■vecora

Volume 36, Number 4 

July/August 1998

JULY/AUGUST 1998
Volume 36, Number 4

decomposition and nutrient cycling. Record

Cover Photo:
Microorganisms perform vital 
functions to help sustain life on 
Earth, including organic matter 

The Microbial World
The role of this dynamic community in turfgrass management 
has raised a variety of opinions, questions, and products.
By Matt Nelson
6
Low Maintenance Troubles
Research that is helping turf managers maintain 
buffalograss as a low-maintenance alternative.
By Roch E. Gaussoin, Ph.D.
8
‘Where Do My Roots Go In August?”
Managing the factors you can control, and understanding the rest. 
By Stanley /. Zontek
11
Golf and Turfgrass Management in Italy
Understanding the infrastructure of the Italian golf industry.
By Paolo Croce and Alessandro De Luca
13
Poa trivialis Contamination
An increase in testing standards would benefit superintendents.
By Matt Levy, RST
15
Holistic Management
A vital tool for golf course superintendents.
By Arthur P Weber
17
Environmental Commitment
Participation in the Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program can 
help superintendents make golf courses into environmental assets. 
By Peter V Leuzinger, CGCS
19
News Notes
20
Never Stop Learning
But don’t forget the basics.
By Keith A. Happ
22
Turf Twisters

Sod production of buffalograss has 
been very successful, with more than 
500 acres currently in production. 
See page 6.

A better root system can be maintained 
by managing the factors that can be 
controlled and understanding the 
impact of the others. See page 8.

THE MICROBIAL WORLD

The role of this dynamic community in turfgrass management 
has raised a variety of opinions, questions, and products.

by MATT NELSON

THE SOIL microbial community 

consists of a wide array of 
organisms with numerous and 
many yet-to-be-understood complex 

interactions (14). Although studies of 
soil microbiology have been conducted 
for decades, scientists have recently 
made considerable progress in further­
ing our understanding of microorgan­
isms and their function in soils sup­
porting turfgrass growth. Public out­
cry and opposition to the use of syn­
thetic fertilizers and pesticides have 
prompted much of the recent research. 
While very useful findings have been 
obtained through many painstaking 
and novel research strategies, these 
studies have yielded the realization that 
considerably more research will be 
necessary to develop solid recommen­
dations for managing soil microbial 
populations. This article will review soil 
microbiology and discuss howto select 
and investigate the use of various 
products and management techniques. 
The intent is to provide information for 
golf course superintendents and other 
turfgrass managers so they can objec­
tively evaluate the plethora of products 
that claim to produce better turf by 
influencing soil microorganisms.

Soil Microbiology

A productive, biologically active soil 
can contain as many as 45 quadrillion 
microorganisms in the rootzone of 
1,000 square feet of turfgrass (19). This 
population consists primarily of bac­
teria, actinomycetes, fungi, and algae. 
Within each of these groups of organ­
isms are many diverse genera and 
species whose populations fluctuate 
widely both spatially and temporally. 
Among the factors contributing to this 
variation are energy sources, nutrients, 
water availability, temperature, pH, 
atmosphere, and the genetics of the 
organism (6). The result is a very com­
plex and highly competitive system 
influenced by a combination of biotic 
and abiotic forces. The specific func­
tion and characteristics of the con­
stituents of the microbial community 
are not straightforward and are not 
thoroughly understood.

Composting is an excellent means of recycling organic wastes. Studies indicate 
that composts introduce stable microbial components and provide habitat for 
indigenous microbial populations, and can improve turfgrass health and 
suppress certain fungal diseases.

Fungi are involved in organic matter 
decomposition, mycorrhizal associa­
tions, and turfgrass diseases. Mycorr­
hizal associations are known to 
improve nutrient and water uptake, 
and also stabilize soil aggregates. In 
fact, mycorrhizal associations have 
been shown to provide interspecific 
transfer of phosphorus and other nutri­
ents (3). Endophytic fungi form associ­
ations with plants and discourage 
insect predation. Actinomycetes de­
compose organic matter, particularly 
complex organic molecules such as 
cellulose and chitin. Actinomycetes 
are also capable of producing anti­
biotics that may confer disease­
suppressive qualities (15, 22).

The bacterial populations in soils 
contribute a range of benefits to plant 
growth. Included in these are nutrient 
cycling, soil aggregation, solubilization 
of immobile elements, competition 
with pathogenic organisms, organic 
matter decomposition, and the pro­
duction of phytohormones. Bacterial 
populations and their associative func­
tions are diverse and highly significant 
to plant productivity. Bacteria tend to 
utilize simple organic compounds, 
such as plant exudates, while fungi and 
actinomycetes are more proficient users 
of complex organic compounds (6).

Much of the activity described above 
occurs in the region of the soil environ­

ment influenced by roots, known as the 
rhizosphere. Within this region from 
the root surface outward approximately 
10mm is found enhanced nutrient 
cycling, exudates that affect pH, redox 
potential, and nutrient availability; 
symbiotic associations with soil mi­
crobes; colonization by microorgan­
isms; interactions with roots and 
pathogens; and metal mobility and 
complexation. More simply put, this 
region is the dynamic interface between 
plants and soil where microbial func­
tion is in action.

Grasses have a significant amount of 
rhizosphere due to their fibrous and 
extensive root systems. Although our 
understanding of the organisms, pro­
cesses, and dynamics is increasing, 
there has been relatively little discov­
ered that would enable turf managers 
to exploit the rhizosphere for improved 
turfgrass health. Researchers have, 
however, used mineral nutrition to 
affect rhizosphere pH and control root­
infecting pathogens (4, 23). Beyond 
this, there is a host of unsubstantiated 
product claims that purport to favor­
ably affect rhizosphere processes. In 
turfgrass systems, there is a significant 
lack of research to validate these 
claims, not the least of which include 
the lack of repeated studies and find­
ings at diverse sites or across a variety 
of soil systems.

JULY/AUGUST 1998

1

Most soils supporting turfgrass 
growth contain a very active and 
diverse microbial population. Some 
people have alleged that the use of syn­
thetic fertilizers and pesticides reduces 
or eliminates the microbial community 
by altering the pH of the soil or causing 
direct and indirect toxicity to organ­
isms. Except for the presence of inert 
ingredients in some emulsifiable con­
centrate formulations that have caused 
toxicity, preliminary results from one 
ongoing study indicate that pesticides 
do not adversely affect most non-target 
microorganisms (16).

Due to the high productivity and 
rapid turnover of turfgrass roots, as well 
as the high lignin content in the stems 
and leaves, organic matter and micro­
bial habitat are rarely deficient in turf­
grass systems (12). The one system that 
may limit microbial activity due to a 
lack of favorable habitat is a newly 
constructed high-sand-content root­
zone, likely due to reduced nutrient- 
and water-holding capacity. Keep in 
mind, however, that the advent of the 
sand rootzone system and sand top­
dressing arose to address severe agro­
nomic difficulties, namely soil com­
paction and poor drainage of native soil 
greens. Sand-based rootzones have 
created physical characteristics that 
allow golf course superintendents to 
provide superior playing conditions 
and also maintain an oxygenated root­
zone. Microbial populations generally 
will stabilize 3-5 years after establish­
ment, so amendments to the sand that 
can facilitate a more rapid colonization 
of the rhizosphere should lend stability 
to the system (6). These amendments 
would include various organic types, 
including composts and/or inorganic 
amendments. The challenge of estab­
lishing turfgrass on new, sand-based 
rootzones could be due in part to the 
lack of sufficient microbial activity to 
buffer the system from environmental 
extremes and harmful pathogens.

Soil Management and 
Microbial Enhancement

Testing for Soil Microbes

Undisputed is the important role 
microorganisms play in plant and soil 
health. The difficulty is in quantifying 
and qualifying that role. Recent ad­
vances in molecular testing capabilities 
have enabled fairly accurate quantifi­
cation of the microbial component in 
soils. While this will not yield a clear 
understanding of the diverse function 
and interaction of the various organ­

2

USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

isms, it is a beginning point for assess­
ing microbial health in soils. Keep in 
mind that microbial populations fluc­
tuate widely across sites and over the 
course of a season, however, so test­
ing for microbial activity may produce 
somewhat confusing results until a 
large enough database can be assimi­
lated. This currently may not be feasible 
or cost effective, and it will certainly 
take time. However, microbial testing 
may provide comparisons of soil that 
supports healthy turf versus soil 
struggling to support turf. Be sure to 
account for other factors that may be 
limiting growth, such as sunlight, air 
circulation, drainage, fertility, traffic 
flow, etc. (13). Soil testing for microbes 
may help assess whether microbial 
activity is influencing turfgrass quality.

Biostimulants

Biostimulant is a loose term that 
includes microbial inoculum, energy 
sources for microbes, soil conditioners, 
plant hormones, and other non-nutri- 
tional growth-promoting substances. 
In recent years, products containing 
both biostimulants and fertilizers have 
further muddled this definition. This 
makes differentiating between fertilizer 
response and biostimulant response 
difficult, if not impossible. No doubt 
this is precisely what the manufacturers 
of such products have intended, since 
the non-nutritional component alone 
may not elicit a plant response.

One group of biostimulants is plant 
hormones. These products may contain 
one or more of the following: cyto­
kinins, gibberellins, auxins, abscisic 
acid, and ethylene. When growing 
under normal conditions, plants have 
adequate levels of hormones for nor­
mal growth and development. Most 
physiological processes in plants in­
volve an interaction of several hor­
mones, and individual hormones have 
several functions. Further, many hor­
mones have different functions in 
different plant species (8).

Normal hormone production can 
be influenced by environmental and 
cultural stress. Different species of 
plants, growing in different environ­
ments, with different stresses, at differ­
ent times of the year are quite likely to 
react in different ways. One of these 
different reactions will undoubtedly be 
with hormone regulation, and this is 
consistent with the variability in plant 
response to hormone applications in 
research results and field trials across 
the country. There currently is no evi­
dence to suggest that applications of 

plant hormones will yield favorable 
or consistent results with respect to 
improved plant health. Furthermore, 
adding hormones to plants beyond nor­
mal levels may produce an inhibitory or 
undesirable effect. Without research 
information to identify and quantify 
treatment regimes, it may be wise to 
avoid tampering with plant hormonal 
activity (7). Anecdotal evidence and 
testimonials have been the substitute 
for independent research results re­
peated at multiple locations.

Another type of growth stimulant 
available on the market contains 
humate or humic acid. These are natu­
rally occurring organic compounds 
that are the end products of biological 
decomposition. Accordingly, they are 
extremely resistant to further decom­
position. Products containing humates 
claim to increase cation exchange 
capacity, increase microbial activity, 
and chelate micronutrients. Kussow 
reviewed manufacturer recommenda­
tions for amending a sand-peat root­
zone mix with humate and found it to 
be a very expensive means of increas­
ing the CECby 13% (9). His review 
further concluded that iron, copper, 
manganese, and zinc are rarefy defi­
cient in turfgrass soils, thus enhancing 
micronutrient availability may only 
provide negligible benefits. Another 
study clearly demonstrated that since 
humates are the end result of decom­
position and thus resistant to further 
breakdown, they do not stimulate 
increased microbial activity (25). Yet 
another study reviewed the effects of 
six non-traditional growth-promoting 
products on the establishment of creep­
ing bentgrass in high-sand-content 
rootzones. Only one of the products 
produced significant differences from 
the control, and the product contained 
humate. Upon chemical nutrient 
analysis of the product, however, it was 
discovered to contain 6% N, 5% P, 2% 
K, 4% S, and 4% Fe. Using this product 
at the recommended application rate 
was equivalent to applying an addi­
tional 0.75 pound N, 1.3 pounds of P, 
and 0.34 pound of K per 1,000 square 
feet per month (27). It may well be that 
this response could have been dupli­
cated with conventional fertilizer, and 
it would seem to request an indepen­
dent nutrient analysis of any growth­
stimulating products you intend to try.
Finally, there have been studies that 
indicate humates and humic acids can 
reduce the efficacy of pesticides by 
reducing their absorption by plants 
and pathogens (9). It is also reported

many are sensitive to UV light and 
must be applied frequently (in some 
cases nightly) to establish sufficient 
populations. Although there have been 
efforts to apply microorganisms 
through irrigation systems, the results 
remain largely inconsistent (2). Finally, 
some companies will not even list what 
organisms they have formulated, be­
cause they are proprietary. Without 
knowing what is being applied, it is 
impossible to gauge the potential 
benefits. These organisms could be 
detrimental to your turf by actually 
competing with the beneficial organ­
isms already present in your soil (7)!

Composts

With little doubt, the most promising 
method of managing and enhancing 
the activity of soil microbes is with 
composted organic matter in wastes 
and other materials. Ironically, this is 
also one of the oldest agricultural 
practices. Composts have been shown 
to add an active microbial component 
to soils and to stimulate those microbes 
already present in the soil (14). Well- 
decomposed organic matter provides 
excellent habitat and energy sources 
for soil microbes, and will provide more 
permanent benefit than inoculation 
with microorganisms. Composts will 
effectively enhance soil aggregation, 
provide nutrients, reduce compaction, 
and improve soil porosity. Sandy soils 
amended with compost will exhibit 
greater nutrient- and water-holding 
capacity (10). While limited evidence 
exists, there is some data to suggest 
amending sand-based rootzones with 
compost can offer improved establish­
ment and disease control over com­
monly used peat amendments (5, 14).

The use of composts in turfgrass 
management presents a viable means of 
recycling municipal and industrial 
wastes while improving turfgrass 
quality. Composts can vary con­
siderably, however, depending on their 
source. Commonly used composts 
include brewery sludge, yard wastes, 
poultry litter, animal manure, munici­
pal wastes, and food wastes. It is 
recommended to have composts tested 
for organic matter content, ash con­
tent (especially if used as a topdres­
sing), moisture content, pH, nutrients, 
metals, and soluble salts (10). On-site 
composting operations should follow 
guidelines to ensure that the material 
has been properly and sufficiently com­
posted (14, 20, 28). The disease-sup­
pressive characteristics of composts 
will be discussed in the next section.

Biological Pest Control

In recent years, considerable focus 
has been placed on the biological sup­
pression or control of various turfgrass 
pests, including diseases, insects, and 
weeds. Reducing the pesticide load on 
the environment is the primary impetus 
behind such study. While research 
has proven effective pest control with 
various biological entities in the labo­
ratory, few have proven consistently 
effective in field studies.

Biological control operates on five 
basic interactions with the turfgrass-soil 
community: competition, antagonism, 
predation, parasitism, and patho­
genicity (1). The two ways of exploiting 
these interactions include microbial 
inoculants and organic amendments. 
While dozens of organisms with 
potential as inoculants for disease 
control have been studied (17, 18, 24), 
few have demonstrated any efficacy in 
the field, and only one product (Biotrek 
22G, Trichoderma harzianum) has 
been registered for disease control on 
turf (11, 15). Biological control of 
insects has been somewhat successful 
in recent years with such organisms as 
entomogenous nematodes, soil bac­
teria and fungi, although registered 
products are still limited (21, 26).

Serious shortcomings exist in the 
understanding of the pest control 
mechanisms themselves, relationships 
with other organisms in the commu­
nity, and formulation and delivery 
technology. Furthermore, foliar disease 
control with inoculants is limited due 
to UV sensitivity of the organisms and 
wide fluctuations of environmental 
parameters in the turfgrass canopy. 
The difficulty in delivering organisms to 
the roots has preempted much success 
in controlling root diseases. Because 
successful pest control typically de­
pends on the establishment of high 
population levels, frequent (and argu­
ably unsustainable) applications be­
come necessary. Injecting organisms 
through irrigation systems has yet to 
be proven as an effective method of 
uniform and consistent microorganism 
application. Keep in mind that 1) popu­
lation interactions within the soil are 
dynamic and interrelated, 2) intro­
duced organisms are slow to colonize 
habitat and generally fail to persist, and 
3) it is unclear whether the introduction 
of microbes in the environment will 
produce a lasting change and if the 
introduction will be beneficial in the 
long run (1, 15).

Organic soil amendments and addi­
tives, particularly compost, have per-

JULY/AUGUST 1998

3

Some microorganisms found in certain 
composts can inhibit turfgrass diseases 
such as Pythium. Biological control of 
turfgrass diseases has proven successful 
in laboratory studies, but has not been 
consistently successful in field trials.

that the fulvic acid component of 
humates can actually increase the 
solubility of pesticides and possibly 
increase mobility (25). Most of the 
studies that claim any benefit from 
adding humates were in either nutrient 
culture or sand culture systems, not in 
field situations. The variation in humic 
substances from different sources and 
lack of research that supports their use 
on turfgrasses currently do not justify 
their use in turf management.

Carbohydrate fertilizers, another bio­
stimulant, have not been proven to 
improve turfgrass stress tolerance or 
have any lasting impact on soil 
microbial populations. Again, research 
on turfgrass and carbohydrate applica­
tion is lacking, but observations across 
the country indicate no observable 
benefits. Any stimulation of microbial 
activity is likely to be very short-lived.

Microbial Inoculants

Various microbial inoculants have 
been formulated for use on turfgrass, 
with claims of accelerated organic mat­
ter decomposition, improved nutrient 
use efficiency and availability, soil con­
ditioning, disease control, mycorrhizal 
associations, and others. The success of 
these inoculants has been limited for a 
number of reasons. At this point, you 
should be aware that the microbial 
community is a very diverse and 
complex set of organisms. The degree 
of natural competition, antagonism, 
and predation limits the successful 
establishment of introduced species. 
Persistence of applied organisms is 
further hindered by the continual 
temporal and spatial fluctuation of 
microorganism populations (6). For­
mulation and delivery of the organisms 
present even more problems for micro­
bial inoculation (15). If the organisms 
can be kept alive until application, 

Evaluating Independent Research

• Who (principal investigator) did the research?

• Where was the work done (lab or field, sand or soil)?

• Look for replication, good comparative treatments, and statistically 

significant differences.

• Have the results been duplicated at another site by another independent 

researcher?

• Have the results been published in a refereed journal?

• Slick brochures can be confusing!!! Don’t be fooled by sales techniques.

good management involves an eco­
nomic analysis. Test the material at 
several locations on the golf course 
representative of different conditions, 
replicate (meaning include repeated 
treatments at each site), and use un­
treated controls and other treatments 
in side-by-side comparisons. All too 
often, new products are tried all over 
the golf course without a control; thus, 
it is impossible to determine what 
effect, if any, the new product has. 
Perceived benefits could be a result of 
favorable weather or other manage­
ment techniques (7, 13). Take consis­
tent, monthly ratings of the plots for 
color, disease, and rooting depth and 
mass, and note stress tolerance differ­
ences. Good tests require at least two 
years of field data. Because a product 
will cause no harm is not reason to 
use it, and such a decision is repre­
sentative of poor management.

Conclusion

Turfgrass management is a continu­
ally evolving science, and as our 
understanding of the microbial com­
munity in turfgrass systems improves, 
new products will routinely hit the 
market. Some of these products will be 
useful, and many others will not. Inde­
pendent research will be essential to 
the development of effective products. 
Perhaps companies marketing bio­
logical products would be wiser to fund 
some research than to purchase full- 
page ads in popular trade magazines 
(if they have faith in their products)!

If completely organic management 
is ever realized, it will certainly be 
through a gradual phase-out of syn­
thetic products. Along with the advent 
of biological products, golf course 

comparative treatments, and least sig­
nificant differences. Check closely to 
see that the results have been dupli­
cated at another site by another inde­
pendent researcher, and that results 
have been published in a refereed jour­
nal. Make no mistake, slick brochures 
and displays can be confusing! One 
product advertisement I recently re­
viewed claimed the product would 
cause no grow-in layer, extend the use­
ful life of greens, reduce grow-in time, 
eliminate the possibility of nitrite (yes, 
they said nitrite, not nitrate^ and 
phosphate leaching, and reduce labor, 
among other things. This company 
may need legal counsel as much as 
scientific counsel. Finally, call the re­
searchers and ask technical represen­
tatives what the active ingredients are 
and what are their modes of action 
(29). University extension personnel 
and USGA agronomists can also pro­
vide valuable information.

If a product you are interested in 
passes this initial screening, it is 
strongly recommended to conduct on­
site testing at your golf course. Many 
of these products are not cheap, and 

On-Site Testing Protocol

• Test products at several locations representing different conditions on the 

golf course.

• Replicate at each site for best results.

• Use controls (no product) to establish comparisons.

• At least two years of field data are necessary to obtain an accurate 

assessment.

• Rate the plots monthly to track differences (color, disease, stress tolerance, 

rooting, etc.).

• Conduct an independent nutrient analysis of new products. You may be 

seeing a fertilizer response!

• Be honest! Is it the product or favorable weather, better cultivation, an 

improved growing environment, or other changes in management 
strategies?

haps a greater potential for effective 
biological control of diseases than do 
inoculants. Well-composted material 
(2-3 years) often exhibits disease-sup­
pressive characteristics (14). Studies at 
Cornell University have demonstrated 
significant and lasting disease suppres­
sion of Pythium root rot, dollar spot, 
and snow mold when composts were 
used as amendments or topdressing 
(14). Continued research in this area 
to reveal the microbiological mysteries 
should help develop more reliable and 
predictable composts for disease sup­
pression and soil conditioning. As 
alluded to earlier, proper composting 
techniques and laboratory testing 
coupled with on-site testing will reveal 
what to expect from composts.

New Products

Never before has the turfgrass in­
dustry had as many commercially avail­
able products for use. Financial respon­
sibility and sound management dictate 
that product purchasing decisions are 
of extreme importance. So how does 
one choose between the good, the bad, 
and the ugly?

The first place to start is with the 
product label. There are products that 
have been registered with the EPA and 
can legally justify the claims of the 
product. These are products that con­
tain active ingredients (29). There are 
unregistered products marketed for 
various uses, some of which are sup­
ported by independent research. Then 
there are products marketed for various 
uses without supportive research. 
These products use testimonials and 
fancy marketing to make a sale, and 
often can be classified as snake oils.

Let’s be sure we understand the in­
dependent, scientific research that 
supports product use. Be sure you 
know who conducted the research, 
where, under what conditions, and the 
relevancy to turfgrass systems. Also, 
look for replication in the study, good 

4

USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

superintendents must also keep them­
selves apprised of advances in synthetic 
chemistry. Many new products have 
been developed from synthesized 
organic compounds that are effective 
at very low levels of active ingredients, 
have low water solubility, short half­
lives, and a strong binding potential 
with soil and organic matter. The new 
synthetic chemistries are better for the 
environment than many of the older 
chemistries.

The importance of a strong microbial 
community cannot be questioned. The 
effectiveness of various products avail­
able to stimulate microbial activity can 
be questioned. Become familiar with 
soil microbiology and processes, check 
for duplicated independent research to 
support product claims, and test the 
material yourself to be sure it is effective 
and makes good economic sense. But 
whatever you do, don’t forget the 
basic tenets of successful turfgrass 
agronomy: adequate sunlight, drainage, 
air circulation, proper fertility, good 
water management, traffic control, and 
cultivation.

MATT NELSON is an agronomist in 
the Northeast Region of the USGA Green 
Section. He “bugs” superintendents to 
take a close look at product purchasing.

Literature Cited

1. Berndt, W. L. 1996. Population inter­
actions: the key to unlocking natural 
pest control. The Turf Letter. l(3):l-8.
2. Bresnahan, J. 1998. Bioject: results of 
1997 research trials. Presented at New 
England Regional Turfgrass Confer­
ence and Show. Providence, RI. March 
4, 1998.

3. Chiariello, N., J. C. Hickman, and H. A. 
Mooney. 1982. Endomycorrhizal role 
for interspecific transfer of phosphorus 
in a community of annual plants. 
Science. 3:941-943.

4. Demoeden, P. H. 1987. Management of 
take-all patch of creeping bentgrass 
with nitrogen, sulfur, and phenyl 
mercury acetate. Plant Disease. 71(3): 
226-229.

5. Hall, R. 1996. Composts vs. peats: 
composts win. Landscape Manage­
ment. 35(8): 14.

6. Holl, F. B. 1997. The mysterious world 
of the turfgrass root zone. Turfgrass 
Trends. 6(ll):l-8.

7. Isaac, S. 1998. Bio-stimulants and all 
that! International Turfgrass Bulletin. 
199:9-10.

8. Kamok, K. J. 1989. The use of plant 
hormones as non-nutritional turfgrass 
growth enhancers. Golf Course Man­
agement. 57(7):28-38.

Soil Microbes

Bacteria Single-celled organisms without a nucleus. Perform an 

important role in organic matter decomposition, nutrient 
cycling, soil aggregation, competition with pathogens, 
production of phytohormones. Also form symbiotic 
associations with plants.

Actinomycetes Filamentous bacteria. Decompose complex organic 
matter molecules like chitin and cellulose, produce 
antibiotics, and regulate bacterial populations.

Fungi Very good degraders of organic matter. Mycorrhizal and 

endophytic fungi form beneficial associations with plants. 
Most turfgrass pathogens are fungi.

Algae Autotrophic organisms. Some fix nitrogen. Excess 
nutrients can result in an unwanted bloom.

Protozoa Important in nutrient cycling and organic matter 

decomposition. Feed on bacteria and control bacterial 
populations.

9. Kussow, W R. 1994. Humate and 
humic acid. The Grass Roots. 22(2):18.
10. Landschoot, P. 1998. Using composts to 
improve turf performance. Turfgrass 
Management in the Pacific North­
west. l(l):32-34.

11. Lo, C. T, E. B. Nelson, and G. E. 
Harman. 1996. Biological control of 
turfgrass diseases with a rhizosphere 
competent strain of Trichoderma 
harzianum. Plant Disease. 80(7): 736- 
741.

12. Loomis, R. S., and D. J. Connor. 1992. 
Crop ecology. Cambridge University 
Press, New York, NY.

13. Moore, J. E 1997. Let’s give credit 
where credit is due. USGA Green 
Section Record. 35(2):20.

14. Nelson, E. B. 1996. Enhancing turfgrass 
disease control with organic amend­
ments. Turfgrass Trends. 5(6):L15.
15. Nelson, E. B. 1997. Biological control 
of turfgrass diseases. Golf Course 
Management. 65(7):60-69.

16. Nelson, E. B. 1998. Turfgrass pesticides 
and biological disease control: are they 
compatible? CUTT. 8(4):7-9.

17. Nelson, E. B, and C. M. Craft. 1991. 
Introduction and establishment of 
strains of Enterobacter cloacae in golf 
course turf for the biological control of 
dollar spot. Plant Disease. 75:510-514.
18. Powell, J. E, M. G. Nair, and J. M. 
Vargas, Jr. 1994. Utilization of a 
bacterial metabolite for the manage­
ment of dollar spot disease of creeping 
bentgrass (Agrostis palustris). Phyto­
pathology. 84(10): 1077.

19. Roberts,-. E. C. 1998. Turf research: 
nature, needs, and net results. Turf grass 
Trends. 7(1): 1-9.

20. Senseman, R. Y 1995. Composting: 
turn your eyesore into black gold. 
USGA Green Section Record. 33(3):8.

21. Shetlar, D. J. 1996. Field testing of bio­
logical pesticides. Turfgrass Trends. 
5(8):l-9.

22. Stockwell, C. T, E. B. Nelson, and C. 
M. Craft. 1994. Biological control of 
Pythium graminicola and other soil- 
borne pathogens of turfgrass with 
actinomycetes from composts. Phyto­
pathology. 84:1113.

23. Thompson, D. C., B. B. Clarke, J. R. 
Heckman, and J. A. Murphy. 1994. 
Suppression of summer patch in turf 
with acidifying nitrogen fertility pro­
grams. Phytopathology. 84(10):1085.

24. Thompson, D. C., B. B. Clarke, and D. 
Y. Kobayashi. 1996. Evaluation of 
bacterial antagonists for reduction of 
summer patch symptoms in Kentucky 
bluegrass. Plant Disease. 80(8):856- 
862.

25. Varshovi, A. 1996. Humates and their 
turfgrass applications. Golf Course 
Management. 64(8):53-56.

26. Villani, M. G. 1996. Biorational control 
agents for Japanese beetle management. 
CUTT. 7(l):l-7.

27. Wegner, T 1997. Bentgrass response to 
non-traditional soil additives. The 
Grass Roots. 25(4):58-61.

28. Zontek, S. 1974. Composting: alchemy 
in action. USGA Green Section 
Record. 12(3):9-11.

29. Zontek, S. 1997. Buyer . . . beware. 
USGA Green Section Record. 35(1): 17.

JULY/AUGUST 1998

5

Low Maintenance Troubles

Research that is helping turf managers maintain 
buffalograss as a low-maintenance alternative.

by ROCH E. GAUSSOIN, Ph.D.

NAMED AFTER the animal that 

grazed it, buffalograss (Buchloe 
dactyloides) is a warm-season 
turfgrass species native to the sub- 

humid and semi-arid regions of the 
North American Great Plains. It is a 
long-lived perennial that spreads vege­
tatively by stolons and, historically, was 
one of the most widely used species for 
erosion control and dryland pastures. 
Buffalograss’s low growth habit and 
exceptional heat and drought tolerance 
have given it the ability to survive in 
environments considered too hostile 
for other species. In the early 1930s, 
buffalograss was commonly used on 
non-irrigated home lawns, golf courses, 
parks, and other turf areas in the 
central United States.

In the early 1980s, interest in buffalo­
grass began to escalate as the public 
became more conscious of natural re­
source conservation and the need for a 
turfgrass species that would require 
fewer pesticide and fertilizer inputs 
while providing an acceptable level of 
quality. The acceptance of buffalograss 
as a high-quality, low-maintenance turf 
has been hindered by the limited num­
ber of available varieties and a super­
ficial understanding of its management 
requirements. In 1984, the USGA Turf­
grass Research Committee began fund­

ing a breeding project at the University 
of Nebraska to develop new buffalo- 
grass varieties and determine their 
management requirements.

The first buffalograss plots were 
established in the spring of 1985. These 
plots were composed of plants col­
lected by a team of scientists from the 
University of Nebraska that included 
Dr. Larry Newell, a forage grass 
breeder, and Drs. Edward Kinbacher 
and Terry Riordan. The plants were 
established in an irrigated field and 
evaluated for rate of spread, density, 
and color. To the surprise of those 
involved with the project, several of 
the selections had completely grown in 
by August of the same year and had 
acceptable turf quality. During the fol­
lowing winter, the selections that had 
performed well in the field were 
increased in a greenhouse and, in the 
spring of 1986, the first replicated plots 
were established.

In 1989, two vegetatively propagated 
buffalograss cultivars were ready for 
release to the public: “Prairie,” devel­
oped by Dr. Milt Engelke at Texas 
A&M University, and “609,” developed 
by Dr. Terry Riordan. This event fur­
thered the widespread use of buf­
falograss in the United States. Ben 
Crenshaw, a professional golfer, and 

Fertilization rates play an important role in the results of buffalograss performance. 
Over-fertilization results in a significant amount of weed competition.

6

USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

David Doguet, a Texas sod grower, 
obtained the rights to produce these 
two varieties and began marketing 
them as turfgrasses that were better for 
the environment.

The marketing efforts of Crenshaw 
and Doguet resulted in significant 
sales of buffalograss sod and plugs, 
and made the public aware of the 
potential environmental benefits of 
using buffalograss in areas where 
traditional turfgrass species were used. 
For example, based on buffalograss’s 
low water use rate, the cities of Austin 
and San Antonio began offering rebates 
to homeowners if they planted or con­
verted their turf areas to buffalograss.

Since the release of Prairie and 609, 
other vegetative cultivars have found 
their way onto the market, including 
northern-adapted cultivars from the 
University of Nebraska breeding pro­
gram. In addition, private industry and 
other university breeding programs 
have produced several seeded cultivars.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, 
fundamental information on optimal 
mowing height, fertilization rates and 
timing of application, optimal planting 
times, etc., was lacking for the im­
proved buffalograss cultivars. As a 
consequence, many turf managers 
maintained buffalograss using tradi­
tional cultural practices and reported 
disappointing results. For instance, 
rather than taking advantage of the low 
water and nutritional requirements of 
buffalograss, many established areas 
were over-irrigated and over-fertilized. 
This management regime promoted 
heavy weed invasions and unaccept­
able turfgrass quality.

In recognition of the absence of 
fundamental information, the USGA 
Turfgrass and Environmental Research 
Committee approved additional fund­
ing to develop more comprehensive 
management recommendations in 
1993. This research could not have 
come at a more critical time for those 
attempting to maintain buffalograss 
stands.

Early management research concen­
trated on establishment techniques.

Over-irrigation promotes unacceptable turfgrass quality. In research investigating various irrigation rates, buffalograss (right) was 
still able to produce a quality turfgrass stand as the irrigation amount was decreased when compared to tall fescue.

Although buffalograss is categorized as 
a low-maintenance species, it was soon 
discovered that during establishment 
it does require irrigation and nitrogen 
fertilizer at levels comparable to other 
warm-season turfgrasses. It was also 
discovered that the primary factor 
restricting successful establishment was 
weed competition. Part of this latter 
problem was that the herbicides rou­
tinely used on buffalograss in a pasture 
system were either not registered for 
turfgrass usage or were no longer avail­
able. This meant that a turf manager 
trying to establish buffalograss had to 
either apply products illegally, hand 
weed, or mow in hopes that cutting the 
stand would give buffalograss a com­
petitive edge. None of these options 
were acceptable.

The herbicide dilemma has been 
somewhat remedied by the registration 
of the herbicide Plateau, which has 
shown good promise for alleviating 
weed competition during establish­
ment of buffalograss. The plant pro­
tectant industry has further responded 
to the dilemma by rewriting existing 
herbicide labels to include application 
on buffalograss.

Research on buffalograss manage­
ment also has focused on determining 
optimal and sub-optimal planting 

dates. Kevin Frank, a graduate student 
at the University of Nebraska, has 
evaluated seven different planting dates 
in Utah and Nebraska. This work has 
shown that buffalograss can be suc­
cessfully planted anytime from April to 
July in these locations, and that plant­
ing after early August will produce 
unsatisfactory results.

An evaluation of mowing and fer­
tility requirements of four cultivars 
(seeded Texoka, seeded Cody, 118, and 
378) also was made at the conclusion 
of the establishment research project. 
This work shows that some cultivars 
respond well to fertilizer rates of 2.0 
pounds per 1,000 square feet, which is 
twice as high as what was previously 
recommended. While this rate is still a 
lower nitrogen recommendation than 
what is applied to traditional turfgrass 
species, it does indicate that the early 
belief that buffalograss would not 
respond to nitrogen fertilization is not 
true of all cultivars. The mowing results 
indicate that, depending on the end­
user’s preference, buffalograss can be 
maintained at 7s" for a high-quality 
stand or simply mowed once a year for 
a truly low-maintenance landscape.

Buffalograss research conducted to 
date has only scratched the surface of 
what can and needs to be discovered. 

The potential of this species as an 
alternative to traditionally used turf 
species is indeed tremendous. With 
this in mind, it is unfortunate that some 
turf managers, without giving buffalo­
grass adequate time to prove its envi­
ronmental benefits, have already gotten 
off the bandwagon.

Currently, buffalograss is being effec­
tively used in home lawns, as golf 
course rough, in areas that are difficult 
to mow, and in roadside/industrial 
areas. As research continues to identify 
optimal management programs for 
improved turf-type buffalograss, their 
use on golf course fairways and other 
intensively managed areas, especially in 
locations where water supplies are 
limited or restricted, should be realized.

DR. ROCH GAUSSOIN is the Extension 
Turfgrass Specialist for the University of 
Nebraska in Lincoln, Nebraska. In addi­
tion to his statewide extension activities 
and continuing work with buffalograss, 
Dr. Gaussoin is evaluating the results of 
various putting green grow-in programs as 
part of a USGA research grant.

JULY/AUGUST 1998

7

“Where Do My Roots Go In August?”

Managing the factors you can control, and understanding the rest.

by STANLEY J. ZONTEK

GOLF COURSE superintendents 

<■ know that roots of bentgrass 
or bentgrass/Pofl annua greens 
shorten and die back each summer. 

And when conditions become hotter, 
wetter, and more humid, the roots 
suffer even more, becoming shorter in 
length and brown in color. These are 
not good signs to the turf manager who 
is attempting to maintain putting greens 
during the peak-play summer golfing 
season, when the grass already is 
subject to mechanical, environmental, 
and disease stresses. It is the purpose of 
this article to review the factors that 
cause root dieback during the summer. 
By understanding these factors, the golf 
course superintendent may be able to 
maintain a better root system during 
the summer.

Factors Associated With
Summer Root Dieback

The following factors are listed in 
order of relative importance in terms of 
their effects on roots.

Soil Temperature: Of all the factors 
that affect the loss of roots of cool­
season grasses in the summer, soil 
temperature is the most significant. 
Research has shown that when soil 
temperatures approach 85-87 degrees 
Fahrenheit at a depth of 2 inches, roots 
of cool-season grasses begin to lose 
their ability to absorb water and to 
cool themselves through transpiration. 
Nutrients, which help to maintain 
plant health and proper plant func­
tions, also are less readily absorbed. In 
fact, that’s one of the great differences 
between cool-season and warm-season 
grasses — their ability to grow under 
high air and soil temperatures.

Unfortunately, soil temperature is 
the factor over which the superin­
tendent has the least control. Never­
theless, a few things can be done to 
help improve the situation. Preliminary 
research at Kansas State University 
suggests that roots die back from the 
surface, where the soil is the warmest, 
n ot from the bottom up as common 
sense would suggest. During the past 
decade, the use of fans on golf courses 

8

USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

has increased dramatically. One of the 
more important functions of fans is to 
cool the turf canopy and the upper soil 
layer. The use of fans is one way a golf 
course superintendent can help main­
tain the health of the grass and its root 
system during the summer.

The new systems that blow air into a 
green and, to a lesser extent, suck air 
through a green, can reduce soil tem­
perature to some extent. In some cases, 
even a small reduction in soil tempera­
ture can make a difference. Research 
currently sponsored by the USGA may 
help reveal the value of air injection in 
reducing soil temperatures.

Mowing Height: All one has to do is 
look at a scalped plug from a putting 
green under summer heat stress to 
appreciate just how critical mowing 
height can be in determining whether 
a grass plant survives a hot and humid 
summer. Low mowing heights are also 
a trigger for stress-related diseases, 
such as summer patch (Magnaporthae 
poae) and anthracnose (Colleto- 
trichum graminicola).

Although golf course superinten­
dents have the ability to adjust cutting 
heights, they often are pressured to 
lower heights to obtain fast green 
speeds. It has been shown that just a 
bit more leaf canopy can help keep the 
surface of the soil cooler and help the 
grass survive. It is important for golfers 
to understand that mowing grass too 
closely during the summer is not a 
good practice, especially when the turf 
on the greens is Poa annua and/or 
some of the older bentgrass varieties.

In the final analysis, as it pertains to 
maintaining ultra-low mowing heights 
and fast green speeds, the old adage 
may be worth repeating — slow grass 
is better than no grass.

Irrigation/Over-Irrigation: Simply 
put, wet soils become hotter soils 
because water is a good conductor of 
heat. Although wet soils may take 
longer to heat up, they also retain heat 
for longer periods. Too much soil 
moisture also is associated with a 
depletion of soil oxygen, which con­
tributes to root loss problems.

The golf course superintendent can’t 
control how much it rains, but she can 
control how much water is applied 
through irrigation! The amount of 
water in the soil has a major impact on 
summer root decline. Water replaces 
soil oxygen and this can lead to an­
aerobic soil conditions, including black 
layer. Diseases such as brown patch 
and Pythium also are favored by higher 
levels of moisture. Longer wet/dry 
cycles work well on more modem 
greens that drain. On mineral soils that 
do not drain as well, lighter, more 
frequent applications of water are best 
for maintaining the right balance. 
During the summer, it is always better 
to water less . . . it’s easier to add 
more water than to remove an excess, 
especially in soils that just do not 
drain very rapidly.

Mechanical Damage: Mechanical 
injury to the grass affects its ability to 
survive a hot summer. Replace grooved 
rollers with solid or section rollers. Use 
floating-head mowers versus fixed head 
walk-behind mowers and switch from 
triplex mowers to walk-behind units. 
Do not mow greens when they are 
too wet, and defer topdressing, vertical 
mowing and routine grooming opera­
tions until temperatures cool and the 
grass and its root system are under less 
stress.

Many turf managers and golfers seem 
unaware of how much mechanical 
injury can contribute to the decline of 
roots during the summer. It is a factor 
that can be controlled but is too often 
overlooked.

Nematodes: Nematodes sometimes 
cause root-loss problems, especially in 
the more southern parts of the country 
where bentgrass is grown on greens. 
It should be emphasized that plant 
parasitic nematodes occur naturally in 
most soils. But please, do not dash out 
to treat all of your greens routinely for 
nematodes unless there is a demon­
strated need for these applications 
based on soil nematode assays. If a 
problem exists, know that parasitic 
nematode problems seldom occur 
evenly or equally in all greens. Hot 

spots of nematode activity occur. It 
takes a good scouting program to 
identify nematodes as a problem, 
especially in the central, transitional, 
and/or more northern regions of our 
country

A well-thought-out nematode con­
trol effort usually begins by reducing 
other plant stresses by increasing the 
mowing height or careful attention to 
syringing, for example. Nematicides 
are among the most toxic products 
applied to golf course greens, and 
their use can be justified only if a sig­
nificant problem exists. Nonetheless, 
when factors are considered that can 
affect the loss of roots in summer, 
nematode activity should be mentioned 
even though control measures may not 
always be justified.

Disease: Soil-borne diseases like 
Pythium can be placed in the category 
of only occasionally affecting the root 
system. There has been much con­

fusion over the years about Pythium 
problems on greens during the sum­
mer. Keep in mind that Pythium is 
ubiquitous . . . it’s always in the soil 
and is a common inhabitant of grass 
roots. Nonetheless, many fungicide 
applications are made to greens in the 
(sometimes futile) attempt to control 
this naturally occurring soil problem.

The key questions to ask are: Are 
these Pythium species aggressive 
parasites actively colonizing healthy, 
live tissue? Are they non-aggressive 
parasites living in the upper few inches 
of soil? Or are they saprophytes? It 
takes an experienced plant pathologist 
to tell the difference. In my opinion, 
many of the Pythium root dysfunction 
and root rot problems identified are 
secondary in nature and occur on 
tissue, including roots, that is declining 
due to other stress-related factors. 
Although a good preventive fungicide 
spray program is always a good idea, 

keep in mind that chemicals alone will 
not keep grass alive during the summer. 
They should be part of an integrated 
program that includes reasonable 
mowing heights, lightweight hand 
mowing, reduced mechanical stress 
from grooming and topdressing, the use 
of fans, weekly to biweekly applica­
tions of light rates of soluble fertilizers, 
and avoidance of over-watering.

Grass Type: The ability of species or 
cultivars to tolerate high soil tem­
peratures varies widely. The roots of all 
cool-season grasses shorten during 
the summer to some extent, including 
the newer varieties that have been 
developed to better tolerate summer 
heat stress. The difference seems to be 
the rate at which roots decline and the 
ability of a variety to tolerate heat stress, 
regardless of the depth of its rooting 
system. This is an important point. 
Visually, the new heat-tolerant bent­
grasses may seem to be performing

Maintaining a good root system throughout the difficult 
summer months is a critical factor for the turf manager. 
Soil conditions, mowing height, mechanical damage, and 
irrigation are just a few factors that impact summer root 
decline. Soil coring is a necessary management tool to 
maintain good soil aeration resulting in healthy white 
roots and a healthier plant.

JULY/AUGUST 1998

9

Furthermore, there could be enough 
soil residual to inhibit rooting during 
the late summer/early fall period. 
Additionally, if one of the long-residual 
preemergence herbicides is applied to 
the greens too late in the spring, the 
residual can affect seed germination 
during fall overseeding work. Know the 
residual of your preemergence herbi­
cide and plan accordingly. In some 
cases, it might be better to skip a pre­
emergence herbicide application and 
rely upon postemergence sprays or 
even hand weeding.

Growth Regulators: It has been said 
that growth regulators neither benefit 
root growth nor significantly inhibit 
root growth. Nevertheless, know the 
properties of the products you are 
using and plan accordingly. One ob­
servation is worth offering: be careful 
of combining growth regulators with 
fungicides that have growth regulating 
side effects. For example, the sterol- 
inhibiting fungicides, or DMIs, have 
growth regulator activity and can 
adversely affect greens on a PGR (plant 
growth regulator) program. There can 
be an enhanced PGR effect, especially 
if the summer is particularly hot, 
humid, and stressful. This enhanced 
growth regulating effect can take the 
form of phytotoxicity and delayed 
recovery from injury.

In Summary

Always work to stimulate root 
development in the spring and fall. 
Aeration, balanced fertility, and reason­
able mowing heights all contribute to 
good root growth. Be sure to have 
adequate sunlight and air circulation. 
Be careful with the application of pre­
emergence herbicides, and be on a 
good preventive fungicide program. 
Monitor for plant parasitic nematodes 
and, where appropriate, consider inter­
seeding newer varieties of heat-tolerant 
bentgrasses into problem greens. All 
of these programs can contribute to 
healthier grass and better putting green 
turf during the summer.

Author’s Note

The author would like to extend 
a special thank-you to Dr. Peter 
Dernoeden at the University of 
Maryland for reviewing this article.

STANLEY J. ZONTEK is the Director of 
the USGA Green Section’s Mid-Atlantic 
Region. Stan has a B.S. degree in 
Agronomy/Turfgrass Management from 
Penn State University and joined the 
Green Section staff in 1971.

Nematodes can sometimes be the cause of turfgrass root problems. Deformed, swelled 
roots with bulbous root tips are an indication of potential nematode damage.

better with more grass on the surface 
of the green, but they have a similar 
amount of summer root loss in com­
parison to other species.

Obviously, Poa annua also experi­
ences summer root loss problems, 
including perennial biotypes. Poa 
annua, by its nature, also has lower 
tolerance to extended periods of heat. 
That’s why Poa annua on greens in the 
deep South functions as a true winter 
annual, whereas in the upper 
Transition Zone we routinely see 
patches of perennial biotypes of Poa 
annua survive the summer. Grass type 
does make a difference, be it among 
bentgrass cultivars or annual and 
perennial biotypes of Poa annua.

Determining how these newer bent­
grasses perform under actual condi­
tions of play, in comparison to some of 
the standard, older bentgrass varieties, 
is one of the reasons the USGA has 
built 16 demonstration greens across 
the United States. Stay tuned — the 
results should be interesting.

Other Factors

Shade Affects Rooting: Proper root 
development requires an adequate 
amount of sunlight. Also, shaded and 
pocketed greens often are wetter 
greens. There is less evapotranspiration 
in the shade than in the sun. Thus, if 
you water greens equally and do not 
compensate for open and exposed 
greens versus pocketed and shaded 
greens, this can cause problems. A 
combination of higher soil moisture, 
higher soil temperatures and additional 
humidity are major causes for the de­
cline of pocketed greens. Proper water 

10 USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

management is critical to maintaining 
quality turf in shaded environments.

Fertility: Putting greens need some 
fertilizer during the summer. Light rates 
of fertilizer applied in a soluble spoon­
feed type of program work well. The 
grass is never over-fertilized, nor is it 
under-fertilized. Such programs help to 
maintain roots, to the extent possible, 
by allowing the grass to re-grow roots 
from the stems and crowns. This re­
generation of roots is another natural 
factor that helps the grass survive.

Soil Compaction: Zones of soil 
compaction and/or layers can be 
managed via an appropriate soil coring 
and aeration program. Keep in mind 
that roots grow through air spaces in 
the soil. Without good soil aeration, 
root depth and density will suffer. 
During the summer, aeration can be 
achieved using solid or small %-inch 
hollow tines, surface spiking, and high- 
pressure water aeration. Used properly, 
these practices can help to maintain 
roots and even stimulate new root 
development.

Preemergence Herbicides: Some 
people may be surprised about how 
low on the priority list of factors affect­
ing root dieback the use of preemer­
gence herbicides is. Preemergence 
herbicides may inhibit or delay rooting 
for several weeks following their appli­
cation, but these products should have 
few long-term negative effects on roots 
in the summer if applied at the proper 
time and at the proper rate in early 
spring. However, if a preemergence 
herbicide application is made late in 
the spring or is applied at an excessive 
rate, then direct injury could occur.

Golf and Turf grass Management in Italy
Understanding the infrastructure of the Italian golf industry.

by PAOLO CROCE and ALESSANDRO DE LUCA

PERIODICALLY, the USGA Green 

Section agronomists are asked to 
host visiting agronomists from 
other countries. One such exchange 

occurred when the Green Section 
technical staff of the National Golf 
School of Italy visited the USGA Green 
Section’s Mid-Atlantic region. Their 
goal was to see how U.S. golf courses 
are maintained in a climatic region 
corresponding to where the majority of 
golf courses are located in Italy. The 
ultimate purpose of any agronomist 
exchange is to learn from one another.
In Italy, golf is a time-honored sport. 
The game was first introduced from 
England by the Duke of Albany in the 
early 17th century. The first course was 
in the Villa Borghese Meadows of 
Rome; however, the first golf clubs were 
officially created in the late 1800s.

The first documented club was the 
Florence Golf Club, established in 
1889. The oldest and still-functioning 
golf course in Italy is the Acquasanta of 
the Golf Club Roma, created in 1903. 
Thus, the early development of golf in 
Italy roughly parallels the USA.

The Italian Golf Federation (FIG) 
was founded in Milan on May 31,1927. 
A year later, it became affiliated with 
the Italian National Olympic Commit­
tee (CONI) and moved its headquarters 
to Rome. By 1941, the FIG was govern­
ing 24 golf courses with 1,000 members. 
As of December 31, 1997, the Italian 
Golf Federation had more than 200 
golf courses, 35 driving ranges, and 
55,000 members.

The distribution of golf courses in 
Italy is not at all homogeneous. Most 
of the courses are located in the north, 
and some occur in the central parts of 
Italy, mainly in the major cities. There 
are a few golf courses in the southern 
part of Italy and on the islands of Italy.
From a technical point of view, al­
most all Italian golf courses have a high 
standard of quality. Some have even 
hosted major international competi­
tions. However, the search for grand 
and impressive facilities has resulted in 
the creation of cost-prohibitive clubs 
and a contribution to the definition of 
golf as an elite sport. This impression 
has curbed golf’s recent development 
and growth.

The Italian Golf Federation Technical Center, located at the Golf Club Le Querce, 
has more than 200 golf course and 55,000 individual members.

Another economic limitation to the 
success of golf in Italy is the high cost 
of maintenance equipment. Except for 
tractors and other commonly used 
tools like string trimmers, spreaders, 
etc., the specialized equipment neces­
sary to maintain today’s golf courses 
must be imported. There is no domestic 
production of such equipment. Most turf 
care equipment comes from Ransome 
of the United Kingdom, as well as Toro, 
John Deere, and Jacobsen products 
from the United States. As an example, 
a Toro 3200 reel mower costs about 
$22,000 U.S. The average cost for a 
triplex putting green mower, groomer 
and verticut not included, is $16,000 to 
$22,000 U.S.

Environmental groups have ham­
pered the creation of new golf courses 
with allegations of negative environ­
mental impact and pollution. A recent 
and more rational approach to golf 
course design, construction, and main­
tenance has established a dialogue 
with Italian environmental protection 
organizations. These efforts also have 
been instrumental in optimizing main­
tenance costs and turf quality. As a 
matter of fact, in the last few years, local 
authorities have become interested in 
golf and have directly or indirectly 
participated in the development of golf 
courses in Italy. Much of this progress 
was made possible by the Federal 
Technical Center of the Italian Golf 
Federation, which includes a turf sec­
tion within the National Golf School.
In Italy, the Federal Technical Cen­
ter— National Golf School was started 

in 1980 with the aim to organize tech­
nical training refresher courses for 
Italian golf professionals. In its first 
years of existence, the school used 
temporary facilities until the construc­
tion of its own 18-hole golf course 
with an independent building for the 
National Golf School was completed. 
As a tribute to his country of origin, 
George Fazio designed this golf course. 
The golf course is on 173 acres (70 hec­
tares) within 25 miles (40 kilometers) of 
Rome. By the mid-1980s, the develop­
ment potential for golf in Italy was con­
siderable, hence the need for training 
the individuals indispensable in the 
operation of a golf course — the golf 
course superintendent and the golf 
course manager. As a result, three 
sections were included within the 
National Golf School. The first section 
was for golf professionals in 1980, a 
second for managers in 1987, and the 
third, the Green Section, in 1989. At 
present, each of these three sections 
of the Federal Technical Center has 
offices, classrooms, a gym, and the 
internationally recognized 18-hole golf 
course. This course hosted the World 
Cup in 1991.

In Italy, it takes five years and several 
educational courses to become a golf 
professional. In our country, only a golf 
professional with a diploma from the 
Federal Technical Center can teach 
golfers.

Golf managers (we call them golf 
secretaries, as in the United Kingdom) 
are in charge of managing the golf club. 
They are responsible for the clubhouse 

JULY/AUGUST1998 

11

budget and also for the golf course and 
club in general. Most of them are also 
referees for golf tournaments.

The Green Section of the Italian Golf 
Federation carries out the following 
functions.

• Annual golf course maintenance 
classes. These classes consist of two 
four-month theoretical classroom ses­
sions and a third practical session of 
two months. During this time, the 
trainees maintain the golf course at the 
Federal Technical Center. To get the 
diploma of superintendent, trainees 
must work on a golf course for at least 
three years and pass several exams (one 
each year). There are also one-week 
refresher courses offered on specific 
subjects for individuals who have 
already worked on golf courses.

• Vocational training for mainte­

nance workers.

• Technical supervision of the 

Federal Golf Course.

• Technical assistance to new golf 

projects and construction.

• Technical assistance to affiliated 
clubs through field visits, telephone/fax 
consulting, and training classes.

• Field research studies at two turf 
experimental centers, one in Turin and 
another in Rome.

• Participation in seminars and con­
ferences involving dissemination of in­
formation on the subject of golf course 
and turfgrass management.

• Organizing and updating the most 
comprehensive turfgrass library in Italy.
The Italian Green Section agrono­
mists were trained at Texas A&M Uni­
versity under the able guidance of Dr. 
James B. Beard. Dr. Beard also was the 
main organizer of the Green Section 
and he still consults with the Italian 
Golf Federation. Interestingly, up until 
that time, the subject of sports turf did 
not appear on the curriculum of any 
Italian school and had to be created. 
The Green Section of the FIG bridged 
this gap, continually updating Italian 
textbooks. By 1992, the school was 
judged as “the only such school in the 
world outside the United States.” On 
the basis of this model, similar schools 
were established in France, Sweden, 
and Germany. There is no doubt that 
the Green Section of the Italian Golf 
School has become the true technical 
reference point in the field of turfgrass 
management in Italy, if not other 
countries. However, there still is a long 
way to go.

At present, more than 30% of Italian 
golf courses are being maintained by 
professional superintendents with 

12 USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

diplomas from the Federal School. In 
the past, golf courses had been main­
tained by so-called green wizards who 
often used their instincts and improvi­
sation, neglecting the scientific and 
correct techniques.

Golf course design and construction 
were frequently carried out by various 
types of individuals — by professional 
or amateur golfers or landscape design­
ers. Often, the resulting golf course had 
high maintenance costs due to very 
poor technical design and construction 
techniques.

Some courses have been designed 
and constructed well. Some are world­
class for the natural environment in 
which they have been created and for 
their design features. However, a look 
at some golf course construction errors 
in Italy shows that:

• Greens have been constructed on 
soils with extremely variable composi­
tion. On older golf courses, which 
account for 20% of our total golf 
courses, the greens were built on native 
soil. This construction technique is 
similar to the push-up type greens built 
in the United States. Such greens were 
designed to hold water.

On newer golf courses, greens are 
built using sand and organic material. 
Unfortunately, although the USGA 
guideline system is highly recom­
mended, due to the quality of the 
materials available, the difficulty in 
finding materials, their high cost, and 
also due to mere incompetence, greens 
are not always properly constructed.

• With Italian climatic conditions, a 
properly functioning watering system is 
indispensable in the maintenance of 
high-quality turfgrass. Most systems in 
Italy are designed and installed with 
great superficiality. This is not the fault 
of suppliers or installation; it is mainly 
due to budget constraints.

• Another frequent error is the cre­
ation of design features for golf courses 
that are impressive aesthetically but are 
difficult to maintain. A case in point is 
sand bunkers with very steep faces, 
which are subject to continuous ero­
sion. Another is steep grass banks 
where hand mowing is mandatory and 
expensive.

• The importance of subsurface 
drainage on fairways is often under- 
appreciated. Many golf courses in Italy 
have soils consisting mainly of silt and 
clay and, after construction, drainage 
systems have to be installed to correct 
these problems.

• Often, tees are not designed and 

constructed to tolerate high traffic.

Turfgrass research is conducted at 

two experimental centers in Italy.

Torino Turfgrass Research Plots

• Bentgrass (Agrostis spp.) cultivar 
characterizations under putting green 
conditions. The final report will be pre­
sented at the World Scientific Congress 
of Golf in July 1998.

• Comparative dollar spot (Sclero- 
tinia homoeocarpd) susceptibility of 
17 bentgrass cultivars under putting 
green conditions.

• The relative competitive ability of 
existing bentgrass cultivars to Poa 
annua invasion.

• The potential for use of a plant 
growth regulator to selectively retard 
the competitiveness of Poa annua.

Roma Turfgrass Research Plots

• Warm-season turfgrass evaluation 
program. Forty cultivars of warm-sea- 
son species: bermudagrass, Paspalum 
vaginatum (seashore paspalum), zoysia 
species, Buchloe dactyloides (buffalo- 
grass), Stenotaphrum secundatum (St. 
Augustinegrass).

• Cool-season turfgrass evaluation 
program. Forty cultivars of Lolium 
perenne (perennial ryegrass) and 27 
cultivars of Festuca arundinacea (tall 
fescue) under close mowing conditions.
Additionally, the Green Section of 
the Italian Golf Federation is working 
in three different directions.

• Education through training courses 

and seminars.

• Turfgrass-soil technical assistance 

visitations.

• Editing of construction manuals.
In summary, as the game of golf 
grows worldwide, exchanges between 
agronomists become all the more 
important. This article is an attempt to 
give a glimpse of turfgass management, 
education, and the common problems 
turf managers experience on old and 
new golf courses in Italy.

PAOLO CROCE comes from a long line 
of golf professionals. He is the only one 
in his family to break tradition and work 
with turfgrass. He earned his turfgrass 
specialization at Texas A&M University in 
1988. His cousin, Stefania Croce, plays on 
the U.S. LPGA Tour. He is the Coordinator 
of the Italian Golf Federation Green 
Section.
ALESSANDRO DE LUCA was one of 
the first trainees of the Italian Turfgrass 
School. After his degree at the University 
of Bologna, he received his turfgrass 
specialization at Texas A&M University in 
1991. He is the Vice Commodore of the 
Italian Golf Federation Green Section.

Current testing standards are inadequate in identifying contaminated seed lots. If problems are not detected in a 2.5-gram test 
(equivalent to a tablespoon), as much as a train car of seed will be sold as weed free based on this one sample.

POA TRIVIALIS CONTAMINATION
An increase in testing standards would benefit superintendents.

by MATT LEVY, RST

POA TRIVIALIS contamination in 

creeping bentgrass continues to 
be a serious problem in many new 
golf courses in the northern part of our 

country. When a superintendent starts 
to see patches of different-colored 
grasses appearing in collars and fair­
ways, everyone scrambles to find the 
sources of the contamination and a 
solution to the problem. Unfortunately, 
after the fact, answers to both of these 
questions are hard to find.

Two years ago, in an attempt to gain 
information about possible sources of 
Poa trivialis contamination, an inde­
pendent seed testing laboratory con­
ducted a study and came up with some 
significant findings. The laboratory, 
located in Marysville, Ohio, invited 
ten of the top seed companies in the 
country to submit bentgrass samples 

for comprehensive testing. Of the 90 
samples the laboratory received and 
tested, 41 contained Poa trivialis, Poa 
annua, or other problem species. 
Almost 50% were unsuitable for use on 
most golf course fairways!

These results contradict the theory of 
some seed company experts who are 
convinced that existing seeds in the soil 
are the likely source of the Poa trivialis 
problem. Also at odds with the soil 
theory of contamination is the fact that 
much of this Poa trivialis found in 
many fairways appears to be plants of 
the new improved varieties. Reliable 
sources report that the color, leaf tex­
ture, and growing habits of the plants 
found in so many new courses are quite 
different from common Poa trivialis. It 
seems highly unlikely, therefore, that in 
the few years that the new varieties 

have been in existence, we would find 
seeds occurring naturally in the soil of 
so many golf course sites.

Another significant finding of the 
laboratory’s study demonstrated that 
current testing standards are inade­
quate in identifying contaminated seed 
lots. In the study of 90 samples, only 6 
were found to contain problems at 
the current 2.5 gram testing levels. This 
is the amount normally used by seed 
companies and all certification agen­
cies. If a company does not find con­
taminants in this one sample, about a 
tablespoon of seed, as much as a 
truckload or more will be sold as prob­
lem-free. It wasn’t until the laboratory 
tested the submitted samples at 50 
grams that it was able to identify all 41 
samples containing Poa trivialis and 
other unwanted species.

JULY/AUGUST 1998 

13

The accompanying table demon­
strates the importance of increasing 
testing amounts.

If the rate of contaminated seed lots 
is close to 50%, why are companies 
looking for problems in the soil? Not 
all are. Many seed companies are aware 
of the problem and are taking steps 
to correct it. However, to resolve this 
issue, some changes may have to be 
made, including where companies 
plant their fields, how their fields are 
inspected, and how they clean, blend, 
and bag their seed. In the meantime, 
how will a company market contami­
nated lots?

You know the present condition of 
your course and what you want it to 
look like in the future. Seed plays a very 
important role in your course’s overall 
appearance. What you plant today is 
what your guests will see, walk on, 
putt on, and hit out of in the future. You 
deserve the best information available 
to make a wise seed-buying decision. 
Testing is by far the most dependable, 
widely used, and economical way to 
determine the potential quality of any 
seed lot.

Here are some easy steps you can 
take to protect your turf from contami­
nation:

1. Ask your supplier to submit a test 
report based upon a minimum of 50

RESULTS OF INCREASING TESTING AMOUNTS OF SEED

2.5-Gram Test 10-Gram Test 50-Gram Test

Number of 
Samples Tested

Percent Containing 
Poa trivialis

Percent Containing 
Other Species

Contaminants
Found

90

3

6

90

6

17

Poa annua

Poa annua
chickweed
tall fescue

90

30

41

Poa annua
chickweed
ryegrass 
tall fescue
timothy 
and others

grams for each lot of bentgrass seed 
you buy.

2. If they cannot provide you with a 
test report, ask them to submit a sample 
to an independent laboratory for a 50- 
gram test. (Refuse to buy any seed that 
has been tested at less than the 50-gram 
level.)

3. When your seed arrives, make 
certain that every bag contains exactly 
the same lot number as found on your 
clear test report.

4. To evaluate seed on hand or for 
information about other testing ques­

tions, call (937) 644-0888 for sample 
packets and mailing instructions, or 
contact another independent seed­
testing laboratory.

A 50-gram test greatly reduces the 
risk of planting problems with your golf 
course seed.

MATT LEVY is a registered seed tech­
nologist and president of Seed Technology, 
Inc., in Marysville, Ohio. Seed Technology 
is an independent seed testing laboratory 
specializing in turfgrasses.

Poa trivialis in creeping bentgrass seed is a serious problem in many new golf course projects. Poa trivialis from a contaminated seed
lot is seen filling in thin fairway areas left by an outbreak of take-all patch disease.

14 USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

Holistic Management

A vital tool for golf course superintendents.

by ARTHUR P. WEBER

should anticipate surprises, monitor 
changes that result from our actions, 
and make prompt adjustments if we 
are to successfully achieve our holistic 
goal.

THE OLD SAYING “if you always 

do what you always did, you’ll 
always get what you always got” 
simply does not work to successfully 

3. The conditions and resources 

available to carry out these actions.

As a practical matter, omit negatives 
from the goal. Positively stated listings 
are shorter and remain focused on the 

maintain a golf course. Now, more than 
ever, golf course superintendents must 
be able to adapt to changing growing 
conditions, playing criteria, and envi­
ronmental constraints. But why do 
some superintendents successfully 
adapt and others fail? Holistic manage­
ment offers both a philosophy and 
methodology to plan for such success.
Conceptually, holistic management 
is not specific to any particular en­
deavor or circumstance. It is about 
perceiving problems within a broad 
perspective of underlying causes that 
can be managed. It considers the 
whole to be managed and affected by 
the results, including the people, soil, 
environment, and budgeting. The 
whole becomes the description of a 
minimal sustainable unit upon which 
management decisions must focus. In 
practice, holistic management is some­
thing like a zoom lens, simultaneously 
able to scan a broad landscape or focus 
momentarily on certain details, but 
always maintaining an awareness of 
interdependencies and the effects of 
decisions on the whole.

Holistic decisions consider the entire 
set of requirements that lead to success, 
unlike most conventional decisions 
made, which consider only part of the 
entire set. For example, decisions made 
solely because of their anticipated low­
ering of the bottom line may disregard 
adverse effects upon the quality of play 
or the health of the ecosystem.

Forming a Holistic Goal

For most, the forming of a holistic 
goal is a new experience. We’ve been so 
busy solving problems that we haven’t 
taken the time to scan the landscape. 
One solution seems to not quite be in 
place when another crisis diverts our 
attention. This is when we’re in need of 
a time-out to form an all-inclusive 
holistic goal by listing:

1. All the criteria to be satisfied.
2. The actions needed to satisfy these 

criteria.

Holistic management is about perceiving problems with a broad perspective of 
underlying causes that can be managed. Decisions consider the entire set of 
requirements that lead to success.

desired outcome. Avoid specifics in 
favor of broader stated options for 
flexibility in accomplishing the most 
important features of the goal. In this 
way the goal is structured to allow 
success in one part of the goal to 
support success in another part. At 
best, we can expect the decisions we 
make, even with the most up-to-date 
scientific knowledge available, only to 
be able to move us, more or less, in 
the direction of our holistic goal. We 

Science, Technology, 
and Management

An extensive misunderstanding per­
vades our culture of how science and 
technology relate to management. The 
confusion enters our laws, regulations, 
expectations, and emotions when we 
fail to identify the causes of problems 
and instead treat their symptoms over 
and over. The treatments then produce 
new problems and we become depen­
dent on the treatments.

JULY/AUGUST 1998 

15

A lesson for holistic managers is to 
never assume that a recommendation, 
scientific or otherwise, will be reliable 
in any one particular situation. Because 
an average condition seldom prevails, 
we should manage to reduce the effects 
of the unexpected. For example, we can 
stabilize our most basic golf course re­
source, our soil, which then buffers the

lesson

7°^^ \for holistic 
managers is never 
to assume that a 
recommendation 
will be reliable in 
any one particular 
situation.

effects of rain, drought, heat, humidity, 
play, et al. Healthy soil improves our 
chances for success. Although we 
might plant the most desirable turf 
varieties, irrigate with a state-of-the-art 
system, and groom with the latest 
equipment, we risk squandering time, 
manpower, and money unless we pro­
vide all we can to develop healthy soil. 
The fertilizers, chemicals, and all the 
other things we purchase to manage 
conventionally and expensively may be 
treating symptoms of a depleted soil. In 
bad years, problems will not derive 
from inadequate resources, but, rather, 
from inherently lifeless soil.

Case Study

A golf course superintendent’s listing 
of the holistic goal criteria he deems 
need to be satisfied might be typically 
reduced, in their broadest sense, to:
• Optimal growing conditions.
• Pleasurable play.
• Environmental integrity.
• Cost effectiveness.
• Good communications.
The diversified actions essential to 
the satisfaction of these criteria, when 
detailed, are many, the majority of 
which are most likely already being 
carried out. Those actions yet to be 
implemented, to fulfill the whole, stand 
out for attention. They earmark, too, 
the conditions and resources needed,

16 USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

You can use the latest equipment to maintain the turf, but you still need to consider 
factors such as cutting height and soil moisture to achieve the desired end result.

either currently available or not yet in 
place, to be developed or acquired to 
carry out these actions.

Optimal growing conditions are 
nurtured by versatile irrigation, good 
drainage, adequate sunlight, unim­
peded ventilation, balanced biological, 
chemical and physical soil properties, 
et al.

Pleasurable play is abetted when 
the course is set up fairly for all golfers, 
no matter their proficiency, minimal 
golf cart restrictions prevail, the course 
is well groomed, surroundings are pic­
turesque, green speeds are consistent, 
et al.

Environmental integrity is satisfied 
by integrated pest management, water 
conservation, wildlife habitation, com­
posting, community relationship, et al.
Cost effectiveness is derived from 
enhanced productivity due to high 
crew morale, safety and health con­
siderations, machinery maintained 
functionally reliable, et al.

Good communications are going 
on with the club manager, golf profes­
sional, general manager, golfers and 
employees, meetings and social inter­
actions, et al.

Holistic vs.
Conventional Management

Conventional management derives 
from research. It is well intentioned, 
focuses on problems to be solved and 
can produce many remedies. However, 
solving problems without a broader 
understanding of how the problems 
arose will lead to competing goals, 
creating losses and successes at the 
same time. Holistic management 
encourages wider consideration of 
choices, giving equal weight to “new” 

and “old” approaches. Experience is 
valued as much as research. Trial and 
error also are a central part of the 
process. Skill and good judgment are 
not confused with rigidly directed man­
agement practices.

A holistic manager plans for flexi­
bility; mistakes are detected early and 
the effects are softened with small 
adjustments before a crisis develops. 
He or she learns from the mistakes 
and successes of others, visits as many 
other operations as possible, asks 
questions, seeks answers, is open- 
minded, doesn’t restrict imagination, 
attends seminars and field days, keeps 
good records, monitors progress, is 
patient, and most important, articulates 
an all-inclusive three-part holistic goal 
and keeps refining it with time.

Footnote

Holistic management, as a decision­
making process, was initiated by Allan 
Savory, who emigrated to the United 
States about 20 years ago from Rhodesia, 
now Zimbabwe. The impetus for this 
application to golf courses derives 
from the introductiom of the holistic 
approach to students of natural re­
source management by Professor R. H. 
Richardson, Ph.D., at the University of 
Texas - Austin.

ARTHUR P. WEBER, a semi-retired 
chemical and nuclear engineer, has been 
an active member of the USGA Green 
Section Committee since 1984. A longtime 
green committee chairman, he was the 
principal author behind the Old Westbury 
Golf and Country Club (NY) Code of 
Environmental Conduct, a leading set of 
principles for golf course maintenance.

ON COURSE WITH NATURE
ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENT

Participation in the Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program can help 
superintendents make golf courses into environmental assets.

by PETER V. LEUZINGER, CGCS

Any decision made in managing the golf course impacts the environment.

environmental stewardship. We didn’t 

GOLF COURSE superintendents 

■began their careers for many 
reasons, one of which was 

call it that years ago, but we knew we 
liked working outdoors with Mother 
Nature. Along the way some troubling 
things happened to some of us. In the 
mid-’80s, groups of people began to 
accuse golf courses and the industry at 
large of being harmful to the environ­
ment. This perception was the com­
plete opposite of how most superin­
tendents viewed their work. We did not 
handle the criticism very well, and we 
hoped it would go away. This was not 
to be, as the criticism grew stronger in 
the early ’90s.

Golf course superintendents who 
exerienced that period learned to deal 

with all kinds of problems, including 
criticism of our industry’s environ­
mental inadequacies. Environmental 
audits, conservation seminars, and the 
Audubon Program were the learning 
tools that helped develop new industry 
leaders. We learned to stand up for our 
environmental commitment. We had to 
lead by example. For me, involvement 
with the Audubon Cooperative Sanc­
tuary Program for Golf Courses (ACSP) 
gave me the confidence I needed to 
look a critic in the eye and convince 
him or her that I was an ally of the en­
vironmental movement. Educated golf 
course superintendents from all over 
the country got actively involved with 
the ACSP and have found themselves 
in leadership positions in the com­
monwealth of environmental steward­

ship. Where we were once criticized, 
golf course superintendents are now 
depended upon to lend their expertise 
in land management and use for their 
communities.

To date, more than 2,300 golf courses 
across North America are participating 
in the Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary 
Program, and more than 110 golf 
courses are fully certified in the pro­
gram. Golf course superintendents who 
are fully certified understand the basic 
fact that any management decision 
they make is going to impact the en­
vironment. We have been trained to 
understand the many benefits derived 
from this new decision-making pro­
cess. These benefits include:

• Increased natural habitat and 

attraction of wildlife.

JULY/AUGUST1998 

17

Taking a natural approach to bunker surrounds can reduce inputs and save money.

• Decreased chemical budgets and 

• Calling Audubon staff or your State 

inventory.

• Decreased water use.
• Better pond and stream water 

quality.

• Increased property value.
• Improved employee training.
• Increased use of native plant 

material in landscaping.

• Reduced high-maintenance areas.
• Increased professional value to 

your course.

• Increased professional job satis­

faction.

Once certification has been achieved, 
the next real challenge is maintaining 
that same degree of excitement and 
dedication to a follow-up program of 
recertification. I have found that main­
taining environmental dedication re­
quires some motivational discipline. I 
do it by focusing on the following 
objectives.

• Rereading my original environ­

mental plan.

• Reviewing goals in each ACSP 

category of certification.

Steward and sharing ideas.

• Recertifying every two years.
It is very important to periodically 
review the original goals that you set 
when you wrote your first environ­
mental plan. Don’t be afraid to re­
evaluate those early objectives, because 
after a couple of years with the pro­
gram, you will have learned a lot and 
will probably want to make changes for 
the better. I get excited about expanding 
programs. That is what keeps me going. 
Usually this involves getting people 
from various factions together to see 
what the golf course and the ACSP is 
all about. Every year we try to expand 
and/or modify the program. This 
expansion can do simple things like:

• Updating the club’s Audubon 

brochure.

• Adding to or changing nest box 

locations.

• Writing an article for the local 
newspaper or soliciting a reporter to 
write a perspective on the course.

• Purchasing new and larger quan­

• Setting new goals and expanding 

tities of native plant material.

projects.

• Promoting the program to golfers, 

peers, employees, and the public.

• Talking enthusiastically about the 
program to anyone with whom you 
come in contact.

18 USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

What keeps our program alive and 
growing? I think it is our own enthusi­
asm sparked by feedback from the club 
members and community residents 
who have noticed the impact of the 
ACSP. People admire the changes that 
have taken place and now realize that 
this golf course is an asset to the com­
munity. To sum it all up, it’s nice to get 
credit instead of criticism!

PETER LEUZINGER has been a golf 
course superintendent for 23 years and 
is with St. Charles Country Club in St. 
Charles, Illinois. He has had two golf 
courses certified in the Audubon Coop­
erative Sanctuary Program, and he is a 
1998 GCSAA Environmental Steward 
Award winner.

NEWS NOTES

New Construction Video Available

THE Green Section is pleased to announce the availability of a new video, 

Building a USGA Green. This 22-minute video provides an overview of the 
construction and renovation of a putting green from preparation of the site and 
initial grading to final seeding or sprigging. The discussion includes shaping, 

drainage, determining the need for an intermediate layer, and rootzone blending.
For nearly 40 years the USGA recommendations for putting green construction 
have been used for green construction around the world. When built and main­
tained properly, USGA greens have provided consistently good results for golf 
courses over a period of many years. This construction method represents the best 
insight and practical experiences of the Green Section staff and soil scientists from 
around the world.

The video is available through the USGA Order Department by calling 1-800- 
336-4446. The cost is $16.95 for USGA members and $19.95 for non-members, 
plus shipping and handling charges. The video is available in both VHS and PAL 
formats.
USGA Green Section Region Updates
ARE YOU looking for a way to keep up with the latest successes and problems 
of your neighboring golf courses? Look no further than the Green Section 

portion of the USGA website.

Throughout the year, the USGA Green Section agronomists will be writing 
regular updates for the website on the latest agronomic activities occurring in their 
regions. The topics will be as diverse as the golf courses visited by the agronomists, 
and will cover everything from acidic soils, algae, and armadillo damage to zinc 
deficiency, zoysiagrass, and zone irrigation control. Given the far-reaching places 
our agronomists visit, it’s guaranteed there will be a few surprises included along 
the way.

You will find the USGA website at http://www.usga.org. The Green Section 
bullet will take you into all of the programs the Green Section is involved with. 
The regional updates are found under the Turf Advisory Service tab.

Visit regularly to find out what’s happening within our world. You never know 

what kind of tips you might find.

Physical Soil Testing 
Laboratories*
The following laboratories are accredited 
by the American Association for 
Laboratory Accreditation (A2LA), having 
demonstrated ongoing competency in 
testing materials specified in the USGA’s 
Recommendations for Putting Green 
Construction. The USGA recommends 
that only A2LA-accredited laboratories 
be used for testing and analyzing 
materials for building greens according to 
our guidelines.

BROOKSIDE
LABORATORIES, INC.
308 S. Main Street
New Knoxville, OH 45871 
Attn: Mark Flock
(419) 753-2448
(419) 753-2949 FAX

EUROPEAN TURFGRASS 
LABORATORIES LIMITED
3 Cunningham Road 
Springkerse Industrial East 
Stirling FK7 7SL Scotland 
Attn: John Souter 
(44) 1786-449195
(44) 1786-449688 FAX

N. W. HUMMEL & CO.
35 King Street, P.O. Box 606 
Trumansburg, NY 14886
Attn: Norm Hummel 
(607) 387-5694 
(607) 387-9499 FAX

THOMAS TURF 
SERVICES, INC.
1501 FM 2818, Suite 302 
College Station, TX 77840-5247
Attn: Bob Yzaguirre / Jim Thomas 
(409) 764-2050
(409) 764-2152 FAX

TIFTON PHYSICAL SOIL 
TESTING LABORATORY, INC.
1412 Murray Avenue 
Tifton, GA 31794 
Attn: Powell Gaines 
(912) 382-7292 
(912) 382-7992 FAX

TURF DIAGNOSTICS 
AND DESIGN, INC.
310-A North Winchester Street 
Olathe, KS 66062
Attn: Chuck Dixon 
(913) 780-6725 
(913) 780-6759 FAX

* Revised January 1998. Please 
contact the USGA Green Section 
(908-234-2300) for an updated list 
of accredited laboratories.

JULY/AUGUST1998 

19

ALL THINGS CONSIDERED
Never Stop Learning

But don’t forget the basics.

by KEITH A. HAPP

Knowledge instills confidence and allows us to make informed decisions 
about new products and technologies.

IT HAS BEEN said that knowledge 

is power. For example, knowledge 
instills confidence to make deci­
sions and to try new techniques. 

Knowledge also allows us to make in­
formed decisions about new products. 
Some new techniques produce the 
desired results while simultaneously 
enhancing the efficiency and effective­
ness of the efforts put forth to complete 
a task. On the other hand, many new 
techniques and ideas do not accom­
plish the intended goal. Implementing 
change, just for the sake of change, is 
not always the right course of action.

Countless journals and trade maga­
zines bombard us with articles and 
features from all over the country 
touting new and better ways of accom­
plishing daily tasks. Researchers 
develop and evaluate theories, hoping 
to evolve these theories into tangible 
practices or procedures for everyday 
use. Everything starts with a question: 
“What if I did . . . ?” or “Could we 
try...?” or “How about if we incorpo­
rated . . . ?” The more questions that 
are asked, the more we learn. Unfor­
tunately, the end user confronts the 
problem of wading through the new 
ideas to determine what will be most 
beneficial.

When considering any new idea, 
technique, or product, don’t forget the 
basics. Without a sound basic founda­

20  USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

tion, how can any fine-tuning strategy 
be helpful? For example, when devel­
oping a fertilization program, try to 
determine the key limiting factor that 
hinders the utilization of the nutrients 
supplied. First, evaluate the environ­
ment. If the site is too shady, do what 
is necessary to enhance the light pene­
tration. If the soil remains too wet, take 
a close look at the irrigation system. Is 
the water being applied uniformly? If 
the irrigation system is performing as 
desired, consider intensifying the aerifi­
cation program so that the soil can be 
modified to better meet the needs of the 
turf. If modification is in order, attempt 
to achieve (via aeration or internal 
drainage) a balance of water, soil, and 
air to allow for sustained growth. Also, 
evaluate the natural air movement 
patterns and modify them if necessary. 
As airflow is enhanced, many of the 
previously described problems may 
disappear. As taught in many turfgrass 
management programs, two of the 
most important building blocks for 
strong turf come from the air: carbon 
and oxygen. Examining the conditions 
under which the turf is grown may seem 
like an oversimplification, but how 
many times are these basic components 
overlooked when problems arise? 
After all, sufficient quantities of air, 
water, and light are essential to all living 
organisms, and these foundational

elements become increasingly impor­
tant when outside stresses are imposed.
Another basic turfgrass management 
concept is mowing. It has been said 
that a bad mower can make even the 
best grass look and perform poorly. 
While planning the year’s activities, 
examine the tools available to main­
tain the course. Are they adequate 
enough to meet the rigors of daily use 
and more than just functional? The 
mowers, after all, are critical compo­
nents of the operation’s infrastructure, 
and without a strong infrastructure 
many other problems can develop.

Finally, don’t forget the people who 
make up the core of the team that 
prepares the surfaces for play. There are 
countless activities, conferences, and 
educational opportunities available for 
all of the key people who help make the 
operation a success. Assistant super­
intendents, golf course mechanics, 
irrigation specialists, and spray tech­
nicians can all gain valuable infor­
mation when presented with the 
opportunity to attend state, regional, 
and national events. After they attend 
the meetings, take time to ask about 
their experiences. Simply asking if it 
was worthwhile, or if they would like 
to go again, may begin a dialogue that 
keeps the lines of communication open 
for some time to come. Concerns, 
needs, and problems may then be dis­
cussed more freely, and this can help 
the operation to run more smoothly.

Turf managers willingly share their 
experiences, good and bad, so that 
others may learn. This in itself makes 
the profession special. However, many 
times new concepts or processes are 
employed simply to keep up with the 
crowd. The full benefit of any advanced 
technology cannot be totally realized 
unless a strong foundation is in place. 
Keep the horse in front of the cart. You 
never stop learning; try new ideas, but 
don’t forget the basics.

KEITH A. HAPP is an agronomist in the 
Mid-Atlantic Region, visiting courses in 
the states of Delaware, Maryland, Penn­
sylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia. Keith 
joined the Green Section staff in 1993.

USGA PRESIDENT
E Morgan Taylor, Jr.

GREEN SECTION 
COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN
C. McD. England III
P.O. Box 58
Huntington, WV 25706

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
David B. Fay

EDITOR
James T. Snow

ASSOCIATE EDITOR
Kimberly S. Erusha, Ph.D.

DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS
Marty Parkes

©1998 by United States Golf Association®

Subscriptions $15 a year, Canada/Mexico 
$18 a year, and international $30 a year 
(air mail).

Subscriptions, articles, photographs, and corre­
spondence relevant to published material should 
be addressed to: United States Golf Association 
Green Section, Golf House, P.O. Box 708, Far 
Hills, NJ 07931.

Permission to reproduce articles or material in 
the USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD is 
granted to newspapers, periodicals, and educa­
tional institutions (unless specifically noted 
otherwise). Credit must be given to the author, 
the article’s title, USGA GREEN SECTION 
RECORD, and the issue’s date. Copyright 
protection must be 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.

GREEN SECTION RECORD (ISSN 0041-5502) 
is published six times a year in January, March, 
May, July, September, and November by the 
UNITED STATES GOLF ASSOCIATION®, Golf 
House, Far Hills, NJ 07931. Postmaster: Address 
service requested — USGA Green Section 
Record, P.O. Box 708, Golf House, Far Hills, NJ 
07931-0708.

Periodicals postage paid at Far Hills, NJ, and 
other locations. Office of Publication, Golf 
House, Far Hills, NJ 07931.

Visit the USGA’s Internet site on the 
World Wide Web. The address is: 
http://www.usga.org

Turfgrass Information File (TGIF): 
http://www.lib.msu.edu/tgif 
(517) 353-7209

GREEN SECTION NATIONAL OFFICES:
United States Golf Association, Golf House
P.O. Box 708, Far Hills, NJ 07931 • (908) 234-2300 • Fax (908) 781-1736
James T. Snow, National Director 
Kimberly S. Erusha, Ph.D., Director of Education
J^eSCcirch *
P.O. Box 2227, Stillwater, OK 74076 • (405) 743-3900 • Fax (405) 743-3910
Michael P. Kenna, Ph.D., Director

Construction Education Programs:
720 Wooded Crest, Waco, TX 76712 • (254) 776-0765 • Fax (254) 776-0227 
James F. Moore, Director

REGIONAL OFFICES:
Northeast Region:
P.O. Box 4717, Easton, PA 18043 • (610) 515-1660 • Fax (610) 515-1663
David A. Oatis, Director • Matthew C. Nelson, Agronomist
1500 N. Main Street, Palmer, MA 01069 • (413) 283-2237 • Fax (413) 283-7741
James E. Skorulski, Agronomist

Mid-Atlantic Region:
P.O. Box 2105, West Chester, PA 19380-0086 • (610) 696-4747 • Fax (610) 696-4810 
Stanley J. Zontek, Director • Keith A. Happ, Agronomist • Darin S. Bevard, Agronomist

Southeast Region:
P.O. Box 95, Griffin, GA 30224-0095 • (770) 229-8125 • Fax (770) 229-5974 
Patrick M. O’Brien, Director
4770 Sandpiper Lane, Birmingham, AL 35244 • (205) 444-5079 • Fax (205) 444-9561 
Christopher E. Hartwiger, Agronomist

Florida Region:
P.O. Box 1087, Hobe Sound, FL 33475-1087 • (561) 546-2620 • Fax (561) 546-4653 
John H. Foy, Director

Mid-Continent Region:
P.O. Box 1130, Mahomet, IL 61853 • (217) 586-2490 • Fax (217) 586-2169 
Paul H. Vermeulen, Director
4232 Arbor Lane, Carrollton, TX 75010 • (972) 492-3663 • Fax (972) 492-1350 
Brian M. Maloy, Agronomist

North-Central Region:
P.O. Box 15249, Covington, KY 41015-0249 • (606) 356-3272 • Fax (606) 356-1847 
Robert A. Brame, Director
P.O. Box 5069, Elm Grove, WI 53122 • (414) 797-8743 • Fax (414) 797-8838
Robert C. Vavrek, Jr., Agronomist

Northwest Region:
5610 Old Stump Drive N.W, Gig Harbor, WA 98332
(253) 858-2266 • Fax (253) 857-6698
Larry W. Gilhuly, Director

Southwest Region:
505 North Tustin Avenue, Suite 121, Santa Ana, CA 92705
(714) 542-5766 • Fax (714) 542-5777
Patrick J. Gross, Director • Michael T. Huck, Agronomist

z-TOW ■ r ?/1;) r i •: ks-----------

DON’T COMPROMISE

Question: The Rules of Golf define the “teeing ground” as a rectangular area between designated 
markers and two club lengths in depth. How far apart should the markers be? (Ohio)

Answer: While available footage and play volume may force compromises, five paces 
between tee markers offers good course setup and reasonable wear distribution. 
Markers should be moved daily.

ATTENTION

Question: I have started a new job at an older golf course and am interested in determining the 
physical properties and drainage capabilities of the soils in the greens. What is the best approach 
to address these questions? (Connecticut)

Answer: That information can be obtained from a laboratory analysis of an undis­
turbed soil column. Collect an undisturbed sample using a 2" diameter PVC pipe. 
Pound the pipe down to a 12" depth to collect the sample (see: Green Section Record, 
September/October 1995). Seal both ends of the pipe with newspaper and duct tape 
in preparation for shipping to an accredited physical soil-testing laboratory. The 
laboratory analysis will provide a written record of the evaluation with information 
that will be useful for future management decisions. Contact a Green Section office in 
your region to obtain a list of accredited laboratories.

TO DETAILS

Question: Our golf course becomes a sea of styrofoam cups during the peak playing season. My 
manager feels that the maintenance staff is not being conscientious enough in regards to trash 
detail. How do other superintendents reduce the amount of trash blowing around their courses? 
(Texas)

Answer: Many courses have a detail person or someone whose job it is to pay attention 
■ to all the little things, such as trash. In addition, their job description would include 
filling the water jugs, emptying trash receptacles, filling the ball washers, moving ropes 
and stakes to guide traffic, and all the other detail-oriented chores. If the maintenance 
staff is too small to have a detail person, you might consider an interesting solution 
developed by a club in Texas. They cut /2-inch rings of 21/2-inch PVC pipe and inserted 
them into the golf cart cup-holders. The tapered styrofoam cups fit snugly into the rings, 
thus reducing the overall number of styrofoam cups blowing across the course.

W248824C0K000LBR0 SAMPL 
ffETER COOKINGHAM
MSU LIBRARIES
EAST LANSING MI 48824