperature is dropped from the 
mid-80-degree range to the upper-60-degree range. 
This temperature is often cooler than the lake on a 
hot summer day. We have eliminated the danger of 
upsetting the ecology of the lake with warm water.
It is estimated that we are able to conserve 
18,000 gallons per hour on a hot day, or 372,000 
gallons per day. This is three-quarters of our daily 
requirement. It may be several years before we can 
say that we have saved enough money to pay for 
the installation of our recycling program, but we 
are saving a precious resource that was being 
wasted. The average savings per year will be nearly 
30,000,000 gallons of water!

Showing the beauty that can be worked into water conservation.

6

USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

Underside of mushroom showing gills. Note size of mushroom in relation to the thumb and hand.

Everything You've Always Wanted
to Know About Fairy Rings

(But Were Afraid to Ask)

by CARL SCHWARTZKOPF, Mid-Continent Director, USGA Green Section

MUSHROOMS ARE popping up all over; on 

greeting cards, shirts, sweaters, salt and 
pepper shakers, kitchen utensils and even golf 

expect a multitude and variety of turfgrass man­
agement phenomenas to occur. One, among many, 
was the increased incidence of mushrooms.

courses! Artists for centuries have been enchanted 
by their design. The forces of nature have joined to 
provide the climatic conditions that favor their 
growth and proliferation, not to mention their 
artistic touch to the landscape.

With the weather of 1977 exhibiting a wide 
range of characteristics: from the hottest to the 
coldest, wettest to the driest; it is only natural to 

Mushrooms grow in a circular or crescent 
pattern and are commonly referred to as Fairy 
Ring. Early man believed the rings were made by 
witches, dancing fairies or even lightning. Many 
types of mushrooms grow in this circular pattern, 
Fairy Ring Champignon Marasmius oreades, an 
edible species, is only one of them. They discolor, 
weaken and sometimes destroy the turfgrass plant.

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1978

7

A certain number of mushrooms are poisonous, 
some are even fatal. Their number is relatively 
small, about 30 species among the thousands that 
can be found in the wooded areas, fields and roughs 
of golf courses. Unfortunately, the most poisonous 
species are also fairly common, and a real danger 
lies in wait for the imprudent gourmet.

First of all, put aside any notion that there are 
simple tests to determine whether a mushroom 
unfamiliar to you is safe to eat. Do not give the least 
credence to the silver coin test. The silver coin is 
supposed to turn black when brought into contact 
with a toxic mushroom. Many people have died 
because they believed this. Because no more silver 
coins are being minted, the aforementioned proce­
dure is difficult to complete.

You may have been told if you see a slug nib­
bling on a mushroom that it may be eaten without 
fear. What you were not told is that slugs can eat 
the deadly Amanitas without ill effects, whereas 
the same Amanitas will be fatal to you.

Also, if you are told that a mushroom will lose 
its toxicity if it is marinated for several days in 
water and vinegar — do not believe it!

Blanching, plunging briefly into boiling water, 
may eliminate bitter taste and irritants to the 
digestive tract from some mushrooms, but it does 
not eliminate the poisons of the truly dangerous 
species.

Whether you like it or not, there is only one 
way to avoid poisoning: to be completely familiar 
with the botanical characteristics of the dangerous 

species. You should even be able to identify mush­
rooms without question when they are damaged or 
develop imperfectly.

The best advice, really, is to leave all wild 
mushrooms alone, unless you are completely 
familiar with their taxonomy.

Since most Fairy Rings that appear on fairways 
and greens are mowed regularly, few mushrooms 
have the opportunity to mature and develop com­
pletely. Mycelium is the underground organism or 
plant part of which the mushroom itself is only the 
fruit. The mycelium results directly from the 
germination of spores. The germination of spores 
results from a network of extremely fine threads 
called hyphae. The accumulation of hyphae and 
mycelium growth contribute to the decline of turf­
grass that one associates with Fairy Ring. They 
compete with it for soil moisture and nutrients.

Unfortunately, chemical control of Fairy Ring 
is not very effective. However, some golf course 
superintendents have reported varying degrees of 
control by coring the area, followed by applying a 
solution of mercuric and mercorous chloride sus­
pended in a wetting agent or surfactant.

The mercuric and mercorous chloride may or 
may not have an effect on the mushrooms or their 
parts. Whereas, the surfactant or wetting agent 
will help to minimize the hydrophobic soil condi­
tion that contributes to the decline of the turfgrass 
plant.

Mushrooms are part of the fungi family and 
fungi span the world. They are just as numerous

8

USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

r 

and varied as flowering plants. They range from 
microscopic organisms to large fruiting bodies; 
from live savers like penicillin to killers such as 
ergot; from rust, powdery mildew, dollar-spot and 
brown patch that are damaging to turf, to yeasts 
which have been used for centuries in the baking of 
bread and fermentation of wine.

Although they are varied in size and appear­
ance, all fungi have one thing in common — their 
lack of chlorophyll. Unlike green plants, they can­
not utilize sunlight and carbon dioxide to convert 
inorganic materials into organic tissue. They must 
extract their nourishment, like man and animals, 
from organic materials, and in doing so, they 
destroy or “eat” whatever they are feeding upon. 
Consequently, when a golf course superintendent 
tells his chairman or club officials that the fair- 
ways were eaten alive with Pythium, the truth has
been spoken.

In order to survive, fungi must have moisture 
and oxygen and usually warm, humid conditions. 
There are exceptions, however, such as snow mold 
organisms that require a lower temperature to 
grow actively. All fungi have specific temperature, 
moisture, light and nutrient requirements to sur­
vive and grow actively.

Usually when one speaks of fungi, most people 
imply the word to mean the larger members of 
this huge group, i.e. mushrooms, “toadstools,” 
bracket fungi, puff balls and the various other and 
often strange, exotic-looking organisms which are 
big enough to be noticed fairly easily. Generally, it 
is not realized that these visible and often brightly

The bottom side of a mushroom showing the stem
and gills.

colored fungi are not the whole story. They are 
merely the fruiting bodies, more or less equivalent 
to the flower clusters of green plants. A large and 
important part of the fungus remains hidden in the 
soil. It may not give any visible proof of its 
presence on the surface for long periods of time.
Fungi reproduce themselves through minute 
spores, which are formed in different ways. In the 
common mushroom, and similar fungi, the spores 
are shed from flanges known as gills on the under­
side of the cap. Whereas, in other types of fungi, 
the gills may be replaced by a mass of narrow tubes 
whose pore-like openings are clearly visible. In 
puff balls and similar fungi, the ball itself is one 
large spore container.

In most fungi, the spore production is im­
mense. It has been calculated that in an ordinary 
mushroom, a square millimeter of gill surface can 
produce approximately 130,000 spores, which can 
be discharged in a matter of five or six days.

Fortunately, only a small proportion of the 
spores end up in situations exactly suited for 
germination. When germination does occur, they 
send out little tubes which elongate into hyphae. 
These branch and extend as well as join with 
similar hyphae produced by other spores which 
have landed in the same proximity. Several hyphae 
develop to form a white mass of thin filaments, 
known as mycelium. Mycelium may be colored 
black, brown, gray or white.

The mycelium is one of the factors that con­
tribute to the hydrophobic soil conditions that one 
associates with Fairy Ring. In woodland areas, it 
is the mycelium which actually chemically decom­
poses the dead branches, old stumps, rotting 
leaves or whatever substance it is growing on. 
The fruiting bodies are not formed until the fungus 
has received sufficient nutrients from its surround­
ings. When climatic conditions are favorable, small 
knobs appear on the mycelium where large num­
bers of the fine threads grow together into a knot. 
This knot or large bump gradually pushes towards 
the surface and finally appears as a mushroom, 
toadstool or other form of fungus. When the fungus 
has reached full maturity, spore production starts 
and can be extremely rapid. From beginning to 
end, the process can be completed in a matter of 
hours.

Consequently, it is easy to understand why 
mushrooms and Fairy Rings reappear quickly 
after the fairways have been mowed. As a result 
of an excessive amount of nitrogen that the mush­
rooms develop, it is only natural to find a dark 
green area developing along the outer edge of the 
circular pattern.

Since treating with fungicide solutions and 
wetting agents has produced unpredictable results, 
most individuals report fairly successful coping by 
applying light and frequent applications of fer­
tilizer in an attempt to mask the dark green color, 
as well as frequent irrigation to keep the mycelium 
growth from monopolizing or utilizing all the water 
intended for the turfgrass plant.

Unfortunately, Fairy Rings are not only an 
inconvenience and annoyance to the golf course

9

Fairy Ring in a landing area. Find the golf ball.

superintendent, but also to the player. For 
example, imagine a nice long drive coming to rest 
in the vicinity of a group of Fairy Rings and the 
frustration of trying to find the golf ball!

Since an effective control for Fairy Ring does 
not currently exist, if possible, fertilize and irrigate 
frequently to mask the appearance of the sapro­
phytic fungi. Mowing frequently, even daily, will 

help keep the fruiting bodies to a minimum and 
hopefully the frustrations the players experience in 
looking for the ball.

Remember the saying, “Stop and smell the 
roses as you walk down life's path ...” You may 
also want to remember; “Don’t eat or hit the mush­
rooms unless you are sure they are edible or 
playable.”

USGA Green Section Conference 
in San Francisco, January 27, 1978

GCSAA 49th International Turfgrass 
Conference & Show, February 12-17, 1978

In conjunction with the first USGA Annual 
Meeting ever to be held on the West Coast, the 
USGA Green Section Conference on Golf Course 
Management will be held on January 27, 1978, at 
the Mark Hopkins Hotel, San Francisco, California. 
The theme for the one-day meeting is “Turfgrasses 
for Golf and How They Affect You — The Golfer.” 
Seventeen speakers will cover a host of topics. 
Registration is at 9 a.m. and all USGA Member 
Club officials and staff are invited to attend.

The GCSAA’s 49th International Turfgrass 
Conference & Show will be held in San Antonio, 
Texas, from February 12th through 17th, 1978. 
The conference attracts over 5,000 turfgrass 
managers annually. The educational theme this 
year is “Economy Through Ideas.” The exhibit 
hall is already sold out for displays of turfgrass 
management equipment, irrigation, etc. Further 
details are available from the GCSAA Headquar­
ters, 1617 St. Andrews Drive, Lawrence, Kansas 
66044.

10

USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

“Three Years of 
Experience 
with A 
USGA Green"

by BOB PHIPPS, Superintendent, 
Shorehaven Golf Club, 
East Norwalk, Connecticut

Shorehaven golf professional Kelly Moser, putting on 
USGA green in late March. This green was ready for play 
— all older greens were too wet and soft.

In the May, 1976, issue of the Green Section 
Record, the article “Mair Sand, Honeyman’’ 
by Stanley J. Zontek appeared. It reviewed 
the advantages of using high sand content 
for greens. One golf course superintendent’s 
efforts in constructing such a green was 
discussed. In that article, it was promised 
that a follow-up report by the golf course 
superintendent, Robert Phipps, would ap­
pear at some future date. His report follows 
after three years of living with a USGA green.

I CAME TO the Shorehaven Golf Club in Connecti­

cut in the spring of 1972. At the time the club 
decided to initiate a long-range golf course renova­
tion program, including the reconstruction of some 
putting greens.

We decided to build the first new green in 
accordance with the USGA Green Section Specifi­

cations for Putting Green Construction. The first 
step was to send samples of sand, soil and organic 
matter to the USGA Green Section Laboratory for 
analysis and determination of the proper top soil 
mixture. They recommended the use of eight parts 
of the sand we have available and two parts of our 
humus (8-0-2). (See Figure 1.)

To shorten the length of time the new green 
would be out of play (and lessening the member­
ship inconvenience associated with new putting 
green construction), we decided to first develop a 
sod nursery. It would be 15,000 square feet in size 
and constructed with the same top soil mix as 
planned for the new green. Thus, we would avoid 
a soil layering problem when the nursery sod was 
brought into place. Penncross creeping bentgrass 
was dormant seeded in the nursery at 11/2 pounds 
per 1,000 square feet.

In the fall of 1974 we reconstructed our sixth 
green precisely to the Green Section specs and 
sodded with the turf from the nursery. It was easily 
opened for play the following spring.

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1978

11

The following is what we found in maintaining 

a USGA green over the past three years.

FERTILIZER

Our older, heavier-soil greens normally are very 
lightly fertilized and receive between 27? and 2% 
pounds of nitrogen per year. However, when fer­
tilizing the new nursery and green, we have used 
from three to five pounds of nitrogen.

A word of explanation is due. When we con­
structed the nursery, we placed eight inches of the 
sand-humus mix over native soil. The root system 
developed exceptionally well and went through 
the eight inches of top mix and into the native soil 
below. We started fertilizing in the spring with 72 
pound per 1,000 square feet of nitrogen per month 
in April and again in May. The turf responded well 
and filled in quickly. By the end of the season we 
had applied a total of three pounds of nitrogen. The 
reason so little nitrogen was used is because we did 
not have an extensive drainage system under the 
nursery. However, extensive drainage was built 
into the new green, thus a greater leaching loss 
and need for more nitrogen.

During the first year with the USGA green, we 
applied approximately four pounds of nitrogen per 
1,000 square feet. We felt this was a lot when com­

pared to what the other greens on the course re­
ceive. However, the new green did not wear or 
grow as well as expected. In 1976, we applied over 
4% pounds of nitrogen. The green was better, but 
still not up to par. This past season, we applied 
slightly over five pounds of nitrogen and the 
growth, wearing quality and putting quality greatly 
improved. We feel that we now have a fertility pro­
gram that will work and give us the desired results.
We supplemented the applications of nitrogen 
with superphosphate and sulfate of potash as per 
soil tests to achieve slightly over a 4-1-2 ratio of 
N-P-K. Iron and magnesium were also applied 
periodically throughout the season. We feel this 
balanced fertilizer program gives us the best 
results.

WATERING

Shorehaven is located on Long Island Sound in 
Norwalk, Connecticut. We usually have a regular 
breeze coming in off the water. This makes it 
necessary to water our older greens every morning 
and to syringe every afternoon during periods of 
stress.

The USGA green is watered “deep” every three 
or four days and is never syringed. We sometimes 
find we have to shorten this watering interval, not

Results of the soil analysis that was made for Shorehaven.

MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY 
AGRONOMY DEPARTMENT 
GOLF PUTTING GREEN SOILS LABORATORY
OST OFFICE BOX 5243, STATE COLLEGE, MISSISSIPPI 39762
PHONE; AREA CODE 601 - 325-4181 OR 325-5660 
DR. COLEMAN Y. WARD - OR. ROLLIN C. GLENN

SOIL ANALYSIS

SAMPLE NUMBER: 

- 73 - 56

»ATE:_JuLy.2.7, 1973

SENDER OR CLUB: She

ADDRESS : East Norwalk, Conn

P_ ARTICLE  SIZE A N A L Y S IS

SOIL MIX 
MATERIALS

GRAVEL
>2 mtn
0 9 mesh)
• %

■ TOTAL
•• SAND 
(9-300) 

mesh 
%

SILT 
,002-.05 mm 
(<300^mesh)

CLAY 
<002 mm 

%

VERY COARSE 
: 1-2 b:
( 9-16 mesh) (16-32 mesh)
%__________%_____

COARSE 
0.5-1 mm

%

SAND FRACTIONS

FINE

<»-“ -•>>

(60-140 mesh)

Sand

Loam A 

loam B 

5.05

18.4 

2.4 

2 04

33.49 

44.93 

‘ 

40.1

42.9

..........................

8.01

9.77

5.X

4.2

6.8

9.0

46.7 J,

1.7 

11.2 

JUL.

10.0 

9.8 

VEST FINE
0.05-.1 mm 
(140-300 mesh)

__ *__
a-o...

6.5

8.7

I

% Ash -14.6

MIXES EXAMINED (PARTS IN TEH)

Hanis 
AMENDMENT

o

2

1

2

1
2

SAND

10

Loam
• SOIL

Loan A 
0

0

1 111 ■

1
Loan B 
1

1

3

7

s

r

12

-■■■■' ... .........................

BULK 
DENSITY 
g/cm3 .

%
PORE SPACE

CAP.

NON­
CAP.

INFILTRATION 
RATE-INCHES 
OF HjO/HOUR

PERCENT MOISTURE RETENTION
AT PRESSURE INDICATED

40 cm 
□f H20

1/3 
atm

2/3 
atm

1 
atm

3 
atms

6 
atms

15 
atms

MIX.

-
LIKE NEEDS 
lbs/1000 
iiiil

1 44

21.0 24.5

8.5

14.5

.49

"WJT

29.3 23.7

28.7 19.3

34.7 15.3

?9 5 16.5

3.4

3.2

1.2

2.9

35.1 16.9

.68

1.24

1.38

1.32

1.42

1.28

,69

1.2

■ 54,

.52

rrr 2.7 2.6 mm

1.6

23.7

3 -8.... 4.3 2? <4

20.8

4.4 4 ?

4 8

3 4

26.4

5.3 4.2

4.5 3.1

2.7

2.5

2.0.8

27.6

a n

6.7

a 6

5.5

4 3 12 2 A

6.3 5.0

4.2

M

6.5 '

6.5...

fi 5

6.1

A 9
6.3

„..........

"... ! 

... ......

---.•-n’t-.— 

----------------------- slx-fncfi sol! death

USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

because the green actually requires water, but 
because the mounds surrounding it (on different 
soil) are drying out and showing the need.

DISEASE

With the excellent drainage and a longer time 
between watering, fungicides can be applied every 
two weeks. Our older greens are sprayed weekly.

WEEDS

We have had no trouble with weeds. A pre­
emergence crabgrass control is the only herbicide 
we have applied. Poa annua invasion over the past 
three years has been minor.

INSECTS

We have had cutworms in the USGA green, but not 
any more than the older greens. Overall, we have 
experienced no special insect problem at all on 
this green.

OTHER OBSERVATIONS

Golf shots hit onto the USGA green hold well. For 
this reason, and because of excellent drainage and 
a deep root system, aerification can be greatly 
reduced, if not completely eliminated. It is in 
marked comparison with our older greens where 
these operations are normally scheduled.

Interestingly, the sand in our bunkers is the 
same as used in our top soil mixture. When it is 
blasted on the green, it disappears quickly. After 
three years we have not observed any “layering” 

condition caused by sand on the edge of the green. 
In fact, the sand exploded out almost acts as a top­
dressing. We feel the normal sand accumulation 
will not cause problems.

In the past few years we have found more of 
our members playing golf later in the fall and when 
weather permits, in the winter. We allow play on 
frozen greens. The only time we close our greens 
is in late winter or early spring when they begin to 
thaw and become soft and prone to foot printing. 
However, because of its high sand content, the 
USGA green thaws and becomes firm faster in the 
spring and is not as soft and mushy as the older, 
heavier-soiled greens. If we had all 18 USGA 
greens, we could open much earlier in the spring, 
thus certainly pleasing many of our golfers.

CONCLUSION

The USGA green has been found to use more 
fertilizer than the other greens, but this is greatly 
offset by a saving in water, aerification and 
fungicides, plus the labor to do these jobs. Being 
able to play the green earlier in the spring pleases 
the membership and could be a source of additional 
income. This would be especially true on municipal 
golf courses.

At present we are reconstructing the tee on our 
par-3 15th hole. The topsoil will be the same 80 
per cent sand/20 per cent humus and sod will come 
from our nursery. We are looking forward to a tee 
that will have firm footing for a good golf shot and 
good turf year-round.

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1978

13

USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD 
JANUARY 1978

URMF 

i SbIRISI

NOW YOU WISH YOU HADN’T

Question: Is activated charcoal still the best material to apply to try to neutralize the effects of 
chemicals perhaps overdosed onto a green? (Conn.)

Answer: At present, yes it is, but remember, activated charcoal does not neutralize 
every incorrectly applied chemical, but rather it is most effective on pre-emergence 
herbicides.

To avoid a mess if ever you have to apply it, spray it on using a sprayer with 
good agitating action. Cycloning or using a drop spreader to apply it, besides being 
messy, usually results in poor distribution of this lightweight and fine material.

CAGE THAT TREE

Question: I have trees near by lakes being debarked by beavers and/or nutria. Have you an idea 
how best to protect the trees and still keep the wildlife? (Texas)

Answer: The best protection we have seen and can suggest is heavy gauge wire 
formed into a cage around the base of the trees extending about 40 inches up the 
bole of the tree.

NOW YOU SEE IT — NOW YOU DON’T

Question: There are numerous guidelines telling what you cannot do with used pesticide con­
tainers, but there is an increasing problem in finding ways to dispose of them. Any ideas? 
(Hawaii)

Answer: The Du Pont Company may have come up with the answer. Any restricted 
pesticide in wettable powder form may be sealed in a water-soluble package. This 
package is simply dropped into the spray tank after removing it from its protective 
outer container. The soluble packages come in 2- and 10-pound sizes. Voila! 
There is no exposure to the chemical during filling or mixing and the outer container 
has never been in contact with the pesticide.