THE BULLETIN

of the

UNITED STATES GOLF ASSOCIATION GREEN SECTION

Vol. 6 

Washington, D. C., December, 1926 

No. 12

Con ten ts

Page
Proposed Union of the Green Section and the United States Golf Association 250

Annual Meeting of the United States Golf Association......................................  251

The St. Louis District Green Section. By W. L. Pfeifer....................................  252

Choosing a Green Committee Chairman. By Sherill Sherman.....................  254

Birds of the Golf Course. The Kingbird. By W. L. McAtee........................... 258

The Most Prevalent Defect in American Golf Courses. By Maynard M.

Metcalf .................................................     259
Variation from Standard  Practice.......................................................................  259

Observations on Brown-Patch Control in 1926. By John Monteith, Jr............ 261

Questions and Answers............................................................................................ 266

OFFICERS

Russell A. Oakley, Chairman, Washington, 

Walter S. Harban, Vice Chairman, Washing­

H. L. Westover, Acting Chairman, Washing­

D. C.

ton, D. C.

ton, D. C.

H. Kendall Read, Secretary, Philadelphia, Pa.

Charles H. Sabin, Treasurer, New York, N. Y.
James Francis Burke, General Counsel, Pitts­

burgh, Pa.

G. T. Cunningham, Executive Secretary, Wash­

ington, D. C.

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

Wynant D. Vanderpool, Chairman, Newark, 

N. J.

H. Y. Barrow, New York, N. Y.

Walter S. Harban, Washington, D. C. 
Russell A. Oakley, Washington, D. C. 
H. Kendall Read, Philadelphia, Pa.

II. Y. Barrow, New York, N. Y. 
William F. Brooks, Minneapolis, Minn. 
Walter S. Harban, Washington. D. C. 
Frederic C. Hood, Watertown, Mass.

Norman Macbeth, Los Angeles, Calif.
Russell A. Oakley, Washington, D. C. 
H. Kendall Read, Philadelphia, Pa. 
Wynant D. Vanderpool, Newark, N. J.

DIRECTORS

The Bulletin is published monthly by the United States Golf Association Green Section, P. O. 

Box 313, Washington, D. C., at Room 7207, Building F, 7th and B Streets N. W.

Address all MAIL to P. O. Box 313, Pennsylvania Avenue Station, Washington, D. C.
Send TELEGRAMS to Room 7207, Building F, 7th and B N. W., Washington, D. C.
Subscription Price: To golf clubs that are members of the United States Golf Association 

Green Section, S4.00 per year (included in membership fee).

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

250

December, 1923

ADVISORY MEMBERS

W. A. Alexander, Chicago, Ill. 
Eberhard Anheuser, St. Louis, Mo.
A. C. U. Berry, Portland, Oreg.
N. S. Campbell, Providence, R. I.
Wm. C. Fownes, Jr., Pittsburgh, Pa.
F. H. Hillman, Washington, D. C.
Thos. P. Hinman, Atlanta, Ga.
A. J. Hood, Detroit, Mich.
K. F. Kellerman, Washington, D. C.

E. J. Marshall, Toledo, Ohio. 
Sherrill Sherman, Utica, N. Y. 
Frederick Snare, Havana, Cuba. 
James D. Standish, Jr., Detroit, Mich. 
James L. Taylor, Brooklyn, N. Y. 
W. R. Walton, Washington, D. C. 
Alan D. Wilson, Philadelphia, Pa. 
M. H. Wilson, Jr., Cleveland, Ohio. 
Frank L. Woodward, Denver, Colo.

I-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Golf Association is preparing to take an aggressive 
stand in an attempt to secure the repeal of the tax on initiation tees and 
club dues by the present session of Congress. Arrangements are being 
made for the appearance before the Ways and Means Committee of the 
House and the Finance Committee of the Senate, of representatives of the. 
Association in an attempt to present fairly the position and attitude of the 
clubs on this important question.

United States Golf Association
To the Member Clubs of the United States Golf Association:

Your Executive Committee, at a meeting held November 18, 1926, decided by 
unanimous vote, to recommend for your approval certain changes in the Consti­
tution bearing upon the classes of membership in the Association, and the Annual 
Dues to be charged therefor. It further recommends that a change be made 
in the relationship novz existing between the United States Golf Association and 
the Green Section of the United States Golf Association, and while this latter 
step requires no constitutional amendment to make it effective, the Executive 
Committee submits it, likewise, for your consideration.

The Green Section of the United States Golf Association was chartered as 
an incorporated body in 1921, for the purpose of carrying on experimental and 
research work in connection with the growing of turf grasses and the mainte­
nance of golf courses. The undertaking was fathered by the United States Golf 
Association and has been considered by the golfing public as an integral part of 
the Association, but in fact there is no formal connection between the Green 
Section and the U. S. G. A., and any supervision or control which the Association 
has exerted upon the Green Section has been by consent and not by authority. 
The work of the Green Section has grown very rapidly since its inception in 
1921, and with this growth its needs for money have increased proportionately. 
Its revenue from dues is not sufficient to balance its budget, and it has there­
fore been forced to supplement this income by seeking contributions from its 
member clubs and also by requesting advances from the U. S. G. A. Your 
Executive Committee can see no good reason for continuing the separate cor­
porate existence of the Green Section of the United States Golf Association, and, 
on the other hand, it can see many reasons why it should directly supervise the 
work of the Green Section and control its finances. To bring this about your 
Committee recommends that the Green Section relinquish its charter and func­
tion in the future as a Sub-Committee of the U. S. G. A., subject to the control 
of the Executive Committee in common with all other sub-committees. This pro­
gram has been submitted to the men who have been in active charge of the 
Green Section work, as its executive officers, and has their hearty and unqualified 
approval.

To carry out the plan it becomes necessary to determine what dues shall be 
charged for membership in the Association, this membership to carry with it 
the service of the Green Section. The present schedule of dues in the U. S. G. A. 
and the Green Section of the U. S. G. A. is somewhat complicated and is as follows: 
Active Clubs of the U. S. G. A. pay annual dues of $30.09 and Allied Club annual 
dues of $10.00 Clubs which are members of the U. S. G. A. can become members 
of the U. S. G. A. Green Section u~on the payment of $15.00 annual dues, but clubs 
which are not members of the U. S. G. A. must pay annual dues of $20.00 to be­
come members of the Green Section. A club may thus become a member of either 
or both organizations.

December, 1926

251

Your Committee believe? that the best solution of the whole problem is to 
abolish the two classes of membership now existing in the Association, i.e., Active 
and Allied, and have but one class of membership for all, this membership to 
include the Green Section service. Your Committee is also desirous of seeing the 
cost of this membership fixed at as low an amount as possible. After much dis­
cussion it has therefore decided to recommend that the Annual Dues for member­
ship in the United States Golf Association, including Green Section service, be 
fixed at $30.00. Upon this basis it will be necessary to substantially increase the 
membership of the Association if the Green Section work is to be carried to its 
full usefulness. Your Committee believes that this increase of membership can 
be obtained, for it is felt that even the smallest clubs in the country can justify an 
outlay of $30.00 per year, bearing in mind the material advantages to be obtained 
from the Green Section service and, likewise, the fact that individual golfers the 
country over are glad to give their loyal support to an organization which is 
guiding the policies and shaping the destiny of the cleanest amateur sport in 
existence.

William C. Fownes, Jn., President, 

United States Golf Association.

United States Golf Association
Notice of Annual Meeting

December 3, 1926. 

To the Secretary,
Dear Sir:

The Annual Meeting of the United States Golf Association will be held on 
Saturday, January 8, 1927, at the Pittsburgh Athletic Association, No. 4200 
Fifth Avenue, Pittsburgh, at 4.00 P. M.

Each Active Club has the right to be represented by one voting delegate, duly 

authorized, and his appointment must be certified by his Club Secretary.

Allied Clubs are not entitled to a vote, but their members are welcome both 
at the meeting and luncheon, and may take part in the discussion of any matter 
properly brought up for consideration.

The following amendments to the Constitution of the United States Golf As­
sociation have been proposed and are hereby submitted by the Executive Com­
mittee for consideration and action at the Annual Meeting of the Association 
on January 8, 1927:

FIRST: Strike out all provisions of Article III and insert in lieu thereof the 

following:

ARTICLE III
MEMBERSHIP

Section 1. This Association shall be composed of active members only.
Section 2. Any regularly organized club in the United States shall be eligible 

to membership.

Section 3. Election of Members. Application for membership shall be made 
in writing to the Secretary of the Association, accompanied by a copy of the 
Club’s Constitution and By-Laws, a list of the officers and members, a diagram 
of its golf course, and such other information as the Executive Committee of the 
Association may prescribe. Payment of the yearly dues then current shall be 
made at the time the application is sent in. Any eligible Club may be elected 
to membership by a majority vote at any meeting of the Association, or by a 
two-thirds vote of all members of the Executive Committee.

SECOND: Strike out Sections 4, 5 and 6 of Article IV and insert in lieu 

thereof the following:

Section 4. Voting Privileges. At all meetings of the Association each mem­
ber Club shall be entitled to be represented by one voting delegate, whose ap­
pointment shall be certified in advance by his Club to the Secretary of the As­
sociation.

Section 5. Quorum. One hundred fifty member Clubs (represented by dele­

gates in person or by proxies) shall constitute a quorum at any meeting.

Section 6. Proxies. Proxies duly certified by the Secretaries of member Clubs, 
may be voted by voting delegates only at all meetings of the Association. No 
voting delegate shall vote more than five proxies.

252 

December, 1926

THIRD: Strike out Article VII and insert in lieu thereof the following:
ARTICLE VII
DUES

The yearly dues for each member Club shall be thirty dollars, payable on 
the first day of January in each year. Clubs which are delinquent in the payment 
of dues shall be denied representation at any meeting of the Association and 
their members shall be debarred from entering the championships or other events 
of the Association.

On Saturday afternoon, January 8, 1927, at 1.30 P. M., luncheon will be 
served at the Pittsburgh Athletic Association, to which are invited all delegates 
of Active Clubs, all members of the Allied Clubs who may care to attend, and 
golfers generally. Luncheon tickets may be secured from this office or at the 
Pittsburgh Athletic Association.

GREEN SECTION—Officials of the Green Section have arranged to hold 
meetings at the Pittsburgh Athletic Association, No. 4200 Fifth Avenue, Pitts­
burgh, Pa., on Friday, January 7, 1927, at 10.00 A. M. and at 2.00 P. M.; also 
a meeting on Saturday morning, January 8, 1927, at 10.00 A. M., at the Pitts­
burgh Athletic Association. A number of interesting papers will be read, supple­
mented by a report of what the Green Section has accomplished during the 
past year.

In order to facilitate the calling of the roll of Active Club delegates, and to 
assist the officials in ascertaining in advance that a quorum will be present, it is 
earnestly requested that immediate attention be given to the enclosed proxy. 
If it is impossible for your Club to be represented by a member, kindly fill out 
the proxy in blank and mail promptly to this office.

Your prompt cooperation will be greatly appreciated.

Very truly yours,

H. H. RAMSAY, Secretary.

The St. Louis District Green Section
By W. L. Pfeffer, President

The St. Louis District Green Section was founded in 1920 in 
recognition of the fact that the St. Louis Greens maintenance methods 
could be greatly improved through the cooperation of and interchange 
of ideas among the Green Committees of St. Louis. It was recognized 
that only by well thought out plans the greens in the St. Louis District 
could be brought to a standard comparable to the Eastern and 
Northern golf courses for the reason that the St. Louis climate is 
almost an insurmountable obstacle to maintaining greens by amateur 
methods.

Prior to the inception of the St. Louis District Green Section the 
hope of carrying greens through the St. Louis summers had been 
practically abandoned with the exception of a few particularly favor­
ably situated greens and the money spent annually in rebuilding, to 
say nothing of the resultant dissatisfaction of members, was distinctly 
discouraging to both the Green Committees and the memberships.

Mistakes made by old Green Committees would be repeated in one 
or two years by new committees and the expense continued to mount 
year by year with practically no results, and as Eastern and Northern 
Clubs were having splendid success with new and finer grasses the 
dissatisfaction in St. Louis reached a point where it was up to the 
Green Committees to produce results.

One or two out-of-town experts on greens maintenance were given 
charge of several golf courses about that time but it was found their 
methods, used successfully on Eastern and Northern courses, were of 
no avail in St. Louis and that the only salvation for St. Louis was to 

December, 1926

253

build up a local organization thoroughly informed on local conditions 
and then with the support of such scientific assistance as was available 
formulate a definite program exclusively for the St. Louis District.

Upon the organization of the St. Louis District Green Section 
meetings were held monthly alternating at the different clubs in 
alphabetical order and the program was to play golf in the afternoon, 
have dinner at the club and immediately after the dinner hold the 
business meeting. The object of the meeting was to discuss ways 
and means of maintenance for golf courses and the membership was 
clearly informed that this was the one and only object of the St. Louis 
District Green Section with the consequence that only those who were 
interested in maintenance work continued to attend these meetings. 
The attendance at times reached as high as 65 and every plan in oper­
ation or contemplated by any club was discussed and either approved 
or disapproved at these meetings, with the consequence that a great 
many distinctly hopeless propositions were abandoned.

The income of a golf club depends primarily upon the condition 
of their greens and fairways as this condition regulates the amount of 
guest fees, the membership waiting list and of necessity the house 
and cafe revenue as with an unfilled membership and a scarcity of 
guests, due to poor greens, the house committee will suffer just as 
much as the Green Committee; consequently we felt that by main­
taining satisfactory greens we would also produce a corresponding 
increased revenue.

The St. Louis District Green Section has been distinctly successful 
and we believe that primarily it is because we have stuck to one sub­
ject, namely greens maintenance and our Green Committee chairmen 
are in a position to intelligently discuss any greens problem with 
scientific specialists, when such specialists are required.

Furthermore, the St. Louis District endeavored at each meeting 
to have a nationally known pathologist, entomologist, drainage expert 
or a specialist of some character address the meetings, at which time 
he is questioned minutely in regard to the local problems applicable 
to his subject. We have also had numerous visits from Dr. Piper, 
during his life time, and from Mr. Monteith, both of the United States 
Golf Association Green Section, and speakers from Missouri Botanical 
Gardens and other institutions doing laboratory work that would be 
of assistance to us in greens maintenance. This assistance is invalu­
able for the reason that there are times when a recognized authority 
is necessary to definitely settle questions on which there has been a 
divergence of opinion. While the greenkeepers and chairmen of Green 
Committees in St. Louis study green problems minutely they do not, 
of course, have the scientific knowledge that is available to the United 
States Green Section and several commercial organizations having 
research departments exclusively dedicated to this work but the 
greenkeepers and chairmen of Green Committees have, by attending 
the St. Louis District Green Section meetings, attained sufficient in­
formation to intelligently question and apply any scientific develop­
ment proposed from any source engaged in research work.

The writer does not maintain that St. Louis greens are perfect 
today but it is a fact that the best greens in St. Louis are at clubs 
whose green committees have regularly attended the St. Louis District 
Green Section meetings and profited by the information received 

254

December, 1926

there. It is a further fact that the greens of the clubs in St. Louis 
whose Green Committee did not attend these meetings have rapidly 
depreciated in the last few years. The Green Section has been of 
particular good to the clubs whose financial standing is small as they 
have received the benefit of practices in vogue at clubs able to hire 
competent greenkeepers whose advice is always available to the 
smaller clubs through the discussion and cooperation at the St. Louis 
District Green Section meetings.

As a means of creating interest and circulating information per­
taining to greens maintenance methods among the numerous mem­
berships, we have added to our program at each meeting a tournament 
consisting of one professional and one good amateur from each club 
with the stipulation that anyone playing in these tournaments must 
stay for the meeting. This is conducive to a realization by the club 
members, of the problems confronting the Green Committees and the 
work they are doing and the further realization that greens main­
tenance is a scientific problem and not accomplished by any one 
miraculous or lucky stroke, with the consequence that better support 
for the Green Committees is attained.

With our heavy clay soils, torrid summers and savage attacks of 
brown-patch an association of this kind, backed up by the splendid 
support given by the United States Golf Association Green Section 
and others engaged in this work, is beginning to realize the ideal of 
good greens, but what a hopeless situation it would be without this 
foundation.

Choosing a Green Committee Chairman
By Sherrill Sherman, Yahnundasis Golf Club, Utica, N. Y.

It is a matter little considered, yet nevertheless strange, that golf 
clubs, composed mainly of successful business and professional men, 
use so little method in selecting members of the different committees 
of the club. Certainly the board of management of a club, selecting 
men for the different committee chairmanships, should know what the 
work for the committee is and what qualifications the chosen man 
should have for the work of that particular committee. It should be 
self evident that the different committees of the club require for their 
successful work men of ability along different lines, for where one 
man would be extremely successful as a Green Committee Chairman, 
he might fail badly as a leader of the Entertainment Committee.

With a feeling that in this age of so-called efficiency, a chart or 
short concise list of such qualifications would be of help in the selec­
tion by a board of governors, I have presumed to write this short arti­
cle for The Bulletin. Having spent a number of years in green com­
mittee work I feel that I may safely express my opinion as to the 
qualifications which would normally insure a club successfully choos­
ing a man for the important post of Chairman of the Green Com­
mittee, with its great responsibilities for the successful growth and 
reputation of the club, for undoubtedly golf and the condition of the 
course are the main foundation stones upon which the success of a 
club rests.

It is possibly trite and seemingly unnecessary to list such quali­
fications but often the repetition of the plainest facts, even if not in 

December, 1926

255

a new form, is beneficial. I believe that if these qualifications are 
listed separately, with maybe a division in major and minor groups, 
with a few words of explanation, the candidate can be checked against 
them readily and quickly, with the result that a good man could be 
chosen promptly. It is rather difficult to say what one qualification 
is the most desirable, but there can be no doubt that an intense interest 
in the work can overcome the lack of certain qualities, for interest 
generally enables one to overcome difficulties that without interest 
would appear too great to solve.

While it is hard to arbitrarily and absolutely accurately divide 
these qualifications I believe that the average reader would agree in 
general with the following division:

MAJOR

Spare time.
Good player.
Willingness to use successful methods.
Freedom from prejudice.
Knowledge of proper greenkeeping standards.
Ability to visualize the needs of all classes of players. 
An intense interest in the work.

MINOR

Good organizer.
Artistic viewpoint.
Acquaintance with good courses.
Firmness to abide by a plan.
Pleasant manner.
Popularity.
Practicability.
Clear expression of opinion and explanation of ideas. 
Use of knowledge of predecessor.

Major

Spare Time.—Unless one has sufficient spare time and the will to 
use it to properly oversee the work, no matter how great his other 
qualifications may be, he will find it an extremely difficult matter to 
keep a golf course in first-class condition, for constant supervision is 
vital to correct the ever-occurring troubles. Due consideration must 
be given to the fact that the men commonly employed are those taken 
from the class of ordinary unskilled labor, for whom it is necessary 
to do the planning and thinking to obtain satisfactory results. The 
varying conditions under which greenkeeping must be done require 
constant thought to obtain the best results.

Good Player.—At least an average player, but preferably a good 
player, for the better player has passed through the different view­
points as his game improved and is more likely to understand the 
desires and needs of players of all different abilities.

Willingness to Use Successful Methods.—The use of successful 
methods, proved either locally or by tested trials in other clubs or by 
the Green Section, means better results at lessened cost. It hardly 
seems necessary to go into detail on this heading, for it is now pos­
sible through The Bulletin to learn of the proven ways for good 
greenkeeping. There should be an ability to adopt the standard to 
local conditions which are a variable condition everywhere.

Freedom from Prejudice.—The advantage of such a condition of 

256

December, 1926

mind should be most evident, for all along the line it will reduce fric­
tion with both the members and the employes. It is well to be strong- 
minded, but one’s own ideas should not be allowed to prevent the 
adoption of new and better methods.

Knoivledge of Proper Greenkeeping Standards.—With a knowledge 
of what are the standards of good greenkeeping as regards the con­
dition of the tees, the fairgreen, the rough, the greens, the hazards 
and the grounds, one will naturally, with intelligent effort, keep the 
course in better condition than if there is no standard by which to 
judge of a definite goal to be reached. It is not the purpose of this 
article to list in detail what these conditions are or should be, for that 
information is available elsewhere. The chosen one can not ordinarily 
have a full acquaintance with all the necessary knowledge of green­
keeping but his learning through experience is much aided by the 
intelligent help that he can obtain through the accumulated knowl­
edge that has been assembled by the Green Section in Washington.

Ability to Visualize the Needs of all Classes of Players.—This is 
where the fact that a man is a good player proves of advantage as 
does his freedom from prejudice, for this qualification undoubtedly 
means much to the happiness and development of a club and its club 
spirit, for with pleasant relations among all the prospect of the growth 
and prosperity of the club would be greatest. All kinds of men with 
different golfing ability and ideas make up the average club, yet all 
pay the same dues and feel that their desires and needs should have 
equal attention, and so the ability to visualize these needs, and as far 
as possible to gratify their wishes is most important.

An Intense Interest in the Work.—It almost seems needless to men­
tion this, yet by this intense interest better work can be done, and 
results accomplished that would be lacking without it. The golf 
courses of the country that have had a man who combined interest 
and intelligence stand forth as leaders.

Minor

Good Organizer.—The proper selection of the Greenkeeper and a 
check-up of his organization, so that following a definite layout of 
the work lost motion is removed, and the same amount of work done 
in less time and better for less money. This surely means economy for 
the club, for fewer men on the payroll means more money in the club’s 
bank account at the end of the year.

An Artistic Viewpoint.—A golf course is more than just an ex­
panse of land for the playing of golf. All work should be done with 
the viewpoint of good golf and good landscaping. The courses we all 
like to play and visit are those which combine a good golf layout with 
the proper utilization of all the natural beauties of the grounds, for 
landscaping and golf can be combined successfully.

An Acquaintance with Good Courses.—It is by personal visits to 
good golf courses that one is able to see a real standard by which he 
can properly gauge the upkeep conditions of his own course and its 
layout and so can change whenever and wherever necessary.

Firmness to Abide by a Plan.—Naturally continual changes in 
method of upkeep or layout of the course cost much money, so after 
due consideration and the adoption of a plan, abide by it, in spite of 
criticism, mostly given without due thought, by the members.

December, 1926 

257

Pleasant Manner.—A pleasant manner in discussing complaints 
and suggestions by members, with a willingness to accept good ideas 
cheerfully with due appreciation, and the discernment to be able to 
show clearly the lack of practicability of those which can not be used. 
At times it is necessary to issue some rule or order that is based on 
sound grounds that to the crowd may appear unreasonable, and in 
such a situation agreeableness would go a long way to handle the 
matter without friction.

Popularity.—It is well to choose a popular man, if he has the 
ability, for he will be better able to carry members to agreement with 
his ideas and his popularity will mean that members will approach 
him in a mood of friendship when expressing to him their opinion 
whether of praise or criticism.

Practicability.—To have ideas, visions, and time to fulfill them is 
not sufficient alone to insure success, for one must have the practical 
ability to turn ideas into actual work, at a cost that is within the 
income of the club as outlined in the budget submitted to cover the 
work of the year by the Green Committee.

Ability to Clearly Express Opinion in Words and Action.—An abil­
ity to clearly express his opinion so that all hearing may definitely 
understand his idea. Also the ability to be able to show the reason 
for his orders to the employes, for knowing the reason for doing a 
certain thing in a particular way makes the work more intelligent, 
and consequently better results are obtained. If a workman is shown 
how worm casts deflect the course of a ball as it rolls on the putting 
green toward the hole, he will be more careful when rodding the 
green to eliminate the worm casts.

Use of Predecessor’s Knoivledge.—If the predecessor has per­
formed the work well with due consideration for economy and per­
manent results, and kept the course in first-class shape to the satis­
faction of the members, do not hesitate to use his knowledge and 
methods acquired through perhaps years of actual experience. Do 
not feel that it is necessary to follow the old saying that a new broom 
should sweep clean and change everything about, for probably there 
has been a good reason for the methods used. On the other hand, do 
not feel that you are bound to follow slavishly without any initiative, 
but improve as you are convinced that you can better perform the 
work in another way either more quickly, more economically or more 
easily.

It is hoped that these few simple suggestions may prove of some 
value to the golf clubs in the selection of the right man for the very 
important position of Chairman of the Green Committee with his 
great responsibility for the financial success and good name of his 
club, for clubs are judged as much by the condition of their courses 
as they are by the completeness of their club houses.

Back numbers of The Bulletin.—1925 volume, all numbers avail­
able; 1924 volume, all numbers available except January and March; 
1923 volume, June to November numbers only available ; 1922 volume 
is exhausted. Price of single numbers, to member clubs, 35c each. 
The entire 1921 volume is, however, available, reprinted and bound 
in paper covers, for $2.25.

258

December, 1926

Birds of the Golf Course
The Kingbird
By W. L. McAtee

Kingbird is a big name for a bird, especially for one that is only 
eight inches long, but the so-called bee martin deserves it not for 
lording it over the rank and file of birds of about its own size, but 
for courageously challenging and driving away all predatory birds, 
including the largest hawks, some of which exceed it a hundred times 
in bulk. Farmers not too much impressed with the kingbird’s fond­
ness for honeybees (of which it eats mainly drones) encourage the 
birds to remain on their premises for the good they do in protecting 
poultry from hawks. 
The kingbird’s sentry 
duty benefits all of its 
wild avian neighbors 
also and makes it a 
desirable species for 
any place where large 
numbers of birds are 
wanted.

Appearing black 
(although chiefly dark 
gray) above, and 
white below, the king­
bird is a very trim fel­
low. As ornaments, 
the tip of the tail is 
white, and a usually 
concealed patch on the 
crown varies from 
orange to vermillion. 
The bird breeds in all 
but the southwestern 
states, where the 
Arkansas kingbird, 
very similar in ap­
pearance and habits, 
takes its place.

THE KINGBIRD

One of the fly­
catcher family, birds 
which customarily 
take their prey in the 
air, launching forth from favorite perches and seizing their food 
with a distinct snap of the bill, the kingbird, furthermore, does not 
hesitate to come to earth for victims. Thus it obtains a greater 
variety of food, and on golf courses which it likes, if apple, plum, or 
thorn trees for its nests are available, it feeds upon many of the 
insects that the greenkeeper constantly must fight.

About nine-tenths of the kingbird’s food is composed of insects, 
and the remainder chiefly of wild fruits, of which those of black­
berry, cherry, elder, sassafras, and grape are most often eaten. The 
bird takes many of the dung beetles and their relatives which burrow 

December, 1926 

259

into greens, including such well known pests as white grubs, the 
green June beetle, and the Japanese beetle. Digging wasps and bees 
also are on its bill-of-fare. Such miners in turf as wireworms, clover­
root borers, and leather-jackets (larvae of crane-flies), and such 
grass eaters as leaf-hoppers, cutworms, and other caterpillars, and 
grasshoppers, also are devoured. Ants, nuisances everywhere but 
especially so on putting greens, are freely eaten by the kingbird, 
probably mostly on the wing when they are flying to new points of 
infestation.

The kingbird does well, as it also looks well, on the golf course, 

and should always be protected.

The Most Prevalent Defect in American Golf Courses
By Maynard M. Metcalf

I do not know European golf courses, but have studied 86 in 
North America and 13 in South and Central America. Almost 
nowhere have I seen at all adequate provision of practice ground and 
proper facilities for the giving of lessons.

Practice ground of sufficient size and proper character for driving, 
for short and long approaching by run up, pitch and run, or dead-stop 
shots, for shots out of sand traps and out of rough and for putting 
should be provided in connection with every course which is designed 
to train good golfers; and ground for lessons with open-front rain 
shelters for instruction should also be provided.

Members will not practice enough if they have to use the course 
itself for this purpose. They feel that they are in the way and are 
a nuisance and they know it is irritating to themselves in practice to 
be constantly interrupted by players. For the training of good golfers 
practice is at least equally important with play. It should be encour­
aged by providing abundant room with opportunity for trying out 
all kinds of shots.

It isn’t quite reasonable to deprive instructors and players of 
opportunity for lessons in rainy weather. High, open-front sheds can 
be built very cheaply and will enable the golf instructor to continue 
his work on mildly rainy days, a benefit to his own purse and a decided 
advantage to the players.

It seems strange that nearly all golf courses are lacking in prac­
tice ground, in ground for lessons, in teaching sheds, or usually in 
all three. Probably the provision of these facilities in our clubs 
would do more than anything else of similar cost to improve Ameri­
can golf.

Variation from Standard Practice

“In the past three years I have used approximately 1,000 yards 
of topdressing; each year the amount has diminished materially as 
the putting surface improved. During the growing season I use about 
a yard of topdressing at each application. I do not go by any set 
rule as to how often I topdress for I know my soil condition and top- 
dress when necessary. Some of my greens are topdressed nearh’ 
twice as often as others, occasionally going as long as seven weeks 
without showing the need of topdressing.”—C. M. Melville, Green­
keeper, Southmoor Country Club, Chicago, III.

260

December, 1926

The foregoing quotation illustrates the fact that golf course main­
tenance can not be completely successful by blindly following rule of 
thumb methods. While a cubic yard to each 5,000 square feet is an 
excellent average there are conditions which make variation from it 
advisable, the new green whose surface is not yet true probably 
requiring more than that rate while the old green with well established 
turf and a true putting surface will need less.

The careful greenkeeper realizes the need of varying his methods 
to suit changing conditions. Not only is this true as applied to top­
dressing, but also to the use of chemicals, fertilizers, frequency of 
mowing, and most often to watering. On the same course variations 
in drainage, soil fertility, contour, and so forth lead the observant 
greenkeeper to depart from what might be called his standard prac­
tice, but only after becoming convinced that special methods are 
required.—Editors.

Mr. Howard F. Whitney, a former President of the United States 
Golf Association, has been elected a member of the Rules of Golf Com­
mittee of the Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St. Andrews. Mr. Whit­
ney is the first American golfer to become a member of this com­
mittee.

Those interested in golf course architecture, if only slightly, will 
find The Links, by Robert Hunter (Charles Scribner’s Sons) a notable 
contribution to the literature on that subject as well as very easy 
reading.

The following quotations from Mr. Hunter’s book illustrate the 
idea emphasized throughout that golf architecture should have two 
aims, one utilitarian, the other artistic.

“In most of the best work of today ploughs and scrapers are used 
to fashion and contour the ground so that it may be made to serve the 
uses of the game. Proportion, symmetry, and uniformity are care­
fully worked out in the designs, and when the finished product appears 
it so blends itself into the surrounding landscape that few can tell 
where nature ends and art begins.”

“Some indifferent holes have many hazards; and some of the best 
have few. Nearly all great holes have a particular terrain which has 
made their greatness possible.”

“Now and then one finds a hole of real distinction which nature 
herself has modelled, and to add anything artificial would be a crime. 
That is, of course, rare, but he who can not see such natural features 
and take full advantage of them is unfitted for work in this field.”

“Placing The Hazards,” is the title of the chapter which will prob­
ably be of greatest interest and value to the layman, although the 
entire well illustrated volume might profitably be read by most Green 
Committeemen.

Soil for topdressing.—If compost is not available, loamy soil, well 
screened, can be used advantageously as a topdressing. It is gen­
erally advisable to mix some sand in the soil, in larger proportions 
if the soil on the course is of a clayey nature, and in lesser proportions 
if the soil is already sandy.

December, 1926

261

Observations on Brown-Patch Control in 1926
John Monteith, Jr.

In the December, 1925, number of The Bulletin an attempt was 
made to summarize the experiences of different clubs in controlling 
brown-patch during the preceding summer. It was felt that by sup­
plementing the reports of experiments at Arlington by some such 
impartial summary of results obtained on greens in various sections 
of the country, the problem could be more generally understood and 
the practicability or limitations of any control method could be better 
defined.

It is well recognized by the Green Section that the experimental 
work at Arlington is only preliminary; that control methods used 
there may prove entirely impractical on many courses, due to different 
soil and climate or to various local circumstances. In our experi­
mental work we can hope only to outline certain fundamental princi­
ples of control, the applicability of those principles to actual golf 
course maintainance must be determined by the various clubs under 
their own local conditions. On the Turf Garden at Arlington a large 
number of possibilities can be compared under identical conditions; 
the majority of them may be discarded as useless or impractical 
whereas the occasional promising method can be passed on to clubs 
for trial. We are fortunate in having throughout the country many 
men who are sufficiently interested in the work to try out these sug­
gestions on their own courses. We are fortunate furthermore in 
having many of the much rarer type of individual who in addition 
to making such tests are willing and generous enough to report 
results that other clubs with similar problems may share their in­
formation. Thanks to this latter group we are able to prepare this 
summary of the past season’s experiences in controlling brown-patch. 
Although the names of some of these contributors are not cited in 
this report, their information is equally valuable and as fully appre­
ciated as those directly quoted.

Control of the disease by means of different mercury compounds 
has been the chief method of interest throughout the season. The two 
chlorophenol mercury preparations (Uspulun and Semesan) have 
been thoroughly tested all through the brown-patch region. The treat­
ment with bichlorid as suggested in the October, 1925, and the July, 
1926, numbers of The Bulletin was tested in an experimental way 
in several localities, and on some courses was used extensively.

The results obtained with Semesan and Uspulun were in general 
similar to those of the preceding season. In some cases Semesan is 
preferred while in others it is thought that Uspulun gives better con­
trol. Such differences are usually negligible and when reports are 
summed up it is apparent that these two preparations of chlorophenol 
mercury give results so similar that they may be regarded as inter­
changeable. In the St. Louis district, where brown-patch is usually 
extremely destructive, both of these chemicals gave satisfactory 
results. Mr. W. L. Pfeffer, president of the St. Louis District Green 
Section, in summarizing recent experiences states that until the last 
two seasons, “there had been hardly a year that brown-patch did not 
totally destroy a lot of greens and damage all of them to such an extent 
that rebuilding of greens in the St. Louis District was a common 

262

December, 1926

occurrence. Prior to 1925, with a few exceptions, St. Louis never 
expected good putting greens after the middle of July, but since the 
experiments held at Algonquin in 1925 the Algonquin Golf Club and 
every other golf club in St. Louis that followed the practices estab­
lished at Algonquin have had splendid putting greens and this is due 
to absolutely no other feature than to the elimination of brown-patch 
by the use of Semesan or similar hydroximercurichlorophenol disin­
fectants.”

He emphasizes the value of some control treatment to carry the 
turf through the brown-patch season in a vigorous condition for the 
fall and winter months: “The treatments in 1925 not only carried 
our greens through the brown-patch period of July and August, 1925, 
but necessarily produced immeasurably stronger and better turf to 
go into the fall and winter with the result that the spring of 1926 
found us with greens beyond our fondest hopes or expectations. 
Instead of rebuilding and replanting each year, as we formerly did, 
with the resultant seedlings with which to combat our torrid summers, 
we found ourselves with strong, well developed turf that even with­
out any treatment whatsoever possessed so much more vitality than 
the young grass we formerly had that it would without doubt by its 
vigor alone go a long way towards surviving our brown-patch season, 
but with a resumption of the Semesan treatments based on the experi­
ments of 1925, our greens went through the summer in almost as 
good condition as through any other month of the year and we now 
have vigorous, luxuriant bent on all the greens that have gone through 
two summers with the resultant increase in roots and vitality and 
without doubt will improve in texture and quality with each succeed­
ing year.”

The method generally used in the St. Louis district consists of 
repeated applications as needed throughout the summer. During 
periods of greatest activity of the fungus, an application may be 
required within a few days of the previous treatment. Commenting 
on the expense of this method Mr. Peffer writes: “Treatments of 
chlorophenol mercury were at first thought prohibitive but our experi­
ence has been that the expense can be minimized by a close inspection 
and immediate application of Semesan to the affected parts only, 
which eliminates the expense of continual drenching of the entire 
greens and naturally eliminates most of the expense. The expense, 
however, in this district is infinitesimal in comparison with the old 
system of rebuilding and reseeding to such an extent that even the 
reseeding costs as much or more than chlorophenol mercury treat­
ments, to say nothing whatsoever of the appreciation in the quality 
of the greens under the mercury treatment and the peace of mind in 
knowing that you could produce a beautiful green and retain it.”

Semesan and Uspulun have been likewise effective in many other 
sections of the country. As was the case last year, however, there 
are occasional reports of failure to control the disease by these chemi­
cals. Many clubs have found that although brown-patch may usually 
be checked by this means there are times when the period of protec­
tion is too short to justify the expense of the treatments. There were 
also some reports of burning with both of these chemicals when used 
at the standard rate of 1 pound per 1,000 square feet, especially dur­
ing July and August.

Bichlorid of mercury as a means of controlling brown-patch has 

December, 1926

263

been watched with especial interest this year. As has been previously 
pointed out in The Bulletin, this chemical is equally effective in 
checking the disease at Arlington, but more likely to produce burns 
than are the chlorophenol mercury compounds. The great cost reduc­
tion in using this treatment led many clubs to try it on an extensive 
scale during the past season. Perhaps the most outstanding course 
where this chemical proved successful was Baltusrol. When the 
National Amateur Championship was played there in September, Mr. 
R. A. Jones, general manager, reported that he regarded bichlorid, 
which had been used against brown-patch throughout the season, as 
far superior to either of the chlorophenol mercury preparations. In 
the case of Baltusrol the treatments were made under the direct 
supervision of Mr. Jones and every care taken to avoid careless or 
uneven distribution, with the result that no serious burning occurred 
throughout the season. Bichlorid was put on with the regular appli­
cation of ammonium sulphate, using a proportioning machine. This 
treatment was coupled with his usual expert attention given to care 
of the turf; in which watering, mowing, fertilizing and such matters 
were not overlooked in keeping the grass in a healthy condition.

We have a similar report from Massachusetts by Mr. Ernest T. 
Clary of the Whitinsville Golf Club. Mr. Clary wrote that shortly 
after receiving the July issue of The Bulletin a bad attack of large 
brown-patch occurred on one of the greens: “We procured a supply 
of corrosive sublimate and applied it to this green as suggested, using 
about two pounds mixed with our regular topdressing which consists 
of compost and sulphate of ammonia. The results of this treatment 
were very satisfactory. The brown-patch was immediately checked 
and the poor spots began to come back.

“You may be interested to know, however, that about two weeks 
later brown-patch attacked the same green. We used the same treat­
ment again with the same satisfactory results. This last treatment 
was made about two weeks ago and at the present time we can see 
very little evidence on this green of brown-patch.

“It will probably interest you to know that in our first applica­
tion of the corrosive sublimate there were some traces of burning of 
the grass. This may have been due to the fact that in our haste to 
make the application we did not allow the mixture of topdressing to 
set over night. In fact we applied the topdressing just as soon as 
we could get it mixed up. Or it may have been due to improper 
watering-in of the topdressing. On the second application we did 
not experience any trouble with burning.

“There were slight signs of large brown-patch in several of our 
other greens so we proceeded to topdress all the greens with the 
corrosive sublimate in our mixture. No brown-patch has developed 
in any other green to date.”

Mr. Fred Holmes, chairman of the Green Committee of the Coun­
try Club of LaFayette, Ind., on August 20 wrote: “We have com­
pletely checked two mild attacks of large ‘brown-patch’ with corro­
sive sublimate mixed with top dressing, some ammonium phosphate 
being included. Some untreated tees of Washington strain developed 
a few bad spots, but the greens showed very little discoloration either 
from ‘brown patch’ or treatment, although a careful inspection a 
week after the last attack reveals a few patches where the grass has 
not fully regained its vigor. We used a light application—about 5 

264

December, 1926

ounces for 3,000 square feet, or 10 ounces to a green of 6,000 square 
feet. These applications seemed to give complete control under our 
conditions.

“In one case the greens did not need topdressing and in that case 
our greenkeeper only used about 1 pail of topdressing to 3,000 square 
feet, he treated six greens in two hours.”

On September 3 he reported further experiences: “I am sorry to 
have to report that, although we did this successfully twice, the third 
time we did not use quite as much care with the result that two of 
the greens show small burned patches. Because of this we have de­
cided that in treating greens in the future, we will use about 1 yard of 
compost and 20 ounces of mercuric chlorid for 6,000 square feet.”

In the Philadelphia section bichlorid was given a thorough trial 
during the summer. It was reported that this chemical controlled the 
disease as satisfactorily as the chlorophenol mercury preparations 
but difficulty was experienced due to scorching the grass, particularly 
in late summer. Mr. H. Kendall Read, who was especially interested 
in the trials made on courses in the vicinity of Philadelphia, concluded 
that much of the burning was due to carelessness in applying the 
chemical. He makes another point against bichlorid in the observa­
tion that brass hose-couplings and nozzles are gradually destroyed 
by its corrosive action. Mr. Jones, on the other hand, states that 
although this had happened at Baltusrol it was found that by 
thoroughly washing the machine and hose immediately after use 
there was comparatively little loss, the saving in cost of material 
much more than compensating for the injury to couplings or spray 
discs.

In the St. Louis district where the chlorophenol mercury com­
pounds gave such satisfactory results it was found that bichlorid, 
when applied in midsummer according to directions given in The 
Bulletin, caused some very severe burns. It was noted that in cases 
where the burning was but temporary the disease was checked. On 
the whole, however, this chemical was regarded as entirely unsatis­
factory in that section.

In reviewing these reports we note, with a considerable degree 
of satisfaction and encouragement, that the experiences of various 
clubs coincide in general with the experimental results obtained at 
Arlington. The chlorophenol mercury preparations when properly 
applied apparently check the disease under practically all conditions. 
As at Arlington, this control has nowhere proved permanent, the pro­
tection varying from a very few days to several weeks, depending upon 
climatic conditions. From practically every section where it was 
tested we have reports that bichlorid controlled the disease as effec­
tively as the chlorophenol mercury preparations, the period of pro­
tection likewise varying from a few days to several weeks. It is 
possible that soil conditions influence to a considerable degree the 
control by any of these chemicals. Excessive rain may reduce their 
effectiveness and at the same time favor the development of the 
disease; a situation which may account for many of the disappoint­
ments reported. “Failures” are not infrequent where a greenkeeper 
(who had perhaps been misguided by a too enthusiastic salesman) 
expected one or two treatments with Uspulun or Semesan to entirely 
solve all his brown-patch problems for the season. It is apparent that 
the turf must receive proper care, with due consideration of the 

December, 1926

265

many cultural conditions that affect the development of the disease, 
if any mercury application is to be fully effective.

The cause of “burning” is still a question. Various cases of injury 
from each of these mercury compounds have been reported. At cer­
tain times any of them may be used greatly in excess without any 
evidence of harm while at other times even the so-called “standard” 
treatments have produced permanent injury. Since it has always 
been recognized that bichlorid is more likely to scorch grass than is 
chlorophenol mercury, The Bulletin has recommended that it be 
tried first in an experimental way. The reports from various clubs 
have further emphasized that this chemical must be used with greater 
care and that under certain conditions it may be entirely impractical. 
Much of the burning no doubt has been due to carelessness, but this 
by no means explains all cases of injury. Our work at Arlington this 
summer, together with these outside reports, indicate that previous 
recommendations were excessive. The use of 1/5 pound of bichlorid, 
rather than 1/3 pound per 1,000 square feet as previously recom­
mended, is more nearly the equivalent of the standard 1 pound per 
1,000 square feet of Uspulun or Semesan. There are times, particu­
larly during July and August, when the grass is “soft” and more likely 
to be injured. In such periods, especially on courses or individual 
greens where the turf is more sensitive to chemical injury, the rate 
of applying any of the mercury compounds must be considerably re­
duced below the usual recommendation in order to avoid discoloration 
or more severe burns. It follows that such treatments must be more 
frequent.

From all the evidence we have been able to obtain, it is apparent 
that bichlorid has an important place in brown-patch control on many 
courses. In the early summer when injury to turf is rare it can un­
doubtedly be used to advantage on any course, for it serves to rid the 
green of earthworms as well as provide protection against early 
attacks of brown-patch. Again, toward the end of the brown-patch 
season, it is less likely to injure turf and may be used with compara­
tive safety against the disease and earthworms. During July and 
August, when the risk is much greater, it should not be generally used 
unless the greenkeeper is thoroughly familiar with it.

While the difficulty due to burns experienced on many courses may 
be considered as altogether discouraging to those who hoped to find 
in bichlorid a cheaper means for control of brown-patch, the close 
correlation of the above tests with results at Arlington serves to 
give greater confidence in the likelihood that calomel will fulfill these 
requirements. The criticism against bichlorid has not been due to its 
failure to control brown-patch as effectively as Semesan or Uspulun 
but to its tendency to injure turf. As pointed out in the October num­
ber of The Bulletin, calomel during the past season at Arlington 
has been fully as effective as any of the mercury preparations and 
is least toxic to grass even when applied in excess. If tests in various 
parts of the country next year substantiate these preliminary observa­
tions, as is to be expected from the results with bichlorid, it is probable 
that the most economical use of mercury against the disease will in the 
future consist of an early season application of bichlorid against the 
fungus and earthworms followed by treatments with calomel during 
the months when burning is most likely to occur. This, however, 
remains for clubs to determine during the next brown-patch season, 
for as yet calomel has not been tested on golf courses.

266

December, 1926

There is one item which should perhaps be included in this sum­
mary since it has been brought to our attention from various sources 
during the past season. It has been claimed that there is abundant 
evidence that bichlorid, unlike the organic mercury preparation, accu­
mulates in the soil and after being used a few times it causes dis­
coloration and permanent injury to turf; such as is the case with 
bordeaux or other copper treatments. It is true that many Cases of 
burning with bichlorid have been reported just as we have seen many 
cases of burning with Semesan or Uspulun. This “burning” is an 
immediate effect (either temporary or permanent) and is entirely 
distinct from the accumulative injury of copper compounds. That 
is, the damage is apparent soon after the application of the chemical, 
as is the case with ammonium sulphate, and the second or even the 
tenth is no more likely to burn than the first application. Much 
pseudo-scientific literature has been circulated emphasizing the differ­
ence between the inorganic bichlorid of mercuity and the organic mer­
cury compounds such as Uspulun and Semesan; pointing out the 
danger of an accumulation of bichlorid in the soil which it is claimed 
does not apply to the organic forms. Alarming as these arguments 
may sound to the greenkeeper or green committee not familiar with 
such complicated chemical distinctions, the fact remains that at 
Arlington after repeated and excessive applications of both forms we 
have as yet found no harmful accumulation of mercury from either. 
So far as we have been able to determine wherever both types of 
mercury combinations have been used against brown-patch any such 
unfavorable comparison between the organic and inorganic form is 
apparent only to those with direct financial interests in the sale of 
chlorophenol mercury.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

All questions sent to the Green Section will be answered in a letter 
to the writer as promptly as possible. The more interesting of these 
questions, with concise answers, will appear in this column each month. If 
your experience leads you to disagree with any answer given in this column, 
it is your privilege and duty to write to the Green Section.

While most of the answers are of general application, please bear in 
mind that each recommendation is intended specifically for the locality 
designated at the end of the question.

r 

"" ~ 

■ ■ - . - - — 

..  — — . • 

■' 

-

1. Shade grass.—Please advise us whether you consider bluegrass 
or bent preferable for partially shaded tees. Or is there some other 
grass you recommend in preference to either of these? Water is 
available for watering the tees. (Illinois.)

Answer.—There seems to be relatively little difference between 
bluegrass and bent as regards ability to grow in shade. Neither is a 
particularly good shade grass, but of the two we would be inclined to 
choose the bent. . A better shade grass than either is Poa trivialis, 
which is also called rough-stalked meadow grass, or bird grass. This 
is an excellent shade grass. It should be sown preferably with bent 
or redtop, as is the practice in sowing Kentucky bluegrass. It requires 

December, 1926

267

moist soil, and since you have water available you could give it suffi­
cient moisture.

2. Proliferations in turf.—We have Washington strain bent 
greens. They have a good color except for small light spots the size 
of a 25-cent piece. The light spots are bent and grow as fast and are 
as good turf as the green part of the grass. Can you tell us the cause 
of these spots? (Illinois.)

Answer.—It appears from the description of the light spots you 
report in your letter as appearing in the Washington strain of bent 
greens that this condition is the same that has been observed at 
Arlington over a period of several years. In the fall of the year, and 
sometimes in the spring, certain strains of true creeping bent and 
velvet-bent exhibit a mottled or spotted appearance due to small tufts 
of grass quite unlike the surrounding turf in color and somewhat 
unlike it in texture. The spots are rarely more than 2 inches in 
diameter. These spots are made up of young grass plants produced 
on the stems of the older plants. Botanically the tufts or rosettes 
are proliferations from the older turf. They are apparently not due 
to any disease. Applications of sulfate of ammonia and ammonium 
phosphate have not been beneficial in discouraging their formation. 
Light dressings of compost have had a tendency to cause the turf to 
return to a normal condition—that is, to discourage the growth of 
these somewhat unsightly tufts. The cause of their formation is still 
obscure. These spots are not objectionable from the standpoint of 
the game but they certainly are unsightly on fine bent turf.

3. Improving rough which is too easy to play from.—Our rough 
is too easy to play out of and we are trying to find the best method of 
making it difficult without making it more expensive to keep up and 
without increasing the likelihood of losing balls. (New York.)

Answer.—We know of cases where good results have been ob­
tained by removing the sod from the rough and then sowing sheep’s 
fescue at the rate of 40 to 60 pounds per acre. Sheep’s fescue is an 
excellent grass for the rough, since it grows in bunches of about the 
proper character and does not make a tall growth that requires fre­
quent cutting. Sheep’s fescue and Canada bluegrass make a good 
mixture, or either used alone is good. The purpose in skinning off 
the sod where the rough is made up of really heavy turf is to get 
a poorer soil, since it is difficult to get satisfactory rough on rich soil. 
Both sheep’s fescue and Canada bluegrass do well enough on poor 
soil to make rough that will penalize wild shots without causing many 
lost balls. When the rough is made up of a rank growth the treat­
ment suggested above will not only vastly improve the condition of 
the course but will furnish valuable material for compost.

4. Grasses for rocky or gravelly mounds.—We have several 
mounds on our course made up of piles of rocks. What grass will 
grow on them? (Massachusetts.)

Answer.—Sheep’s fescue is probably the best grass for this pur­
pose. Blue lyme-grass is a beautiful grass for growing in bunkers on 
sand ridges/and will probably grow on your rock heaps where the 
soil is sufficiently deep.

MR. NORTHERN GREEN COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN:

You have undoubtedly passed a very trying season coping with numerous golf 
course problems, striving to keep the course in first class condition, and dodging 
balls and destructive criticisms which were purposely sliced and hooked in your 
direction by some inconsiderate club members who blamed their rotten game on 
the condition of the course and sought revenge on you.

Naturally after the playing season has passed your interest in the course and 
matters pertaining to its maintenance has a tendency to flag, you breathe a sigh 
of relief and try to forget golf for a time. Perhaps you feel that you deserve a 
vacation, which of course you do, but since you are Chairman of the Green Com­
mittee there is no time for a vacation just yet.

After taking an inventory you will be surprised to know how much new 
equipment is needed and what extensive repairs are necessary to various machines. 
Do not wait until spring to attend to these repairs. If necessary to send machines 
to the maker for overhauling do so now and if the work can be done by your own 
mechanic order the new parts for him at once.

And before you go South for a little golf why not review the work of the past 
season and make definite detailed plans for next year? Are there approach areas 
where a ball bounces badly or a long two shot hole where you too seldom get a 
wooden club lie? If so, how about some topdressing on these spots as early in the 
spring as possible and how many yards of material will be required for the job? 
Surely the inclusion of these items in your new budget is desirable.

Do you really know the area of each of your greens? If not how can the 
application of chemicals, fertilizers, or compost be anything but guesswork? The 
difference in appearance of a 6,000 and 8x000-foot green is not great but the dif­
ference in material to be applied during a season is. Then too, if you are not sure 
about this detail your estimate of sand, fertilizer and compost required for up­
keep is only a hazy dream.

If tile should be laid to correct poor drainage anywhere on the course there 

will never be a better time to plan for it than now.

And why not clean up that bit of rough where the grass is so rank that a shot 
into it generally means a lost ball? The topsoil from that spot would be of value 
in the compost pile whereas now it is the cause of needless misfortune. Perhaps 
fescue would be better there than bluegrass anyhow.

All these things are still fresh in your mind. Jot them down for reference 

now and work them into your plan for 1927.

In case you must lay off several good men why not insure their return next 
spring by getting them jobs for the winter? Some club member is probably look­
ing for just such men. You might be of mutual help to each other as well as to 
your club by making it worth while for the men you want on your pay roll to stay 
there. It will certainly help your greenkeeper if the majority of his force are 
trained to golf course work. Instructing greenhorns is a waste of valuable time.

THE GREEN SECTION.