9<o
*a sS

Proceedings
Of the

33rd Northwest Turfgrass
Conference

Sept. 25 - 27, 1979
Admiralty Inn
Port Ludlow, Washington

-

m

*

&

m
WKfàm

g p p ^

lllrl nl

':

•• ,T

ì

Vr > vh. ...

lllìiwìnfflllBli1OT

Welcome to Port Ludlow and welcome to the 33rd
Northwest Turfgrass Association Annual Conference.
Earl Morgan, Program Chairman, along with Tom Wolff
and Roy Goss have worked closely to bring us a fine
turf program. Dick Schmidt provided us with an excellent golf tournament and day of golf. Our thanks
go out to all the others who have made this event a
success.
The help this past year of the Board of Directors
was exceptional and I want to thank each one for their
interest and dedication in serving NTA. It has been
a pleasure to serve as your President and I wish Earl
Morgan the same support and cooperation that all of
you have given to me.
Your Association grows as your support and activity in it grows. Please continue to voice your interest
and your ideas to your Board members to make next year
even better than the past. I urge you to support, in
your way, the additional turfgrass research program
which we are sure will come in the near future. Through
active research, the Association's purpose and its functions can be better met.
Thank you for the opportunity of serving as
President of NTA this past year and Good Luck, Earl,
in 1980.

NORTHWEST TURFGRASS ASSOCIATION
1979 Officers
Joe Pottenger

President

Earl Morgan

Vice President

John Monson

Treasurer

Roy L. Goss

Executive Secretary
Board of Directors

Craig Calvert

Puget Sound Seed Co.
1050 W. Nickerson St.
Seattle, WA 98119

Carl H. Kuhn

Carl Kuhn and Associates
P. 0. Box 493
Mercer Island, WA 98040

John Monson

Broadmoor Golf Club
2340 Broadmoor Dr., E.
Seattle, WA 98102

Earl Morgan

Similk Beach Golf Course
Rt. 2, Box 375
Anacortes, WA 98221

Jim Pitman

Tarn 0'Shanter Golf Course
1313 - 183rd NE
Bellevue, WA 98008

Joe Pottenger

5405 Larson Road
Yakima, WA 98902

Dick Schmidt

Port Ludlow Golf Club
P. 0. Box 75
Port Ludlow, WA 98365

Mark Snyder

Salishan Golf Links
Salishan Lodge
Gleneden Beach, OR 97388

Bob Wick

Capii ano Golf & Country Club
420 Southborough Drive
W. Vancouver, BC, CANADA

Tom Wolff

Mani to Golf & Country Club
Box 8025, Man ito Station
Spokane, WA 99203

TABLE OF C O N T E N T S
V Importance of Nematodes on Turfgrass in
the Pacific Northwest - F. D. McElroy
7
Green in Energy - J. R. Watson
15
N Educational Opportunities in Turf at
x OSU - Tom Cook
21
Nf
Turfgrass Degree Educational Opportunities in
the Pacific Northwest - Washington - J . C. Engibous . 27
v
Academic Opportunities in Turfgrass in Idaho Ron Ensign
30
A ? Contract Lawn Care - Rodney L. Bailey
33
v
H. A . S. Decline of Annual Bluegrass \ J. M. Vargas, Jr
41
N
Sand Top Dressing at Inglewood Country
Club - Charles Nolan
46
x
Water--A Diminishing Resource J. R. Watson
50
^ Effective Communication is a Multiple
Responsibility - Donald D. Hoos
59
'College Education and the Turfgrass
\ Manager - Stephen Miller
65
The Causes of Late Winter - Early Spring
Damage to Golf Turfgrass - J. R. Watson
70
^Athletic Field Development and Maintenance
Costs - William Lex
77
x
There Ain't No Free Lunch v J. M. Vargas, Jr
81
Turfgrass Performance Under Idaho
v Conditions - R. D. Ensign
89
x
Slow Release Nitrogen Studies R. D. Ensign
95
Two Pests of Grass in Washington \ R. Lee Campbell
99
The Influence of Ammonium Sulfate and Urea on
the Distribution of Available N in the Soil
x Surface - A. S. Baker and S. Kuo
104
^Turfgrass Disease Research Report Gary A Chastagner and Worth Vassey
Ill
Control of [/eAonica ^¿ti^onmi^ Speedwell
1978-1979 - Roy L. Goss, John Roberts and
\ S . P. Orton
116
The Influence of Nitrogen Sources and Variable
Rates of S and P on Bentgrass Color, Voci annua,
N
A Quality and FuAa/Uum Patch Disease - Roy L. Goss,
v John Roberts and S. P. Orton
119
^ Regional Turf Variety Evaluations - S. E. Brauen
and Roy L. Goss
125
-6-

IMPORTANCE OF NEMATODES ON TURFGRASS
IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST 1
F.D. McElroy 2
N. A. Cobb, an early nematologist, once remarked,
"... if all the matter in the universe except the nematodes were swept away, our world would still be dimly
recognizable ... we would find its mountains, hills,
valleys, rivers, lakes, and oceans represented by a
film of nematodes." The more we learn about nematode
distribution the more we become convinced of the truth
of that statement. Nematodes are found from the mountains to the seas, from the poles to the equator. Most
of these nematodes are not harmful, but there are enough
parasitic species around to keep man busy trying to
solve the problems they create.
I have divided my presentation into four major
areas. I will begin with a review of nematode biology
and parasitic habit, followed by the importance of nematodes on turf outside the Pacific Northwest. I will
then discuss diagnosis of turf problems and finally our
current knowledge of nematodes in the Pacific Northwest.

^ Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 2527, 1979.
Nematologist, Peninsu-lab, Kingston, WA.

NEMATODE BIOLOGY AND PARASITIC HABIT
Nematodes range in length from 0.3 to 2 mm and are
thin and colorless. They possess a spear or "stylet"
which they use to puncture plant cells to feed. There
are two general catagories of plant parasites: those
which live only in the soil and feed on the outside of
the roots ("ectoparasites"), and those which enter the
roots and foliage with their bodies to feed and destroy
tissue ("endoparasites"). Eggs are laid either in the
soil or in plant tissue. Once the eggs have hatched the
larvae pass through a series of molts to become adults.
Nematodes cause damage to plants in many ways.
Direct damage may result from feeding causing lesions,
galling, and stunting of roots, which in turn causes
yellowing, stunting and wilting of tops. Nematode
feeding may also indirectly injure a plant by altering
its physiology so that it becomes more susceptible to
attack by other organisms, and may even break down resistance to those organisms. They may also serve as
vectors of viruses and other organisms. The final result is a reduction in yield and/or quality of the crop.
NEMATODES CAUSING DAMAGE TO TURFGRASSES
There are well over 50 species of nematodes which
are know to parasitize turfgrasses. However, the pathogenic capabilities of many of these species are not well
defined. In certain areas of the United States tests
have been carried out in the laboratory and in the field.
The importance of nematodes on turf has been dramatically
demonstrated. I will briefly review the nematodes
studied and the types of damage caused, but I will confine my remarks to those species which may be of importance in the Pacific Northwest. Some species are of importance in the south and southeast but are unlikely to
occur in our region.
One of the spiral nematodes (so named because of
the "C" shape they assume when relaxed), HeZicotyldnckuA,
is widely distributed on turfgrass. It appears to be an
important nematode in the northern regions of the U. S.
Feeding commences in early spring as new root growth

begins, and by summer the nematode has limited the roots
to the top 1-2 inches of soil. Disease symptoms begin
to appear with the onset of high summer temperatures and
moisture stress. This nematode reaches extremely high
numbers, especially in well aerated turf. Feeding of
the nematodes results in cortical destruction leaving
the vascular tissues exposed. Attack by secondary organisms causes browning and results in an inability of
the roots to take up nutrients and water. This eventually results in a condition known as "summer dormancy"
whereby the plants cease to grow even though they are
well supplied with water and nutrients.
The lance nematode (HoplolcUmus spp.) is another
widely distributed nematode associated with damage to
turfgrasses. It is found in a variety of soil types
and has been shown to cause severe stunting of certain
grasses. In one study with bermudagrass it decreased
growth by 50%.
The stubby root nematode [TsUckodosiuA spp.) also
has wide distribution. It feeds exclusively on root
tips causing a reduction in root size with shorter rootlets, and stubby tips on the rootlets. It has been
shown to cause as much as a 49% reduction in root weight
and a 25% reduction in top weight.
The exact roll of the ring nematode (CsUcommosideA
spp.) is less clear. It has been implicated as a parasite of turf in several areas. In one study high populations of this nematode were associated with chlorotic
symptoms. Nematicide treatment resulted in correction
of this problem and a significant increase in grass
weight over the non-treated turf.
The importance of the stylet nematode {TylznckotikynckuA spp.) is also unclear. While it generally does not
appear to be a problem in most areas, it has on occasion
been associated with unhealthy turf. This situation was
corrected when treated with a nematicide.
Damage caused by the root-knot nematode (Meloldogym
spp) is more easily determined under field conditions.
Root symptoms may range from slight swellings at infection

sites to larger galls or knots on roots. The nematodes
actually enter the roots and once feeding has begun the
females swell and are no longer mobile. These swellings
cause stunting of the roots and tops. Some species may
even cause extreme chlorosis and death of the plants.
The cyst nematode {H&teAodeAa spp.) is similar to
the root-knot nematode and also swells inside the root
once feeding begins. However the majority of its body
remains outside the root, and may be seen as a cyst on
the root. Symptoms consist of overall reduction in top
and root growth, and occasionally a distinctive interveinal chlorosis of the foliage, similar to iron deficiency.
Several other species of nematode have been found
associated with unhealthy turf but their role in the
cause of this condition is even less clear.
DIAGNOSING NEMATODE DAMAGE
This is not an easy task even when you know what
you are looking for since the symptoms vary depending
upon several factors. Symptom expression depends upon
the kind and number of nematodes, type of turfgrass,
various types of stress (e.g. drought, fertility imbalance, etc.) and may often be associated with a fungus or other disease problem. To further complicate
the picture, the symptoms may come and go. Under conditions of stress, such as hot weather, moisture stress,
or poor fertility management, symptoms will become evident. Once these conditions have become more favorable
for plant growth the symptoms disappear, only to reappear with reoccurrence of stress.
Generally the above ground symptoms will appear as
slight to severe chlorosis, stunting, loss of vigor,
wilting, or general decline. These symptoms, of course,
reflect what is happening to the root system and are
typical of anything which hinders root growth. Therefore
they are of little diagnostic value by themselves. Symptoms of nematode damage to roots may be any one or all
of the following: absence of young, white feeder roots;
shriveled, discolored, stunted, galled or slightly

swollen roots; and/or root systems generally confined
to the top 1-2 inches of soil. Even the top and root
symptoms are not sufficient for positive diagnosis of
a nematode problem. However, they are necessary preliminary steps which will enable one to determine if
the third step of laboratory nematode analysis is necessary.
If a nematode problem is suspected, it is important to have an accurate diagnosis before applying any
control measure. This is especially true in these days
when high chemical costs and environmental protection
are a concern. The most accurate diagnostic sampling
is accomplished by collecting two samples, one from
the good area and one from the margin of the poor area.
The sample should not be taken from the center of the
poor area as nematode populations will be lowest here
and not reflect the true situation. Samples are best
collected using a special probe made from a one-inch
aerator tine. Fifteen to twenty cores from each of
the good and poor areas should be collected separately
and placed into plastic bags. If such a sampling device is not available, a standard cup-cutter may be
used to collect one sample from each of the two areas.
These two systems allow sampling of a green without
causing any destruction. The third non-destructing
method is to collect samples during the normal aerating
process. Representative cores can be collected from
the various areas making up a sample of about one pint
each. This method also serves as a means of monitoring
a potential problem green on a regular basis, (e.g. collecting samples once or twice a year). Always make sure
the cores do not dry before placing them in the plastic
bags, and send them in for analysis immediately.
CURRENT KNOWLEDGE OF NEMATODES ASSOCIATED WITH TURF IN
THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST
In 1976 a limited survey of turfgrasses was carried
out in southern British Columbia, Canada. Samples were
collected from twelve different sites representing golf
greens, bowling greens, and playing fields in the Fraser
Valley extending from Chilliwack in the east to and including the city of Vancouver. The following nematodes

were associated with unhealthy turf. Extremely high
populations of the spiral nematode occurred in several
locations and were generally associated with poor
growth. At one site in particular it was associated
with a golf green which failed to respond to treatment
with fungicides for control of FuAcUhium patch disease.
The roots of grass plants in the damaged areas were
badly discolored and the plants failed to produce new
growth above ground. In another case this nematode was
associated with a golf green exhibiting symptoms similar to "summer dormancy" as described earlier.
Nematicide tests were set up on two golf courses.
Four nematicides and one fungicide were applied either
as granular or liquid formulations and watered in following application. Of the chemicals used (Nemagon,
Vydate, Nemacur, Mocap, and an experimental fungicide
RP 26019) Nemacur gave the most consistent control of
the nematodes. Unfortunately the experiment was terminated before final evaluation could be made.
As many of you are aware a similar survey was
carried out this summer with golf courses in Washington
State. This was done through the cooperation of several turf managers, and the sample collection and disease evaluation carried out by Dr. Gary Chastagner at
the WWREC in Puyallup. Two sample sites were selected
for each green to be sampled, one from a healthy area
and one from a poor growth area. Samples from each
site on the green consisted of fifteen sub-samples collected using the special probe described earlier. Sampling tests carried out in B. C. proved this to be an accurate and non-destructive sampling technique for use on
golf greens. Samples were sent to my laboratory for extraction and nematode identification. Three extraction
procedures were used to obtain total recovery of nematodes and roots were examined microscopically to determine disease symptoms. Preliminary identification to
genus has been carried out, and this winter slides will
be made and nematode species determined.
Only thirteen greens representing eight golf courses
(four east and four west of the Cascades) were included
in this survey. Table 1 shows the ten parasitic genera

found, the number of greens on which they were found,
and whether or not they were associated with diseased
turf. These findings are similar to those reported for
B. C. with three notable exceptions: root-knot, stubby
root, and lance nematodes. In fact, the occurrence of
root-knot on turfgrass is a first report for Washington
and B. C. All of the genera found have been previously
reported to be pathogenic at one level or another on
grass. Eight of the thirteen greens contained a combination of three to four parasitic genera, and two contained
five parasitic genera associated with poor growth.
While this is a very limited survey, representing
only thirteen greens for the entire State of Washington,
it still gives enough information to indicate that nematodes can be a problem on turfgrass in this state and
should be considered along with other pests in attempting to diagnose a problem. We are still unsure of the
importance and distribution of nematodes on turf, especially on the west side, since our present samples only
represent the Seattle area.
Before the full importance of nematodes on turfgrasses in the Pacific Northwest can be assessed we
need at least two additional bits of information. We
need samples from a wider area throughout the state to
indicate the nematode distribution. Secondly, on selected sites showing these high populations of parasitic genera, we need to establish test plots using nematicides to attempt to bring the turf back into full production. With your continued interest and cooperation
we should accomplish both of these in 1980.

P
•P p
•H 0
£ 0
P

P
O

P

O
•H
-P
cd
•H
O
O
0
0

CD

£

CD
CD
P

tuO

tuo

Tl
0
0
cd
0
0
•H
Ti

o-

Os]

CM

O

(A

Os]

H

H

H

CA

Os]

H

P

rH

p
0
0
-p
P

•H
•

P

P
P

O
0
0
cd
P

tuo

P

p

-P

ON
OON
rH
p
•H

£
Ti
0
-P
ed
•H
O
O

0
cd
0
0
P

o

-p
cd
S
0

S

0
P

0
tuo tuo
P

p
O

-P
tuo
P
•H
P

-P
•H

0
p
0
0

0
cd
3s

H

o

o

P

-p
•H

«H
H

£

S

P
•H
0
0
0
P

rH
cd

o
o

P

H
rH
O
tUO

M

P
•H

-p
P

tuo
•H
0

0

0
0
TI
•H
O

•

H
0
rH
P
cd

EH

ON

£
0

O

S
0
P
O

o

•H
P

O

•H
Pi
00

0
p
X
O

/^N

P
O
•H

0
0
fH
w
0

P
0
P
rH
O
î>> p
-P
0
O
H
P

o

•H
H
0
P

oo

P
•H

0

rH

Ph
•w TÍ
0
0
0 S
p
p
>5
O
P
0

0
P
P
O
p

>>

P
O
P
O
p

cd

H

-P

/-N

-P
P
P
•P

0

P

0

H
>5
P
P
P

P
>> cd
Ph EH Pi

-14-

P
P
O

Tí
tuo

•H
P
O
PI

P
O
p
P
1
P
O

P
O
O
P

t»
P
P
P
o P
(p
00
s /

—
0
p
h

o
Ti

•H
O
H

0
S

0
p
p
o
Ti

0
P

O
P

0 cd
Í» sP
O —
cd

P

0
TI
o
O
P
p
O
0
•H p
0
P
EH P

0
P

S

•H

cd

H
O
H

Pi
O

P

GREEN IN ENERGY 1
J.R. Watson 2
I am pleased to have the opportunity to share this
part of your program with John Monson. There is a need
to review topics like "Green Is Energy" for energy is
essential to our business. And we must take a leadership role in preserving our turfgrass areas; or, the
green industry as we know it today may not survive.
The energy crisis dictates that we make some changes in
our thinking, our planning and our operations. The
changes we need require a strategy, a plan of action.
I commend John for the work he has done and I commend Roy Goss and your program committee for their fore
sight in developing this program.
Green is energy. The truth, green plants convert
the sun's energy into plant substances, some of which
may be used to produce alcohol or "gasohol" as it's
called when mixed with gasoline. But, I have not inter
preted the title as a charge to discuss gasohol even
though it is truly "green" energy. Rather, the title
assigned says your program committee recognizes the
existence of an energy crisis. I do, although I do not
wish to discuss whether or not the world is rapidly
running out of oil, as some people contend. We have an
energy crisis even if only for the fact that it costs
so much more today than just a few years ago. We can
expect costs to continue to rise, probably at a faster
rate than inflation overall, for everything used in
turf management derived from petroleum: Fuel for

Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 25
27, 1979.
Vice President, The Toro Company, Minneapolis, MN.

powered equipment and to pump water for irrigation and
for the fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides that are
made from petroleum, petroleum based products, or natural gas.
The turfgrass industry as we know it today will
not survive if one of two things or both should happen:
Number one: Energy will become so costly no one
will be able to afford to spend the amount necessary to
maintain turf. Currently it is estimated that fuel
costs make up only 2-4 percent of the total operating
budget for most turf facilities. What happens if that
escalates to 10-15 percent?
Number two: Energy will become so scarce, for
whatever reasons, that it will be rationed and turf
maintenance will be given a very low priority.
Either, or both, of those two things could happen,
totally, or enough to have an adverse effect on the turfgrass industry.
I submit that we must -- and I emphasize must -take steps now to minimize the consequences of either
of those two possibilities. Essentially, there are
three things we must do:
1. We need to convince everyone
ty, our state, our region, our nation
that what we do -- protecting, caring
expanding the verdant landscape -- is

-- in our communiand the world -for, improving and
important work.

We know it is important. We know the vital role
that green spaces play in our lives. That message needs
to be repeated everywhere until everyone understands it.
We, as an industry, simply do not articulate our importance to the public -- we talk to each other rather than
to others!
2. We need to adopt management practices that will
reduce energy use. And develop grasses that require
less water, less fertilizer, and less mowing, and are
more resistant to disease producing organisms, along

with equipment that will cut or spray more acres per
man, and cost less to operate.
3. We need to become more assertive in representing our industry before the legislative, regulatory and
administrative branches of our governments, at all levels: municipal, state, and federal. We need to let
them know who we are, what we do and why we are concerned about turfgrass management. We can contribute,
and we should, to the body of knowledge that will form
the basis for legislative decisions affecting energy.
We should play a far more significant role than
we have in influencing government action. We should
help bring about sensible management of our energy and
water resources to accomplish, among other things,
avoidance of piecemeal panic restrictions when shortages occur. And, it's my personal opinion that the U.S.
should have done a great deal more to establish and to
expand the recent trade arrangement with Mexico to gain
some security from Mexico's newly discovered oil reserves .
Maintenance practices, as John has ably discussed,
can have a tremendous impact on energy use. There are
a number of practical steps that will help reduce energy
consumption for turf maintenance. Among them:
* Select the most efficient piece of equipment for
each job. Generally, reel mowers are more efficient
than rotary or flail mowers. The scissors action of
the reel mower not only cuts better but requires less
power, consequently consumes less fuel. With the same
mowing speed, reel mowers will use up to 50 percent
less fuel per acre of grass than a rotary. Maintenance
of today's reel units may be more expensive than for
rotaries, but that could change.
Keep in mind that the number of blades in a reel
not only affects the quality of cut, but also the fuel
consumption. A five-bladed reel will use eight to
twelve percent less power and fuel than a six-bladed
reel.

* Use diesel fuel, rather than gasoline. Diesel
fuel generally costs somewhat less than gasoline but
more importantly the diesel engine has proved itself
to be from twenty to twenty-five percent more efficient
than the gasoline engine. This means fewer gallons to
perform a given task.
* Allocate more funds for higher capacity, laborsaving equipment. Attack the largest part of your
operating budget — labor. In most cases it represents
some 65-70 percent of the budget.
* Keep equipment clean and properly adjusted. It
will require less power and therefore less fuel. Proper adjustment of belts, bearings, chains and shafts
can reduce the friction within the machine and deliver
more power for work output. Frequent lubrication of
vital parts also will reduce friction.
* The tire pressure of any machine should be maintained at proper levels to reduce the rolling resistance
* With reel mowers, the bedknife adjustment is critical .
The proper maintenance of the vital parts of any
machine is important not only to conserve fuel but also
to extend the functional life span of the machine. No
part of the machine is as critical as the engine for
achieving fuel economy. Just as with an automobile, a
properly maintained, well-tuned engine can conserve fuel
Several steps that should be followed concerning the engine include adjusting the carburetor to provide maximum fuel-to-air ratio. Checking the ignition system to
insure clean points and plugs, and timing to provide
maximum power. The engine air cleaner is crucial. A
clogged air cleaner can change the air-to-fuel ratio and
use excessive amounts of fuel. Proper adjustments and
maintenance in the combustion chamber are important to
extended engine life.
*Mowing practices also may be a means of saving
fuel.

Some examples:
. . plan mowing patterns that require the least
amount of transport between locations.
. . use the least amount of overlap consistent
with the skills of the operators -- when did you last
hold an operator training program?
. . where possible, eliminate mowing steep slopes
and non-play areas.
Equipment-manufacturers must design and make available equipment that will be less costly to operate -and easier to maintain. Among other things we need to
reduce the number of parts and make more parts interchangeable. We need to reduce weight.
Let me discuss a new fairway and large turf area
mower my company released for sale in early 1979. I
believe it serves to illustrate the trends you can expect from major manufacturers in the future.
Development started on this unit in early 1975. It
resembles our current unit, but in actuality is all new.
Some of the things of interest:
. . It is an all-hydraulic seven gang reel mower.
. . More than 80 percent of its components are
interchangeable with other Toro machines.
. . All seven reels have the same parts number.
. . All seven hydraulic motors have the same parts
number.
. . There are forty-four different hoses that have
only seven different parts numbers.
.. It can mow up to nine acres per hour.
. . Reversible reel motors allow backlapping on the
machine to reduce sharpening frequency and permit the

operator to clear the reels without leaving the driver's
seat.
. . The safety interlock system cannot be by-passed
and it serves an important additional function as a
trouble-shooting device.
. . Each reel unit weighs 110 pounds less than our
wheel-driven gang mower units.
I submit that all of these features are reflective
of a very advanced state of the art for our industry.
To achieve energy conservation all facets of the
industry must work together. We must speed the normal
sequence of events; we must make things happen, not wait
for them to happen or evolve normally. We are not living
in "normal" times and we must learn to conserve our
energy at all levels to insure energy for our green areas.
Many, in fact most, of the points I've touched on
are probably not new to you. For the most part all of
us have been acting very much like the old farmer who
was visited by a young county agent he had never met
before.
The county agent was armed with pamphlets and literature and his mind was brimming, of course, with all
the latest ideas on good farming practices. The old
farmer looked at him. Moved his chaw from one cheek
to the other, then said, "Young feller — before you
start -- just remember I ain't farming half as good as
I know how." And, in a way, turf management is a lot
like farming, only more so.
We've got to start managing like we know how or
the turfgrass industry -- may not survive -- the coming
energy crunch.
Thank you.

EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES IN TURF AT OSU 1
Torn Cook
Students interested in turf and landscape maintenance at OSU should major in horticulture and select the
management option under the landscape curriculum (see
attached curriculum outline). For the most part this
provides a good general background in plant and soil
science and the opportunity to concentrate on specialty
courses including turf and landscape maintenance and
design. Instruction in turf maintenance is variable
depending on student interest but the following list
includes potential coursework students might take:
1.

HORT 314

Principles of Turfgrass Maintenance

An introductory course stressing turf I.D., growth
and development, stress tolerance, mowing, fertilization, pest control, and soil modification.
Lab involves greenhouse and field exercises in establishment, identification, etc.
2.

HORT 417

Advanced Turf and Landscape Maintenance

Interpretation of maintenance principles for use
in maintenance programing, writing maintenance
specifications, budgeting, estimating maintenance
bids, etc. Also considered are specific industries
such as sod production, athletic field maintenance,
chemical lawncare, etc.
Labs include field exercise and field trips.

^ Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 2527, 1979.
Department of Horticulture, Oregon State University,
Corvallis, OR.

3.

HORT 405

Reading and Conference

Golf Course Maintenance
Detailed look at golf course maintenance including
structure of clubs and analysis of current maintenance techniques such as topdressing, aerification,
mowing, fertilization, disease and weed control,
and construction and maintenance of tees and greens.
Labs involve field trips to golf courses.
4.

HORT 405

Reading and Conference

Students with special interests may formulate their
goals and pursue them via reading and conference.
Examples of past projects include budget surveys
and a variety of student research projects.
Potential students should consider several factors
before entering our program. First, during the initial
two years coursework is general and will not normally
include courses specific to turf or landscape maintenance, so bring lots of patience. Second, most of your
time at OSU will be spent in the classroom. Therefore
you need to supplement classtime with lots of work experience (hopefully with more than one superintendent).
Third, if you go to a community college for your first
two years, take lots of basic courses such as chemistry,
math, etc., since these are the classes you need before
beginning horticulture classes. Also many applied courses at a community college will not transfer to our program. Finally, if you are out of state remember that
tuition is prohibitively high so your best bet is to
move to Oregon, establish residency and then apply for
admission as a resident. Make sure you check with the
registrar at OSU to determine current residency requirements first.
Prospective students should direct correspondence
to:
Office of Admissions
Oregon State University
Corvallis, Oregon 97331

1979-80
Horticulture
Landscape Curriculum
Designed for students wishing to pursue careers in landscape construction and maintenance. Consult
advisor concerning the specialized options in landscape and turf maintenance or design and construction.
(*This denotes the suggested year that the class be taken in proper sequence, 1-Freshman, 2-Sophomore,
3-Junior, 4-Senior). Check catalog for prerequisites.
UNIVERSITY REQUIREMENTS
a) Complete 192 term hours; b) 60 upper division hours; c) 36 hours in major (Agriculture),
24 must be upper division. (Certain courses are specific requirements for University and School or
School and Department; they will be listed on the curriculum only once.)
Term
Class
Code
Hours Year
Comments
English Composition
PE Activity Courses
Humanities and/or Arts

Wr 121
PE

Social Science
Approved Undergraduate Courses:
Anthropology
Psychology
Geography (Geog. prefix)
Sociology
Political Science
Economics

3
3
12

1
1
This requirement is fulfilled by ALA courses
required by Dept. of Horticulture.

12

SCHOOL OF AGRICULTURE REQUIREMENTS
Communications
Approved Electives
6
Writing - Wr 214,222,224,233,234,235,316,323,324,327
Journalism - J 111,212,223,317
Speech - Sp 112,113
Full-year sequence of a first-year language.
Pass Comprehensive English Exam (Wr 230 may be taken in lieu of, but not for communication credit)
Physical Science
1 year general chemistry (Specified by Dept. of Horticulture).
One of the following series:
Chemistry
Ch 104
1
5
4
Ch 105
1
4
Ch 106
1
General Chemistry

Ch 201
Ch 202
Ch 203

3
3
3

1
1
1

Additional year of physical science (Specified by Dept. of Horticulture)
(See options under Dept. requirement)
Biological Science
1 year biological science required (Specified by Dept.
General Botany
Bot 201
4
Bot 202
4
Bot 203
3
Mathematics
Trigonometry

Mth 102

4

of Horticulture)
1
1
1
1/2

DEPARTMENT OF HORTICULTURE REQUIREMENTS
Following are the common core requirements (required for all students in either landscape option)
Horticulture Courses Required:
Horticulture Principles
Horticulture Principles
Plant Propagation

Hort
Hort
Hort
Hort

201
202
311
314

4
4
4
4

2
2
2
5/4

Term
Code Hours

Class
Horticulture Courses Required:

(Cont.)

Principles § Practices of
Landscape Maintenance
Horticulture Seminar
Internship

HORT 315
HORT 407
HORT 410

4
1
A

3/4
(Every fall term)
Between Jr. & Sr. Year

Other Agriculture Courses Required:
Soils
Sprinkler Irrigation
Three terms of the following:
Woody Plant Materials
Herbaceous Plant Materials

Sis 210 5
AET 326A 3

2

3/4

*ALA 326
ALA 327
ALA 328
HORT 355

3
3
3
3

2
2
2
2

Bot 341

4

3

CE 226

3

2

ALA
ALA
ALA
ALA
ALA

3
3
3
3
3

1
2
2
2
3

4
4
4

2/3

*Counted as Agriculture hrs. for landscape
students only

Biological Science Required:
Plant Ecology
Physical Science Required:
Plane Surveying
Humanities and/or Arts Required:
Graphics
Landscape Design Theory
Landscape Design I
Landscape Construction

111
280
290
291
359

Business Requirements:
One of the following:
Financial Manag. Acctg.
(OR)
Basic Acctg. 4 Fin. Analysis

BA 211
212
BA 217

One of the following:
Business Law
Real Estate Law

BA 226
BA 414

3/4
4

BA

3/4

Management Processes

302

2/3

In addition to common core requirements students in landscape horticulture must select and complete
the requirements of one of the following:

Landscape and Turf Management Option
Agriculture Courses Required:
Weed Control
One of the following:
Nursery Management
Advanced Turf & Landscape Mgmt.

CrS 418

5

4

HORT 361 4
HORT 417 4

3/4
4

Entomology

Ent 311

4

3/4

Plant Pathology

Bot 350

4

4

Biological Sciences Required:

Physical Sciences Required:
One of the following:
Organic Chemistry
Ch 226
3
Organic Compounds
Ch 213
4
At least
elective from the following:
AET 211, AE 356, G 200 or G 201, CH 227, Ph 201

2
2

Recommended Electives (Students must select at least ,12 hours from the following list of courses, including at least JL upper division agriculture course) Consult advisor concerning other accepted electives.
Agriculture Courses:
Engine Theory and Operation
Land Drainage
Soils and Land Use
Soils and Fertility
Controlled Environ/Crop Prod.
Plant Nutrition

AET 312
AET 319
Sis 321
Sis 324
HORT 351
HORT 416

3
3
4
4
4
4

Bot 331
BB 350

5
4

ALA
ALA
ALA
ALA
ALA

3
3
3
3
3

Biological Science
Plant Physiology
Bio-Chemistry
Humanities and/or Arts
Landscape Construction
Plant Composition

Organizational Behavior
Personnel Management

360
361
426
427
428

BA 361
BA 467
BA 468

4
3
3

Landscape Desigx^ and Construction Option
Physical Science Required:
At least two of the following:
AET 211, AE 356, G 200, or G 201, Ph 201, 202, Ch 226, 213
Humanities and/or Arts:
Landscape Construction
Plant Composition

ALA
ALA
ALA
ALA
ALA

360
361
426
427
428

3
3
3
3
3

advisor concerning other accepted electives.)
Agriculture Courses:
Land Drainage
Soils and Land Use
Nursery Management
Adv. Turf & Landscape Maintenance
Weed Control

AET 319
Sls 321
HORT 361
HORT 417
CrS 418

3
4
4
4
5

Ent 311
Bot 331
Bot 350

4
5
4

ALA
ALA
ALA
ALA
ALA
ALA

3
3
3
3
3
3

Biological Science:
Entomology
Plant Physiology
Plant Pathology
Humanities and/or Arts:
Landscape Design II
Landscape Design III

390
391
392
490
491
492

Business:
Organizational Behavior
Personnel Management

BA 361
BA 467
BA 468

4
3
3

_

TURFGRASS DEGREE EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES
IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST - WASHINGTON 1
J.C. Engibous 2
It is a real pleasure for me to attend and participate in the 33rd Northwest Turfgrass Conference. Certainly the setting here at Port Ludlow ought to be
pleasing to anyone, but I am referring more to being
here to respond to your question about educational opportunities for students interested in turfgrasses and their
management. I'm sure Ron Ensign and Tom Cook share my
enthusiasm for the opportunity to give you some insight
into the problems and opportunities facing the universities in training people for your industries.
Let me begin by turning the problem around, and
stating what I think your expectations of a college
graduate to be. We first have to make an important
distinction, that between common sense and knowledge.
A college degree does not guarantee common sense; common sense is almost an inborn trait that can be developed through education and experience. Knowledge is
what we offer to the serious student in the university
which, combined with a reasonable amount of common sense,
makes that individual a productive member of your team.
The second major point I want to make is that we
cannot, in a four year experience with a student, provide him with all the answers to every problem in a
manner so deeply ingrained in his mind that he can

^ Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 2527, 1979.
Chairman, Department of Agronomy and Soils, Washington
State University, Pullman, WA.

instantly give the right answer. I am sometimes chagrined when I visit with people out in the agricultural
industries and find them critical of the new college
graduate because he didn't have the equivalent of a
Ph.D. degree in agronomy, soils, insect identification,
fungicide use, financial management, purchasing and
janitorial services. It took years of experience for
each one of you to achieve this level of wisdom, and it
is unreasonable to expect a new college graduate to match
your performance immediately.
Let us quickly examine what faces the college student who brings his high school diploma and college
aptitude test score to Washington State University. Let
us assume he is one of the lucky ones, and already knows
he wants to pursue a program revolving around turfgrasses
and turfgrass management. I say one of the lucky ones,
because he will not waste time in the wrong courses. Why
this is important will become obvious as I unfold his experiences at WSU.
Because turfgrass falls in the Department of Agronomy and Soils, our student must meet the core course requirements in Agronomy. He must then meet the other core
course requirements for a university degree. Since he
does not want to be a general Agronomist, but a turfgrass
expert, he must take certain required courses relating
to the turf management option. He is then free to take
whatever other courses he likes, provided those courses
are open to him. The core program for any Agronomy student includes seven courses: crop growth and development;
crop identification, grading and marketing; weeds; plant
breeding; physiological crop ecology; seminar and special
problems. The unversity requirements (GURs) represent a
total of 14 courses. These include introductory plant
physiology, general genetics, soils and general plant
pathology. Add on agricultural entomology (or general
entomology), biometry, economics (or economics in agriculture). Our student is coming along fine. Now he can
work in communications, speech and humanities elective.
No turfgrass expert would be complete without 2 courses
in introductory biology or intermediate botany and a
math course. And finally, he needs introductory chemistry and chemistry related to man (or principles of

chemistry) and the double whammy called elementary organic chemistry.
Remember, I said that takes care of Agronomy and
the general university requirements. Now he wants to
specialize in the curricula options of turf management
under the technical group. We lay eight more courses
on him at this point. They are turfgrass culture, forage
crops, special turf problems, basic landscape designs,
turf irrigation systems, principles of management and
organization, and principles of applied entomology or
plant pest control or diseases of plants.
Where are we after all of this? The core requirements total 15 in Agronomy, 75 for the university, and
18 for the turf option, totaling 109 credit hours. In
order to graduate, his record must total 120 hours;
this means he has 11 free hours, or 3 to 4 courses of
his own free will and choosing. So you want to know
why he can't balance a ledger or understand simple elements of business law. There are so many students
majoring in business on our campus that such courses
are rarely open to students from other colleges. There
is also the problem of scheduling classes that compete
on the daily calendar. College students, like everyone
else, can only be in one place at one time.
My bottom line message boils down to this. The
serious student who comes to WSU with the combination
of a good high school record, maturity and common sense,
is given a tremendous opportunity to equip himself to
be an excellent addition to your industries, and greatly
increase his earning potential over his career. Most of
our students fill that category. Let- me assure you that
the student unrest days are over, and the college population today is a serious, studious group. If you help
us to recruit students, provide the career opportunities,
and I mean by that, interesting work, reasonable working
conditions and adequate compensation for these students,
we will deliver the product that you need.

ACADEMIC OPPORTUNITIES IN TURFGRASSES
IN IDAHO 1
Ron Ensign 2
The opportunities for academic training in turfgrass sciences are offered in the Department of Plant
and Soil Science as a part of the Landscape Horticulture option. This option is for majors interested in
professional carrers in the management and operation
of commercial nurseries, greenhouses, parks, golf courses,
and related industries.
The courses offered for study, other than the basic
University and College of Agriculture requirements, are
largely science oriented and are not practicum type
courses. Each student in the Landscape Horticulture
option is required to take a minimum of 132 credit hours
of course work which requires eight (8) semesters or
four (4) years. About one-fourth of our 125+ students
in the department are in this option. The balance of the
students are in the Crop Management, Soils and/or Plant
Science curricula options.
Some undergraduate students are also permitted to
take Special Problem courses during their senior year.
Such courses are assigned by the major professor and
the students are asked to study special assignments of
their interest.

Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA September 2527, 1979.
Professor, Plant and Soil Science Department, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID.

In addition to these undergraduate educational
opportunities, the University of Idaho offers graduate
training at the Masters of Science level. The advanced
courses depend on the interest and career direction of
the students. Thirty (30) semester hours, including a
thesis, are required. This degree requires about two
(2) full academic years.
The University of Idaho, College of Agriculture
is the only institution of higher education in Idaho
that offers a complete four-year educational program
leading to a B.S. degree in turf related subjects.
Two year programs are offered at Boise State University
and Ricks College in Landscape Construction - Maintenance and Landscape Nursery, respectively.
In addition to the above academic program the
University of Idaho offers special workshops and short
courses in plant pesticides, irrigation, soils, horticulture and other topics through the Cooperative Extension Service and Continuing Education. Also, Extension
Specialists and Extension Agents conduct special training sessions, arrange for special meetings and educational tours and field days on various areas of interest
in the state. Educational materials are distributed
through the Extension Service on many areas of crop and
soil management, including turf. A wide source of information is available not only from Idaho scientists
but from scientists from throughout the U.S.A.

The recommended courses for students in Landscape Horticulture are:
Credits
Plant Science 102

Introduction to Plant Science

4

Plant Science 104

Plant Science Laboratory

1

Plant Science 201

Turfgrass Science and Culture

3

Plant Science 305

Introduction to Plant Pathology

3

Plant Science 338

Weed Control

3

Plant Science 464

Ornamental Plants & Their Management

3

Soils 205, 206

General Soils and Lab

4

Ag. Mech. 315

Irrigation and Drainage

3

Landscape Arch. 288

Plant Materials

3

Landscape Arch. 387

Park and Recreation Planning

3

Landscape Arch. 388

Plant Materials

3

Biol. 201

Introduction to Life Sciences

4

Biol. 203

General Botany

4

Bot. 241

Systematic Botany

3

Bot. 311

Plant Physiology

3

Chem. 103

Introduction to Chemistry

4

Chem. 275

Carbon Compounds

3

Chem. 278

Organic Chem. I Lab

1

Biol. Chem. 380

Introduction to Biochemistry

4

English 103

Basic Skills for Writing

3

English 104

Essay Writing

3

Entomology 322

Economic Entomology

3

Genetics 314

General Genetics

3

Also
Agricultural Electives

16

Advanced Writing Electives

3

Business and Accounting Electives

6

Communication Electives

2

Humanities and Social Sciences

14

Mathematics Electives

4

Physical Education

2

Unrestricted Electives

14
Total

132

CONTRACT LAWN CARE 1
Rodney L. Bailey 2
I appreciate this opportunity to speak to you today
about contract turfcare and to bringyou up-to-date on
what is developing in the industry. Unfortunately, there
has been little participation here at the Turf Conference
by people from the contracted services segment of the industry and there should be a great deal more.
With the post World War expansion of industry, commercial establishments, golf courses, cemeteries, public
parks and estates of the wealthy came the involvement of
the institutionalized lawn-care professional. With development of wealth and estates came the self-employed gardner, typically in this country, the self-employed minority.
In the 1960 1 s and 70's, with a growing public awareness of the environment and the rapid expansion of zoning
of commercial and industrial parks and of group community
living, there was an explosion in landscaping which offered opportunities for, and attracted, the full-service
landscape maintenance service contractor. He proved to
be the optimum economic solution for maintenance of these
properties, many of which were too small to support the
necessary full-time professionals and equipment needed.
In a growing number of cases, he has proved to be the optimum situation for maintenance of larger scale government, private commercial, institutional and even golf
course properties.

1

Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 2527, 1979.
President, Evergreen Services Corp., Bellevue, WA.

In the 1970 1 s yet another phenomenon is occurring,
developed by those who have applied the technology to
put professional lawn care within the reach of the average homeowner. Capitalizing on chemical and spray technologies, and on the potential for volume operations,
the lawn care applicators have found how to take the
worry elements out of the homeowner's lawn at an affordable price. Recognizing that the homeowner doesn't mind
mowing and watering, but that he doesn't like the uncertainty of disease, insect, weed and fertility control,
and particularly the expense of it, they visit his lawn
4 to 8 times a year and do it for less than the retail
products themselves would cost. The lawn applicators
have found a rich market, easily sold on a volume basis
and they represent the most rapidly expanding part of
the industry.
While they have not had a marked impact on the Northwest market yet, it will not be long before this marketplace potential is realized.
It is difficult to place a figure on the maintenance
contract service market nationwide. Closest estimates
from ALCA, LAWN CARE INDUSTRY MAGAZINE AND WEEDS TREES AND
TURF MAGAZINE would probably place it somewhere between
1% and 2 billion dollars annually and growing rapidly.
Recently, Lawn Care Industry magazine reported 22 companies in the annual volume range of 1 million to 70 million dollars and 16 in the % to 1 million dollar range.
I personally am aware of several general service maintenance contractors in excess of 1 million dollars annual
volume.
With the growth and development of the full-service
contract grounds care and lawn service industry, is coming
several important benefits to the lawn care profession as
a whole. First, the markets are large and growing and
they are attracting research dollars and research efforts.
Several of the larger lawn care companies (Chem-Lawn for
instance, a 60-67 million dollar operation) support their
own research and development professionals as well as
their own in-house technical training programs.

Second, the market is demanding and receiving attention from the equipment and product manufacturers at a
level not noticed before. Many of the mower manufacturers are being forced to recognize that equipment designed
for the golf course simply doesn't stand up for the contract maintenance company which trailers it everywhere
and may use it 10 hours a day for 10 months of the year.
Durability, productivity, maneuverability, operator comfort, serviceabi1ity and total life-cycle cost are becoming major design factors. When Jacobsen advertises
"We Hear You", who do you think they are listening to?
In the last two years I have attended two conferences
between industry members and equipment manufacturers
specifically aimed at opening communication between contractor users and equipment manufacturers. I wish I had
more time to tell you about the exciting feedback communications which occurred at these meetings.
Consider a few of the advances in technology and
equipment that weren't available in our industry even
ten years ago:
-Multi-drop-tank spray trucks
-Articulated gang hydraulic mowers
-Hydrostatic transmissions
-Hustler/Groundsmaster rotaries
-Nylon filament trimmers
-Back pack blowers
-Advanced electronic irrigation controllers
-Slow release fertilizers, herbicides, insecticides
-Growth regulators
-Etc.
Finally, the markets are creating a new demand for
graduates of 4 year, 2 year, vocational tech. graduates
of practical curricula in landscape contracting and
maintenance. Educational institutions are responding
as never before to a market which only a few years ago
had problems placing graduates anywhere. The presentation
of curriculum from Oregon State University we heard earlier this morning is an excellent example of the 'newbreed" programs geared specifically for the educational
demands of the institutional and contract service grounds
maintenance market.

These occurrences all affect and make life better
for the turf manager whether he be private, public or
self-employed. However, all of these trends and happenings, related to a rapidly exploding market growth,
have not come along without problems in the industry.
Dr. Goss suggested I talk about a few of these today,
the business as well as the technical challenges and
problems and that I talk about the extent and use of
research and applied technology in the turf care contracting industry.
As a general service landscape maintenance contractor, we focus on all aspects of landscape care including
turf care, tree care, shrub and groundcovers, irrigation
systems, erosion control, landscape modification and
planting. Turf is a relatively smaller portion of the
job for us than in the golf course environment and is
sometimes non-existent on many of our contracts. Turf
is usually less intensively maintained and certainly is
less intensively utilized than in the golf course situation with the exception of public park areas. The primary objective is one of appearance rather than "playability" or durability to traffic. As a result of the
broader scope of service, turf management has received
less technical emphasis, relatively speaking, than it
has in either the golf course, public park or high volume
lawn care segments of the industry.
The nature of the business is dominated by the customer, his economics and his priorities. Ten years ago
we wrote the specification and quoted the budget. The
quality objective was typically Class "A". As the business developed, competition increased, and our knowledge
of costs became more sophisticated, we were forced to
realize that the market frequently demanded Class "B"
and "C" approaches from a budget and quality standpoint.
Typically, now, the service specification is a managed
program where there is a definite price/service relationship, hopefully, mutually understood by both the customer
and the contractor. Customer market education is a major
challenge, particularly where you are dealing with in
excess of 200 separate customers.

The typical commercial service specification, as
related to turf care, is usually written to cover the
basic services with a specified service level ranging
from "A" approach to "C".
The "basic" services are usually regarded as mowing,
edging, fertilization, moisture control, weed control,
disease and pest control. As to mowing, a sample "A"
approach would read, "turf will be reel mowed 32 to 38
times, or as otherwise needed throughout the year at
heights between 1 and 1% inches and at such intervals
that no more than 1/3 of the leaf blade will be removed
at any single cutting. Clippings to be caught and removed." A typical "C" approach would read "turf to be
rotary mowed on scheduled frequencies between 22 and
26 times. Clippings will be removed during rapid growth
periods if unsightly."
Other services such as liming, thatching, aerification, manual watering, irrigation repairs and site
modification may be included as basic services but are
typically quoted as time-and-material "extra" services.
The level of technology beyond basic practice is
far from exotic. The emphasis in turf care is toward
good, basic, long range practices to encourage turf
health which minimizes disease, insect and weed problems.
We act to minimize spray and chemical applications and
tend toward corrective rather than preventative approaches
where chemicals are involved. We are dealing increasingly
with an environmentally sensitive public and are constantly in the general public eye on commercial properties.
Whenever a spray boom or gun shows up, eyebrows are
raised and questions are asked. We have found that most
problems requiring chemical control are minimized through
controlled mowing heights as low as possible, and through
well fertilized, dense, healthy, and pH controlled turfs.
Frankly, our biggest problems result from (1) liability to closely monitor or control watering, irrigation, rain because of our weekly or bi-weekly rather than
daily presence on all but the larger commercial sites,
(2) loss of control over the property during critical
periods, and (3) inability to be everywhere at once when

severe weather, disease or pest infestations occur. The
second point is the most significant. It has taken a
long time to convince the customer market that the 9-10
month seasonal contract costs them more in the long run
than does a good 12 month program and that the service/
price relationship is for real. Maintenance contracting,
commercially, is a low margin business. When a quality
contractor loses bid contracts by margins of substance,
there is a service difference behind the price difference. This happens frequently in the market. The good
news is, however, that most price shopping customers come
back; our company has a 95% return rate. However, when
they do, we frequently must re-establish a sound, basic
program to combat the effects of less-than-adequate ferti
lization, weed control, pruning, mowing and watering
programs.
Our approach to the more exotic problems is to recog
nize them, identify them and pursue WSU or other source
recommendations for solutions. Within the last year we
have developed our own program to move ahead technologically and to keep abreast of the latest products and
techniques we hear of. Our technology committee, not
fully operational yet, is to review and approve new ideas
and review alternative practice approaches.
We have experimented successfully with controlled
release fertilizers and herbicides and liquid limes. We
have experimented with inconclusive results to date on
Bio Dethatch and turf growth regulants and we are planning programs with chemical aerators and growth regulants
for shrubs, hedges and groundcover areas.
Sometimes these efforts move slowly for multiple
reasons. It is difficult to budget for and find time
for experimental programs. Finding experimental sites
usually requires customer understanding, approval, and
hopefully customer budget. Both are, at times, difficult to come by. Frankly, we are typically fighting
bigger tigers of a less sophisticated nature. Drainage problems are common as are soil problems. We typically encounter 1-2 inches of topsoil on top of, and
not intermixed with, clay, glacial fill or pit run subsoil. It is difficult to get a customer who didn't want

to pay for good preparation initially to take the risk
on subsoil improvement or modification programs.
The major problem with the experimentation on, and
application of, new technologies is the ability of companies and the industry to obtain and train people for
practical application at the field level. Herein lies
our greatest industry technical, as well as management,
challenge for contractors, institution professionals,
and lawn applicators alike - that of developing and
retaining an industry pool of trained people, at field
technician and middle management supervisory levels,
who are capable of understanding and applying the technology available to us.
Industry growth is outstripping the supply of
trained and qualified people and is creating a competition for these people on a level not previously experienced. Before it pulls us apart, my suggestion is that
we get together to support expansion of training at 4
year, 2 year and vocational tech. programs as well as
the continued expansion of technical and supervisory
symposiums. I come to conferences and symposiums such
as this one and am frequently disturbed that only senior
managers, owners or technical directors are present.
Where are the students, the young foremen, and the incompany trainees? We must reach out with education and
training in mind.
Our company has sent foremen and department managers to San Diego, Dallas, Milwaukee and Chicago within
the last year to seek technical, supervisory and management training. We are active in our trade associations
to support education and training symposiums at the practical field level and we are now underway on our own incompany training program. We are typical of midsized
companies in our industry nationwide. Let me urge you
to support these types of training and developmental programs in your own operation and trade association wherever
you can.
With that, my time is up. I hope I have been able
to expose you to what is going on in the maintenance

contracting industry and to identify where we are. With
my final call to support education, training and development of people, I thank you for this opportunity to have
met with you.

H. A. S. DECLINE OF ANUAL BLUEGRASS 1
J.M. Vargas, Jr. 2
There are few areas in the world better adapted
for growing annual bluegrass than the coastal area of
the Pacific Northwest with its oceanic climate. In
fact with the moderate year round temperatures and frequent rainfalls, it is hard to imagine any other grass
surviving at a 1/2 to 3/4 inch height of cut that exists
on most golf course fairways. Then why are people still
trying to eradicate annual bluegrass? The problem lies
in being overtrained.
The problem of learning how to successfully grow
annual bluegrass (Poa annua) is one of education or retraining. It has been considered an undesirable weed
for so many years tht it is hard for people to accept
it as a desirable turfgrass. It is not a weed and if
managed properly provides a satisfactory turf in the
many areas of the cool season grass belt. Many golf
course superintendents either refuse to admit they have
any annual bluegrass or else deliberately underestimate
how much they have. Part of the reason for not admitting to having annual bluegrass is because of the stigma attached to it being a weed; therefore, if it is a
weed, I must be a poor superintendent if I can't control
it. The reason for the stigma attached to annual bluegrass came from educators in the universities who were
convinced it really was a weedy annual grass that died
from high temperature during the summer heat stress period. Because of this attitude, little research has been

Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 2527, 1979.
Plant Pathologist, Michigan State University, East
Lansing, MI.

done on cultural aspects, disease problems or insect
problems on annual bluegrass for fear of being burned
at the stake as a heretic or put away in a padded cell.
Research was done instead on Kentucky bluegrass and
creeping bentgrass which very few people actually had
on their golf courses and the results transposed to
annual bluegrass which more often than not didn't work.
Annual bluegrass is the largest single component of
golf course fairways and greens that are 10 years or
older in the northern region of the cool season grass
belt. Although most people wouldn't admit to having
it anywhere on their course, it has been successfully
grown on golf course greens for years, mainly because
pest control programs have been practiced on the greens.
Annual bluegrass has failed on golf course fairways because similar pest control programs have not been practiced there.
Many a golf course superintendent has spent a great
deal of time, money, and effort trying to control annual
bluegrass with the arsenical herbicides rather than trying to learn how to live with it. Most lost their fairway, many lost their jobs. The smart ones either stopped
their arsenical herbicide programs or else never started
them.
FAIRWAYS VS. GREENS
In spite of the fact that good pest control practices are carried out on annual bluegrass greens very
poor pest control practices are carried out on annual
bluegrass fairways. It is difficult to understand the
logic behind this. If annual bluegrass greens have to
be treated for diseases and insect problems in order to
maintain healthy turf, why then do the same treatments
not have to be applied to annual bluegrass fairways in
order to keep them healthy? There is a logical explanation, and it deals with the long accepted belief that
the annual bluegrass is dying from high temperature stress
alone. The fungicides and insecticides were applied to
greens for incidental diseases, not for the survival of
annual bluegrass. The other reason is preventive pest
control programs on greens are believed to be affordable,

whereas such programs on fairways are believed to be too
expensive. Yet it is hard to understand how a golf course
can always find the money for the chemicals and seed used
in an annual bluegrass eradication program, but cannot
use the same funds on chemicals to save the annual bluegrass that is there. As long as high temperature is considered to be the primary reason for the grass dying,
the method of preventing this will be through irrigation
instead of pest control. However, it has been clearly
demonstrated that high temperature alone was not the reason for annual bluegrass dying, a combination of high
temperature stress, Helmi^koAposUum leaf spot and anthracnose which caused annual bluegrass to senesce during
the hot weather. These factors and perhaps others are
now referred to as H. A. S. Decline of annual bluegrass.
In addition, an insect problem caused by the Ataenius
beetle grub has been shown to be responsible for the
loss of annual bluegrass fairways during heat stress
periods. Blaming the loss of annual bluegrass on high
temperature alone prior to 1975 is understandable since
the facts concerning annual bluegrass survival were not
known, but the information is available now and yet annual bluegrass fairways are still dying and the blame is
still being placed on "that lousy annual bluegrass" dying
in the hot weather.
If the history of golf course irrigation is examined
we find that initially only golf course greens were watered. The green fairways of spring were allowed to go
dormant in the summertime and green up again with the
return of fall rains. These fairways were primarily common Kentucky bluegrass, colonial bentgrass and fine leaf
fescue. Golfers wanted to have green fairways all summer long so fairway irrigation systems were installed.
Fairways were irrigated and mowed closer and the Kentucky
bluegrass, colonial bentgrass and fine leaf fescue fairways soon became soft lush annual bluegrass fairways.
But the pest control programs that were carried out on
golf course greens in order to keep them healthy were
overlooked. Common diseases like dollar spot or brown
patch were observed on the fairways and treated when
they became severe. The problems that weren't recognized
were HoZmintkoApotbiim leaf spot, anthracnose (H. A. S.
Decline) and the Ataenius beetle grub. These fell into

the category of high temperature killing of annual bluegrass and the solution to the problem was to irrigate them
IT IS EXPENSIVE TO TREAT FAIRWAYS FOR DISEASES AND INSECTS
What has happened in the past is understandable, and
if ScJL&iotiviia dollar spot and Rlvizoc^oyiia brown patch
were the only major diseases on annual bluegrass fairways,
the statement that it is too expensive to spray on a preventive basis is understandable, even if incorrect. What
is meant is that dollar spot and brown patch are unsightly but occur slowly enough that they can be treated on a
curative basis, but we are no longer talking about 5cJL&io£LVUXL dollar spot and RhlzocXonia
brown patch, we are
talking about large dead areas of the fairway caused by
VOCL annua decline and the Ataenius beetle grub that must
be treated if you expect "to have green grass on the fairways." With that in mind, here is the part I don't understand.
From 50,000 to 200,000 dollars are spent to install
an irrigation system "to have green grass in the fairways." Thousands of dollars each year are spent on water
"to have green grass on the fairways." In addition, thousands of dollars are spent on miscellaneous equipment and
supplies such as aerifiers, spikers, vertical mowers "to
have green grass on the fairways." From a few thousand
up to 15,000 or so thousand dollars are spent for the finest mowing equipment "to have well-manicured green grass
on the fairways." Between three to fifteen thousand dollars is spent to fertilize the fairways "to have green
grass." But spending between 5-10 thousand dollars a year
to treat the fairways for disease and insect problems on
a preventive basis "is too expensive." You have over a
quarter of a million dollar investment for the purpose of
"having green grass on the fairways," and you can't spend
five to ten thousand dollars a year to protect it. But
you wouldn't think of not watering on a hot day because
it was too expensive. Why? Your answer would be something like "because the grass would die." And yet it is
too expensive to treat with pesticides to prevent the
grass from dying. What difference does it make if the
grass dies from drought or disease or if the money is
spent on water or fungicide in order "to have green grass

on the fairways?"

The answer is "none" and you know it.

PUT IT IN YOUR BUDGET
Put the cost of fungicides and insecticides in your
budget. Present a strong case for them. Ask them whether or not they want "to have green grass on the fairways" all summer long. If they turn you down, fine, shame
on them, but if you don't put it in the budget because
you think it is too expensive, then shame on you.
CULTURAL PROGRAM FOR ANNUAL BLUEGRASS FAIRWAYS
Mowing height--l/2-7/8 inch
Watering—infrequently and deep during cool weather,
--light and often during warm weather including syringing when necessary during
warm periods of the day.
Fertility—nitrogen 1/2 lb of actual N May, June,
July, August and September,
--high phosphorus and adequate potassium
(as needed based on soil test).
Fungicide program—annual bluegrass fairways 7 to
12 applications during the year.
The major diseases on annual bluegrass which occur
during the growing season are: H. A . S. Decline (HeZmlnthoApo/Uum leaf spot, anthracnose and senescence),
ScJteAotiyiicL dollar spot, FUACVUUM patch and RkizoctonlcL
brown patch. H. A . S. Decline is the most serious problem and trying to grow annual bluegrass without controlling it is futile.
Insecticide—"Poa" fairways.
Should be applied to areas of fairway where the insects are a problem. Once the problem is present an insecticide schedule should be set up to treat those affected areas on a yearly basis.

SAND TOP DRESSING AT INGLEWOOD COUNTRY CLUB 1
Charles Nolan 2
The top dressing of turf is certainly nothing new
to golf course superintendents. For my part it goes back
some 30 years, only in my part of the world it was called
mulching. We as superintendents are facing ever increasing play on our courses. The golfer is demanding better
playing conditions, faster greens. This coupled with
inflation, puts us in a position where we should be ever
searching for new and better ways to give our patrons
the course they are paying for, let it be public or private. As we all know, there are many ways to achieve
one's goal or to cut a blade of grass.
Before I set out on a topdressing program, I met
with Dr. Roy Goss of Western Washington Research Station
and some fellow superintendents to hear and see what
they were up to in regards to topdressing. After some
research I set out on a sanding program. The goal was
to restore the greens at Inglewood Country Club or be
faced with starting at the hard pan and rebuild. The
ongoing sanding program at Inglewood achieved that goal.
So you can better understand why we started on a
sanding program, here are a few brief facts about Inglewood Country Club.
Built in 1918, the greens
existing soils. No drain tile
in. Inglewood Country Club is
ington. We have a rainfall of

were constructed from
was, or has ever been put
located in Kenmore, Wash35 to 160 inches per year

^ Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 2527, 1979.
Superintendent, Inglewood Country Club, Kenmore, WA.

•

which occurs during the fall, winter and spring months.
Here at Inglewood we get some 45 inches of rain. The
summers are typically dry, but golf is played 12 months
a year. What the original depth of soil on the putting
surface was, I can only guess at 12 inches or so, but in
1970 it was 6 to 7 inches. I believe that through aerifying and cup changing, as much as 6 inches of soil has
been removed from the putting surface. The soil structure was broken down so badly that the greens were closed
most of the winter months. In fact, they were maintaining 36 greens because the regular greens were so bad.
Not only the greens, but the aprons in some areas were
3 to 4 inches deep in mud, and like the greens, were
churned up by foot prints making putting impossible.
Our first task was to core the greens with 5/8 inch
tines, remove the cores, and topdress with a sand with
particle sizes falling between No. 20 and 120 Tyler
standard screen, U. S. Series equivalent. We followed
up with another coring three months later, again removing the cores and topdressing with sand. Three months
later we cored the greens again only this time we verticut the cores, topdressed with sand and overseeded.
This was done to marry the soil and sand, thus relieving
any layering that might occur.
Our third year we cored four times, verticut and
topdressed. It was during the third year that we started
topdressing once a week. We have now been sanding lightly each week (weather permitting) for four years. The
greens now have a 3 to 4 inch mixture of sand and soil
plus a 3 to 4 inch topping of sand on top giving us a
total of 7 inches of new mixture to work with. We intend
to continue for another two years. At that time we hope
to reduce the topdressing program to once a month. We
were coring the greens once a year and overseeding, but
have found out that we get better greens by coring twice
a year, which we are now doing. The course is closed on
Mondays until noon. This gives us the time needed to
topdress. Starting at 6:00 a.m. three men can topdress
all 20 greens in a 3 hour period of time. The equipment
we use is one tractor and trailer and one utility cart.
They are used to supply the sand. We use a Lely fertilizer spreader equipped with a sand ring, pulled by a

utility cart to put down 9 cubic feet, one hopper full
of sand on each green. (The time on each green is about
minutes.) The sand is let dry for 2 to 3 hours. By
this time, all greens have been sanded and we can start
dragging on No. 1 green and continue around the course,
thus keeping ahead of any golfers. The light amount
of sand drags in quite easily and is barely noticeable.
We water Monday night, so on Tuesday morning little or
no trace of sand can be seen. We leave the catchers
off the mowers on Tuesday. This, plus decaying roots,
adds a little humus to our mix.
We have eliminated all thatch problems. As we have
none, we experience less disease, our fertilizer bill
has been cut in half, verticutting need only be carried
out once or twice in the spring as the drag mat eliminates graining better than any machine to date. It also
eliminates the use of combs and brushes. As for the
putting quality of the greens, they are all so consistent, one can't tell one surface from the other. The
vertical and lateral movement of water has been improved
greatly, almost eliminating puddling. As for dry spots
that plagued us seven years ago, they are non-existent.
To date we have experienced little damage to our mowers.
The golfer can enjoy his golf course 12 months a year
now, the surface stays drier, and there are less foot
prints making for much improved conditions.
As for the approaches, we spread the sand very
heavy, in some cases 2 or 3 inches deep. We encourage
the golfer to walk on the sanded areas until spring, at
which time we overseed. In many areas this was all that
was required to dry them up from mud to dry turf in only
one year. We found that the heavy traffic and compaction by mowers cause the breakdown of the soil structure
to the point where infiltration was near zero. After
the liberal application of sand and aerification, these
areas once again resumed near normal infiltration and
percolation. The protective covering of sand has significantly improved the stability of these areas.
To sum up our program at Inglewood, one must say,
you must be consistent in topdressing, use a sand described above, put it on little and often. It is worth

noting that sand has no structure to be destroyed through
traffic or by mowing equipment. Aerifying and topdressing should be considered a permanent practice since layers of grass or thatch can develop over any soil material
including sand and reduce the infiltration rate with time
At first you will experience some rough greens but after
about the fourth or fifth week, they smooth out. The
time and dollars spent will pay great dividends. As they
say, try it, you will like it.

WATER — A DIMINISHING RESOURCE 1
J.R. Watson 2
I am pleased to have an opportunity to discuss
this topic with you. The title "Water—a diminishing
resource"—provides the latitude and the opportunity
to discuss several aspects of this very vital and important subject. Each year hundreds of people involved
with turfgrass and with other aspects of water gather
in meetings to discuss water and water related topics.
Pick up a newspaper in any man's town and chances are
you will find at least one article dealing with the
subject. And, recently many industrialists, conservation groups and many political leaders have become
concerned. In short, the subject of water receives a
great deal of discussion. Rightly so. For water is
important; it is our most vital natural resource. And
it is an exhaustible, diminishing resource.
Water is really a very serious subject but we don't
treat it with the seriousness it deserves. None of us
do. Not those of us involved in turf management. Not
the farmers, who account for about 45-50 percent or more
(some say 80%) of the total amount of water consumed in
the U.S. each day. Not the people in industry, who some
say use another 40-45 percent of the total. Even those
industries that could not exist without access to large
quantities of water, like the utility companies, the
food processors, the beverage makers, the paper manufacturers; and, certainly not the average householder,

Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 2527, 1979.
Vice President, The Toro Company, Minneapolis, MN.

whose total waste of water -- that's waste, not beneficial use -- each day amounts to millions of gallons.
This from the approximate 9 percent that goes for physical and domestic use.
I suppose the main reason we don't regard water
more seriously is that we have not been convinced that
we're dealing with a scarce commodity. In my home state
of Minnesota, it's hard for anyone to believe that water
is scarce when you realize we have over 15,000 lakes containing many billions of gallons of water. And, we receive some 30-40 inches of precipitation annually. How
can water be scarce under those conditions?
The truth of the matter is that the amount of water
on this planet is constant. Just like land, it's not
being made any more. The amount of water available for
the use of everyone on Earth -- for all purposes -- industry, agriculture, golf courses, and our individual
needs -- is the same today as it was at the beginning of
time, and it will be the same in the year three thousand
if the old planet Earth is still around in the year three
thousand.
The amount of water available for our use is less
than one percent of the total in existence. The rest is
tied up in the polar ice caps and in the oceans -- essentially unavailable to us. Not only is what remains -that one percent -- a limited, inelastic supply — we
are doing things to it: We are finding new uses for it,
constantly. And we're polluting it, faster than nature
can purify it.
While I do not want to cast myself in the role of
an alarmist, a convincing case can be made that a water
crisis is building.
It is unfortunate, but true, that our society has
become crisis oriented. It takes some catastrophic
event or some action that deeply affects large numbers
of us in a personal way before we react with sufficient
collective force to cause something to happen. And then
our reaction tends to be hasty and impatient -- demanding
quick solutions.

A case in point, of course, is the recurring energy
crisis. In spite of the severe disruptions caused by
the 1973 oil embargo and in spite of repeated admonishments to curtail use, we continue to act as though the
supply of fossil fuel were unlimited. And, some agitate
against nuclear energy — the only real hope for alleviation of energy needs in the forseeable future.
That same kind of attitude followed the disastrous
drought a few years ago that disrupted lives and livlihoods in Southern California, in the Bay area of Northern
California, and many other parts of the U.S., including
my home state of Minnesota. Yet, when the rains returned
we blithely fell back into our old wasteful ways of water
use.
There are other similarities between the energy
crisis -- which is real -- and the potential for a water
crisis -- which is not yet with us but which could be
far more disruptive and hurtful. Both have deep-seated
implications. We experience the consequences of conflict with respect to oil every day. Conflicts over
water reach more farther back into history -- to Biblical
times -- but the forces of conflict continue unabated to
this day, as you well know.
Earlier I mentioned only 1% or less fresh water is
available for our use. Of that, we have, in the U.S.,
a dependable supply of fresh water estimated to be about
600 billion gallons a day. This represents approximately
3% of the world's total. For comparison: Canada and
Russia each have in excess of 20%. One source (Weigner)
reports that in 1960 we used about 270 billion gallons a
day. In 1970 this had increased to 370 billion gallons
and usage is expected to be 422 billion gallons in 1985
-- if we ignore the tremendous quantities that will be
needed to process shale oil, transport coal slurry and
other energy demands we seek to throw off the Arab yoke.
Water and energy relationships cannot and must not be
ignored. They are similar and solutions are closely
inter-related.
I attended the National Conference on Water held
in May 1977 in St. Louis. A great deal of information

came out of that conference but one thing that stuck
indelibly in my mind in the report of the proceedings
that was transmitted to President Carter is this statement:
"OveAa&t most pads o£ the. nation aAe ¿holt oI
wateA now, and consumptive, use nationwide witi
increase
by 33 peAcent by the yean 2000."
The water problem really parallels the soil problem. There are still huge quantities of oil in the
world, but demand has simply grown faster than supply.
So it is with water. Water is a diminishing resource -not because we have less each day but because we are
finding new uses and because demands for old uses are
increasing at a very alarming rate. Also, basic to the
problem is the fact of distribution or location -- some
areas have abundant supplies; others like Tucson are
losing water at an alarming rate -- the water table has
dropped some 400 or more feet in past few years. The
same is happening to those areas overlying the Ogallala
Aquifer -- a huge underground water reservoir extending
through the Plains area from Nebraska to the panhandle
of Texas. Demand has increased dramatically. For example, in the Texas panhandle from some 2 to 3,000 wells
25 to 30 years ago to 70 to 80,000 today. And there are
many many other examples.
We had better believe we are dealing with a scarce
commodity and we had better start treating it with more
respect.
I do not want to deal with the politics of how or
what to do about redistribution, alternative uses, or
costs, rather I would ask:
What aJte we going to do about it?
What a/ie you and
you/t goL^ dub OA tuA£ facility
going to do about it?
Three themes or points run through all the water
and water related meetings that I attend and I should
like to review them briefly.

They are:
1.

There is a vital need, a desperate need, for everyone who uses water for beneficial purposes to use it
more wisely. To practice water conservation every
day.

2.

There is a need to impress upon everyone who uses
water to grow healthy turfgrasses for a golf course,
or for any other recreational purpose, that that is
a very important beneficial use of water. They help
to cool our cities and thereby reduce energy and
they provide healthy recreation.

3.

It is time to recognize that wastewater - sewage
effluent - is an important source of water for turfgrass irrigation. Further that use of this "recycled
water is in reality "water conservation."

Those of us who are involved in the turf management
business are guilty of misuse of water. That's true,
but to a far less degree than for most of the other major
water users. The golf courses in this country, by and
large, have for years had better management than any
other type of recreational turf, including home lawns.
And that management includes, of course, the use of water
Yet, I would be remiss if I were not critical of the use
we have made of some of our accomplishments.
As many of you know, I was the fortunate recipient
of a graduate Fellowship sponsored by the U.S.G.A. Green
Section when I attended Penn State. Dr. Fred Grau,
Director of Green Section at that time, and Professor
Burt Musser, my major advisor, considered watering practices to be one of the important areas needing evaluation
That was 1947 -- some 32 years ago.
My dissertation was entitled, "Irrigation and Compaction on Established Fairway Turf." Among the conclusions resulting from this study were the following:
1.

Moisture levels exerted a greater influence on turf
quality, during the experimental period, than did
soil compaction.

2.

The moderate use of supplemental irrigation seems
necessary to produce high quality playing turf that
will remain green throughout the growing season.

3.

The unwatered plots were brown and in poor condition
for play over an extended period of time.

4.

Moderate usage of supplemental irrigation on intensively managed turf will favor development of bentgrass at the expense of the slower growing species,
so that, eventually the turf will consist largely
of bentgrass.

5.

Supplemental irrigation in quantities great enough
to maintain a soil at approximately field capacity
is unnecessary and encourages disease, and the subsequent invasion of crabgrass and clover.

6.

Excessive watering creates a soggy soil condition,
promotes shallow rooting of the turf, encourages
disease and the invasion of crabgrass and clover -and, if Poa annua had been present or the height of
cut lower, I am confident it too would have increased.

That was 1950 -- 29 years ago. Since that time
others have investigated other aspects of water, its
application and use on golf course turfgrass. Have we
made progress? Yes — we've made a great deal of progress in all phases of golf course management these past
30 years. One of the reasons is that aside from agriculture, nothing that grows has received as much attention as golf course turfgrasses. Research--private, industrial, and university--and extension activity have
helped the industry make enormous strides. Knowledge,
technology, and management techniques relating to golf
course turf have all advanced dramatically. But despite
those gains, water and water related problems are still
with us.
As an example, let me quote from an article by
Dr. Jack Hall of V.P.I., published in the 1978 proceedings of the Rocky Mountain Turfgrass Conference -one year ago.

"We killed more golf greens in Virginia in 1977
with improper irrigation than any other management factor." Jack went on to say that too often greens were
irrigated when the intent was to syringe and when this
happens at 90°, temperatures damage is likely to occur.
Automatic irrigation systems offer many advantages, but
too few have the capability to "mist" water. Only a
limited number of manufacturers have equipment capable
of properly syringing (misting) and too few system designs incorporate this feature -- it does cost extra
but there are costs involved in replacing greens! (For
each gm of water vaporized, 540 calories of heat are
dissipated.)
There obviously is a gap between what we know and
what we practice. Sometimes I think it's a chasm. To
date, we seem to have been incapable -- at least unsuccessful -- in bridging that gap. Why? Perhaps it's an
economic factor, perhaps improper dissemination of information, perhaps resistance to change, and probably
some of all these reasons plus others. Certainly, I
don't have an answer. Bat I ^isunty bzLLzvt that ovi<¿ ofi
th<L majoi ckaLtmg&A facing ou/i tnduAt/iy tn tha next
yoxwA XA to ¿¿vid a way to na/uiou) thtb gap -- w<¿ ¿tmpty
muAt ¿tnd a solution
to thij> piobtm.
We need to learn
more about such things as drought tolerance and rooting
characteristics of grasses, water requirements, watering
techniques—water application and efficiency—water conservation, soi1-air-water relationships, leaching and
weeds and their ecological relationship in the golf course
environment. Also, we must find ways to avoid pollution
and to use recycled water.
And, of course, we have not learned to use water
with the kind of efficiency that we must if we are going
to play a significant role to help keep this planet from
running out of water.
In addition to recommending that we find a solution
to the information gap, I should like to also suggest
that we -- y o u , m e , all of us here -- do everything we
can to generate more knowledge -- more new information,
better technology, better products, better equipment --

so that turfgrass management will continue to advance.
That can be done in a number of ways. One is with
scholarships. Another is to sponsor research, basic or
fundamental research, as my company is doing to support
a four-year study of water use rates for turfgrasses at
Texas A & M. For we believe knowledge of water use rates
is basic and will be of immense value in determining
overall water requirements of a particular region, as
well as for the future water efficient turfgrasses that
grow and that will grow on turf facilities in the future.
There are some 8 or 9 steps for conserving water
under drought conditions which I should like to list
and which if followed should lead to conservation of
our most valuable diminishing natural resource.
1.

Treat every day as if you were in a period of severe
drought.

2.

Establish watering priorities. This means giving
highest priority to the most intensively managed
areas; for example, on a golf course, the greens,
the most valuable part of the course and where the
most critical play takes place.

3.

Follow sound irrigation practices.

4.

Reduce, or avoid where possible, all causes of stress
such as salt build-up.

5.

Alter mowing and cultivation practices. This includes
raising the height of cut wherever possible, which
leads to frequent mowing.

6.

Expand use of mulch.
vation measure.

7.

Erect wind barriers, especially where there are
large expanses of open spaces.

8.

Experiment with anti-transpirants and surfactants.

9.

Aggressively seek additional sources of water.

This is a very important conser-

Among the alternative sources are wells and ponds,
collections of marginal water and — the most abundant
and most often wasted supply -- treated sewage effluent.
At my company we are convinced that wastewater will
become a major source of irrigation water in the future.
We believe it must be used widely for all types of irrigations, especially for large turf areas and in agriculture.
We expect to play a strong role in the research and
product development necessary to make certain the equipment and the resources will be available for expanded
use of wastewater for irrigation.
As many of you are aware, the USGA Green Section,
the American Society of Golf Course Architects, the
Golf Course Superintendents Association, and the National
Golf Foundation, sponsored a two-day conference in November in Chicago to deal exclusively with the subject of
wastewater use for irrigation of turf on golf courses
and other sports fields.
It was a conference that was long overdue. It will,
I predict, encourage significant expansion in the use of
effluent for irrigation. The proceedings are available
from each of these organizations at a nominal cost. I
urge everyone in this room to obtain a copy of the proceedings and to read them carefully and thoroughly.
Thank you!

EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION IS A
MULTIPLE RESPONSIBLITIY 1
Donald D. Hoos 2
In recent years, the old time profession of "Keeper
of the Green" has made rapid strides. Golfers continually demand higher standards of maintenance. To meet
these demands, today's turfmen must call on the latest
in modern equipment, agricultural research and technical
information.
Even though the modern superintendent is first and
foremost a grower of grass, the fields from which he
draws his information have become extremely broad. He
must be capable of providing a high degree of maintenance
proficiency, operate economically and keep abreast of
new developments. He is a busy man. The job has become
more than one of "keeping the green." The turfman is an
agriculturist, a supervisor and a manager.
This last description of the turfman as a manager
is the area in which I would like to focus our attention
today. It has been receiving increasing attention in the
last few years and rightly so. With growing budgets and
other responsibilities, the time devoted to management
by turfmen is increasing. Management has always been a
part of our profession, but has received little emphasis.
In today's computer society, with its ability to accumulate and store volumes of information and data and critically analyze techniques and procedures, we have developed a management society with a great vocabulary
of management terms. It is now time to incorporate these

^ Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 2527, 1979.
Western Director, USGA Green Section, Tustin, CA.

ideas and terms into our vocabulary of agricultural and
scientific knowledge to deal with the managers, businessmen and professionals who are our clientele.
What does all this mean? Simply this; we have to
be effective communicators. What is communication? It
is an exchange of ideas or a conveyance of information.
It sounds simple enough and should be. It's probably
the most important thing we do in any of our daily activities. We have to communicate to get things done. It
is basic to everything — this exchange of ideas or conveyance of information. It is the one thing that separates human beings from the rest of the animal kingdom
and has allowed us to develop a so-called modern civilization. Yet, communication or lack of it in many cases
has been the cause of more than one superintendent to
lose his job. Therefore, let's examine some of the
things that prevent good communication and then look at
some of the things we can do to improve communication.
Roadblocks to Good Communication
In my travels I am frequently called by a club
official requesting an urgent visit to help analyze a
serious turfgrass problem. Upon arriving at the golf
course, I may find a simple agronomic problem that the
superintendent has already corrected. Yet, I still
sense hostility between the club officials and superintendent. The superintendent obviously has good agronomic knowledge and ability, yet has not been able to
communicate this to the membership. Or vice versa, the
membership desires are not being communicated to the
superintendent. A roadblock exists to good communication.
These are some of the roadblocks commonly encountered:
1)
2)
3)
4)

Lack of confidence or mutual misunderstanding.
Failure to listen or read intelligently.
Lack of feedback or failure to arouse discussion
on a lateral basis.
Failure to apply successful communication techniques .

Perhaps a lack of confidence or mutual misunderstanding is the most common of roadblocks encountered.
In most cases, the green chairman or general manager
possess very little technical knowledge about grasses,
soils, diseases and other agronomic matters. They
must rely on the superintendent's expertise to make
agronomic decisions. The superintendent must be able
to communicate to his chairman or manager the best methods to achieve the best conditioning of the golf course.
If the superintendent's inability to communicate these
things results in insufficent materials or manpower to
accomplish the desired results, a lack of confidence in
his judgement or ability can result. This can lead to
second guessing or the superintendent's decisions and
oversupervision. The eventual loser in such situations
is the golfing member who must then play golf on less
than satisfactory turf.
Mutual misunderstandings can be equally troublesome.
The old adage "A little knowledge can be a dangerous
thing" all too often comes into action to create misunderstandings or misconceptions about the proper way
to handle a problem. A club official reads a trade magazine describing the use of a certain chemical to control Poa annua in bermudagrass turf in Texas. He decides
that this method may eliminate Poa annua from his fairways and greens in Washington and directs the superintendent to apply the chemical to the golf course. If the
superintendent is unable to explain that this chemical
will kill all cool season grasses, then he's going to
have an even bigger problem later.
One of the single largest causes of turfgrass loss
is the misapplication of chemicals. Usually the explanation for the damage is that the applicator misread the
label and applied too much chemical, or he misunderstood
the oral explanation given by his superior and used the
red material in the green bag instead of the green material in the red bag. One must realize that communication of ideas to all maintenance personnel are equally
as important as communication of ideas to club officials
and club members.

How many superintendents in the audience think
they really know what the majority of their members
desire in a golf course? Do you get feedback from the
members? If you don't, then you are going to have
problems. A lack of open discussion and information
exchange between club committees or departments can be
disturbing. It is always disheartening when a superintendent tells you about the day he had one green
mowed and suddenly there are two groups on every tee
waiting for a shotgun start he knew nothing about. Or
the time he aerified all 18 greens the day before the
member-guest tournament.
Perhaps the worst situation one hears about involving a lack of mutual discussion on a lateral basis
concerns the installation of an irrigation system. Too
often one hears of a situation where a club accepted
the lowest bid on an installation and two years later
realizes that it is going to cost them the same amount
of money to correct the deficiencies of the system. A
little more open discussion in the beginning may have
caused them to make the right choice to begin with. Invariably in this situation, one hears the statement, "If
they had listened to me in the first place, this wouldn't
have happened." Perhaps in this situation, the superintendent didn't make full use of his communication ability
to force the right decision to be made.
The failure to apply successful communication techniques in our day-to-day operations creates many of our
problems. We might list a few basic steps for good communication that apply to almost everything we do.
1)
2)
3)
4)

Know your audience.
Know your objectives
A) Watch your attitude
B) Know what you want to say.
Learn your assets and liabilities.
Plan your strategy
A) Catch interest
B) Hold interest
C) Create desire
D) Ask for action at the end.

The successful superintendent uses good public relations hand-in-hand with basic communication skills.
Public relations is quite simply the image you project
and the way your project it. As Diane Wilson, staff
writer for Golf Course Management points out in an article in a recent issue; "Do you look like a professional
who can completely handle a multi-hundred-thousand-dollara-year operation? The question is not so much whether
your appearance suggests competence (although that helps),
but whether your actions and words show you to be a concerned individual who can handle tough problems."
There are many ways you can help project this
image. You should listen to complaints. Remember that
the person who complains deserves an answer of some kind.
He wouldn't complain if he didn't care about the golf
course. Do not lose your temper. Be a good listener.
If the person or group complaining is a long one, keep
eye contact, and nod occasionally so he will know you
are listening. After acknowledging the person's anger,
calmly explain what is being done about it or thank him
for bringing it to your attention. If the complainer
sees you as an understanding calm professional who solves
problems, his opinion of you can do you much good.
Keep the green chairman, manager and membership
informed of your problems and progress. A notice in
the club paper or on the locker room bulletin board
prior to aerification of greens, resodding or any work
detrimental to play will save a lot of headaches and
member grumblings.
If unusual weather conditions cause disease or
other turfgrass problems, let the membership know about
it, what corrective measures you have taken and how long
it will take before expected recovery of
damaged areas.
It is good policy in another way. It helps to keep the
turf management program before the member's eyes. They
will enjoy knowing about course conditioning and improvements .
Take advantage of consultants such as the USGA
Turfgrass Advisory Service and University Extension personnel to help analyze problems. We live in an age of

specialization and it is virtually impossible to keep
abreast of all the information that is available to you.
To seek help, consultation and insure you make the right
decision is not a sign of weakness or inability. Medical doctors have been doing this for years to insure
correct diagnosis and treatment of patient ills. Corporations do it to insure maximum production and efficiency. A true professional seeks advice and help with
his problems. By getting an outside observation from
an impartial source, a superintendent can evaluate his
program and insure he is using the latest techniques
and procedures available.
I've collected a few "foods for thought" that I
would like to leave with you. Perhaps as you return to
your courses and your day-to-day activities, you can
implement some of the communicative skills we've talked
about today. The following short thoughts might be
worthwhile to consider and keep in mind:
The most profitless things in the world to manufacture are excuses.
Next time, reach for the truth instead of an alibi.
A man may fail many times, but he cannot be called
a failure until he starts blaming someone else.
Some people are so busy learning the tricks of the
trade, that they don't learn the trade.

COLLEGE

EDUCATION

AND

MANAGER

THE

TURFGRASS

1

Stephen Miller 2
As I look out over the audience assembled here today, I see a group of highly successful turfgrass managers. Let's pause for a moment and consider just how
this success was achieved and how our turfgrass expertise was gained.
Many of us have taken college courses dealing with
turfgrass management; in fact, some of us have degrees
from such institutions. Most, if not all of us, have
attended educational seminars and conferences such as
this one. Trade magazines, publications, and other lit
erature contribute greatly to our turfgrass knowledge.
And, of course there is that grand old teacher - experience.
College education gives the turfgrass manager an
excellent foundation to build on. Throughout one's
coursework, one begins to gain an understanding of
plants, soils, climate, and their interaction. Yet a
mere understanding of plants and soils, no mater how
thorough, is not by itself enough to become a successful turfgrass manager. There is a great difference between knowing and actually doing. There is a course we
don't get to take in college which some of us turfgrass
graduates refer to as PE 101 - Practical Experience 101

^ Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 25
27, 1979.
Assistant Superintendent, Port Ludlow Golf Course,
Port Ludlow, WA.

Consider for a moment a hypothetical situation.
Let's take two students, say, just out of high school.
We will put one directly into a turfgrass setting, a
golf course for example, and send the other to college.
The college student will spend the next four years acquiring knowledge, hopefully picking up a small amount
of practical experience during summers. The young person on the golf course, on the other hand, will actually
be doing and carrying out the tasks necessary for the
year-round upkeep of the golf course. At the end of
four years the college graduate goes to work on the golf
course. At this point in time there probably will be no
comparison between the two young people in their respective abilities to get things done. If we want to fertilize fairways, for example, the person who has been doing
it for four years will go out and do the job quite smoothly. The new college graduate, however, no longer faces
a level research plot of precise dimensions, but must
now contend with an area of irregular shape and contour,
perhaps even with considerable slope. The first time out
is undoubtedly going to be rough - just as it probably
was for the person straight out of high school four years
ago. Clearly the college graduate will have to do the
job a few more times before feeling confident about doing it as smoothly as the person who has been doing it
for some time. While the recent graduate may understand
more about the timing and nutritional ramifications of the
job just completed, the actual application of the fertilizer no doubt will be done more efficiently by the person
who has been doing it for a few years.
If we follow these two young people for another
four years, I feel we may find a most revealing situation. The person who has been working on the golf course
all along will no doubt still be doing a fine job of
fertilizing fairways (along with all the other tasks),
as well as having a thorough understanding of the cultural actions being taken. The knowledge and understanding gained from college education coupled with a
few years experience to develop the ability to carry out
jobs smoothly and efficienctly give rise to a well-rounded
turfgrass manager.

So, while building a future for oneself in the turfgrass industry, I feel a college education gives one a
head start, even if only a slight head start. But college
education does not give one all the answers. We are
blessed and cursed to be in a business in which no one
has all the answers. Whenever dealing with anything
biological, there is so much that is not understood there are simply too many variables. Turfgrass graduates are blessed in the sense that while they are sometimes expected to know everything, they can take solace
in the fact that no one has all the answers. Yet all
turfgrass managers are cursed in that no one can explain
why certain things happen. For example, here at Port
Ludlow in the middle of August we had a severe outbreak
of FuócUbíum yiivaZz on our 16th green. The green is elevated and the area is open with good air movement. Ambient temperatures never dropped below 50 F. Every
square yard of the green was affected yet there wasn't
any FtiócvUurn on our other greens. We treated the green
and cleared up the problem, but no one has the slightest
idea why we had such a heavy infestation in that area at
that time of year.
Obtaining a college degree in turfgrass management
exposes a person to a great many research and experimental projects. Most turfgrass students are also required
to undertake research on their own. This exposure lends
an understanding of research methods, as well as the
ability to interpret research findings. I know that in
my own case, this exposure has made it easier for me to
understand current research, assimilate it, and put it
to practical use.
An advantage to college coursework in any field is
the enhancement of one's ability to think. Continual
work in the classroom and laboratory instills in a person a thinking process which aids in the ability to
think out problems, consider the effects of alternative
courses of action, etc.
Probably the greatest advantage of a college education is the personal growth that occurs in just getting through the educational system. Our colleges and
universities are by nature highly beaurocratic institu-

tions. One must learn to communicate effectively and
be able to work with people. The ability to effectively work with people is of tremendous value in our profession. Whether in a park, golf course, or any other
turfgrass setting, we are in a production oriented business - we must get things done. And from this standpoint, we are in a people business. Personnel management has to be one of our top priorities. Very seldom
will a turfgrass facility look just the way we want it
to - we would probably have to do everything ourselves
to achieve that. We must, therefore, be able to work
well with others and depend on them. Where necessary,
we must train people to do a job that is acceptable to
us. In this respect the ability to work with people and
communicate effectively with them is indispensable. As
one proceeds through a hectic and beaurocratic educational institution, one grows and improves in this most
important area.
There are a few areas in which I would like to see
turfgrass degree programs improved. As previously noted,
one hopefully gets some practical experience during summers while one is in school. But in the Pacific Northwest it is during the late fall and winter seasons when
our greatest disease problems arise. While these problems are occurring, turfgrass students are in the classroom. Unless extensive research space is available, the
student gets very little exposure to these problems. For
this reason I would like to see ways by which turfgrass
students may obtain greater experience during late fall
and winter. Be it expanded research facilities, or actual
work at a turfgrass facility for perhaps an afternoon or
two during the week, just getting students out working
with turfgrass at this time of year would be greatly helpful.
Another area which should be more heavily stressed
would be that of business administration. Modern turfgrass managers are being called upon more and more to be
competent business managers as well as agronomic and
horticultural experts. As noted by previous speakers at
this Conference, we are facing great problems - shortages
of our precious natural resources, energy considerations,
and inflation. We must become better managers - not only

in the agronomic and horticultural aspects of our profession, but in the administrative aspects as well. In
all likelihood we will have less manpower with which we
must accomplish at least as much as we do now. Equipment, fertilizer, and chemical costs are all subject to
the constant spiral of inflation. It is obvious that
turfgrass managers are being faced with greater and
greater administrative and fiscal challenges. In this
area, college education can be especially helpful to the
wouldbe turfgrass manager. Turfgrass students are required to take a few business courses and should be encouraged to take more as electives.
It is my firm belief that college education provides a solid foundation in the plant sciences. It also
provides the opportunity to gain additional training in
areas such as business administration. Such an education,
coupled with a few years experience, will no doubt give
rise to some outstanding turfgrass managers.

THE CAUSES OF LATE WINTER EARLY SPRING DAMAGE TO GOLF TURFGRASS 1
J.R. Watson 2
During late winter - early spring, fluctuating
temperatures and waterlogged, partially frozen soil
produce conditions that cause the loss of turf. This
loss may be the direct or indirect result of one or
more of these phenomena. Direct damage or kill of
the permanent grass may occur at any point of the
freeze - frozen - thaw cycle so characteristic of this
season. Indirect injury may result from attacks by
disease producing organisms (mostly snowmold and other
low temperature fungi) and by traffic on frozen turfgrass areas.
CAUSES RELATING TO TEMPERATURE VARIATIONS
Turfgrass may be destroyed ~ at the time it
freezes, during the time it's frozen, during the time
it's thawing, or after it's thawed and growth has begun.
Some killing probably occurs during each of these periods. This cycle of freezing, frozen, thawing may be
repeated several times during each winter and early spring.
When associated with intermittent growth in late winterearly spring, damage may be severe. Death as the plant
freezes happens most often in the late fall-early winter,
but may occur after a period of growth (particularly
rapid growth) in the spring when a sudden drop in temperature occurs. This is most damaging when the grass
plants are in a non-hardened condition. Ice crystals

Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 2527, 1979.
Vice President, The Toro Company, Minneapolis, MN.

form within the cells and this disruption of the protoplasm may cause death. Too, repeated cycles in the
spring will exhaust food reserves upon which the plants
must draw to initiate growth. For this reason, Poa annua
is especially vulnerable.
Death during the time the plant is frozen is unlikely to occur unless it is subjected to traffic. This
will seldom occur if a good snow cover exists, which is
the case most often during the winter months. However,
play during the time period under discussion may cause
mechanical damage either by attrition or from pressure
which forces the ice crystals through the cells, thereby puncturing them and causing death. Play during times
the grass is covered with frost has the same effect.
Death at the time of thawing depends on the amount
and the state of the "bound" water within the cell
(intra-cellular water). Unless adequate bound water is
present in the protoplasm, death may result if thawing
is rapid or if inter-cellular water re-enters the cell
too rapidly. In the latter case, the cell wall is permeable but the protoplasm is unable to absorb the water.
Prolonged cold may be conducive to death because it contributes to brittleness of the protoplasm and, if contact (from traffic) is made, the plant is highly susceptible to damage.
CAUSES RELATING TO TRAFFIC
Grass will initiate growth during the warmer periods of late winter-early spring. If the season is
characterized by widely fluctuating temperatures, the
grass is vulnerable to the freeze-frozen-thaw growth
cycle with its attendant problems. Too, the enviornment produced is highly conducive to disease development. Thus, this may be the most critical phase of
the turf management program facing the golf course
superintendent. A n d , he often finds his turf management programs (and, therefore, himself) in direct conflict with the golfing membership, especially those
desirous of playing a few early rounds.

Mechanical injury by traffic on partially frozen
or wet soil may be immediately evident (visible) or
delayed (invisible). Visible injuries (soil displacement) are the footprints and ruts caused by foot and
vehicular traffic -- sliding and slipping, walking or
rolling -- on partially frozen or saturated soil. Invisible injury stems from soil compaction. Although
this type of mechanical damage is not confined to the
winter months, soil compaction may be far more damaging during this period than generally recognized.
Traffic on partially frozen or wet soil, without the
protection of living grass, will exert greater pressure (hence, more compacting force) than during the
normal growing season. This results, subsequently, in
poor growth and may explain "problem areas" which show
up in spring and summer for no apparent reason. Cupping
areas are particularly vulnerable in this respect.
Traffic on frosted turf causes the frost crystals
to puncture leaf cells and kill the grass. Removal of
frost, or preventing play when the grass is frosted,
is essential.
Control of traffic during vulnerable periods does
not always contribute to harmony between early golfing
members and the less enthusiastic golfing and non-golfing members. The responsibility for control rests with
the club officials -- president, greens chairman, superintendent and golf professional.
CAUSES RELATING TO ICE SHEETS AND PONDED WATER
Turfgrasses, although essentially dormant during
the winter months, nevertheless, carry on metabolic
(growth) activity, particularly respiration. During
late winter-early spring, as growth activity increases,
the grass may suffocate (a) if diffusion of atmospheric
and soil gases are reduced or stopped; (b) if excess
carbon dioxide accumulates, or (c) if oxygen supplies
are reduced to a minimum. Such conditions exist under
ice sheets in poorly drained areas where the soil remains saturated for extended periods and, under flooded
conditions when ponded or standing water persists. The
higher the temperature, the shorter the period of time

that the grass can survive these adverse conditions.
Under limited (and rare) conditions,
and ponded water may act as a lens. When
the sun's rays are magnified to the point
cessive heat produced may cause a burning
of the turfgrass.

ice sheets
this happens,
where the exor scalding

CAUSES RELATED TO REDUCED WATER INTAKE
Desiccation is a "wilting" phenomenon. Like wilt,
which occurs during the normal growing season, desiccation occurs when evapotranspiration exceeds water intake. This inability of the roots to absorb water, or
for the plant to transport it to or through its system,
may result from a shallow, poorly branched root system;
diseased vascular system, or, from a reduced or restricted soil water supply. Limited soil moisture may
be the result of a "dry" soil (not enough water) or of
a frozen or partially frozen soil (water unavailable to
the root because of its physical state). Thus, the
roots simply cannot take in enough water to offset that
being lost by the plant and it "desiccates" or dries up it wilts. Although more serious during periods when
the soil is "on the dry side" or partially frozen, desiccation on high windswept sites may occur at any time.
The increased air movement causes excessive transpiration
and under limited or reduced soil moisture conditions,
the plants may die unless protected.
In late winter-early spring, before the irrigation
system has been activated, damage from desiccation may
be severe. Water hauled in spray tanks or by other
means and applied to critical sites will preclude or
minimize loss.
PROTECTIVE MEASURES
Techniques and procedures that protect, avoid and
correct the damage that occurs in late winter-early
spring are well known to and understood by the golf
course superintendent. For the most part, protective
measures relate to production of a healthy vigorous grass
and to the control, to the extent possible, of the soil-

plant environment. When these factors are adversely impacted by anomalous conditions of weather, poor construction or inadequate equipment and supplies, the responsibility for loss of turfgrass must be shared.
I.

To Protect Against Temperature Variations
1.

Apply sound cultural practices in the fall of
the year. This would include properly timed
application of balanced fertilizer; cultivation
of compacted areas and of such areas as slopes
where water infiltration is poor; controlled
application of water - to insure satisfactory
soil moisture; mowing in accordance with growth
requirements - raise height of cut on areas
known to be susceptible to desiccation; implementation of disease control programs at the
proper time - fall and spring. (Programs to
control or eliminate insects, weeds and thatch
would have been implemented at earlier dates.)

2.

Control traffic, especially during critical
periods.

3.

Use mulches or covers if warranted.

4.

If late winter-early spring play is anticipated,
cut cups in the fall and fill with newspaper.

5.

Cut temporary greens if needed.

6.

Work toward elimination of Poa annua.

7.

Develop programs to introduce new, improved
grasses as they become available. Seed greens
lightly each fall to help eliminate Poa annua.

8.

Avoid practices that stimulate excessive early
growth or that produce soft, succulent growth
in early spring.

9.

Apply fungicides as needed.

II.

III.

IV.

To Protect Against Traffic
1.

Develop programs to control traffic during critical times and on critical sites.

2.

Enlist support of all golfers.

3.

Take pictures of damage and make presentation to
greens committee and membership.

To Protect Against Ice Sheets and Ponded Water
1.

Improve drainage.

2.

Redesign and rebuild if necessary.

3.

Leave snow as insulator as long as possible.

4.

Apply dark material (Milorganite) to ice sheets
to make them porous.

5.

Mechanically break up solid (non-porous) ice
sheets if temperatures range into 50's or greater
for extended periods.

6.

Apply fungicides as needed.

To Protect Against Limited Soil Water
1.

Water in the fall as late as is needed to insure
good fall and winter supply of soil moisture.

2.

Use covers and mulches to protect vulnerable
sites.

3.

Plant superior permanent grasses.

4.

Apply those cultural practices needed to insure
adequate storage of food reserves and that develop deep rooted, extensively branched grass
plants.

5.

Apply water to counteract desiccating conditions
- haul if necessary.

6.

Apply fungicides as needed.

7.

Avoid all practices that stimulate early excessive growth or that produce soft, succulent
growth.

ATHLETIC FIELD DEVELOPMENT
AND MAINTENANCE COSTS 1
William Lex2
For proper field development there should be advance
planning. I would say that at least a year before you go
to bid on a project the planning should begin. There are
many problems that can be avoided and early planning also
gives you time to pick the best architect for the job.
When the construction is started if you, as Grounds Maintenance Supervisor of the school district or park department, have charge of overseeing the project you should
keep a daily record of what is discussed or done on that
day as you very well may have to refer back to your records. You cannot rely on your memory! I would recommend that the school district or park department have
full control of the project using the architect only if
needed for consulting reasons. The person in charge of
the project should be on the field at all times when the
contractor is working. An example of that would be when
we were putting in the drain lines. We used a digger
with a lazer beam which is the very best way to put in
drain lines. It takes all the guess work out while
watching them dig lines. Many times they weren't watching the lights on the digger and we were getting humps
in the line which would have stopped or slowed water flow
or trucks running over drain lines crushing them. By
being on the job site it insures the job is done right
and hopefully without problems later.

^ Presented at the 33rd Northwest Turfgrass Conference,
Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 25-27, 1979.
Grounds Foreman, Northshore School District 417,
Seattle, WA.

At Northshore School District we renovated Pop
Keeney Stadium (about 6h acres). We redid the football
field and baseball field and added a soccer field at a
cost of approximately $500,000 including lighting. I
will give you the cost of three different types of football fields and the cost of maintaining the type of field
we put in.
1) Astroturf
74,100 ft 2 @ $4.50/ft 2 Total: $444,600
2) Pat System 74,100 ft
$3.00/ft 2 Total: $222,300
z
3) Natural turf 74,100 ft 0 $1.50/ftT Total: $111,150
Football Field
(without pumps)
The Northshore School District went with number
three, Natural Turf. I feel a turf field is the best
to play on and over the long run less costly than Astroturf. The drain lines were put in 10 feet apart; filled
with washed pea gravel, then 16 inches of washed Number
2 sand. No clay or silt at all.
Number 2 Sieve Count
1^11
V
#10
#40

100%
84%
59%
15%

Down Grade 15%

#80
#200

5%
1.3%

Up Grade 5%

2.

Now we come to maintenance of the new field and
cost. This should have been planned well in advance.
When you go with a sand base field the costs at first
are going to be high.
1) Water - You have to keep the sand wet at all times
during germination and early growth.
2) Mowing - Mowing at first on a sand base field has to
be done by hand.

3) Fertilization

Because of the near perfect drainage
you will get with this type of field
you will have to fertilize often. We
fertilize once a week for five months
as in the case of school districts
and park departments they want to use
the fields as soon as possible so you
push for fast growth.

I will break my cost down and give you the cost of
maintenance after construction is over and you have
seeded your field.
New Field Maintenance Cost - Sand Base Field
$
90.00 per
Mowing - 1 man 9 hr
Ferti1izer-1280 lb
$ 270.00 per
Sweeping - 1 man 28 hr
$ 280.00 per
Water - 2 million gallons
$ 500.00
$1 ,190.00 per
Total Cost
Cost/ft 2
.62<t per month

month
month
month
month

After the first year the cost will drop to a more
acceptable level. You will also have to add to your
maintenance costs the cost of aerating and thatching
which is very important in any field maintenance.
The cost of maintaining a field that has been in
for some time will give you a better idea what your
sand base field will cost in yearly maintenance.
ONE YEAR OR OLDER FIELD MAINTENANCE COSTS
74,100 ft 2 - March-October
$10.00 per man hour
MOWING
1 Man - 2 hr
Equipment
Maintenance

twice weekly

Cost/month
Cost/month
Cost/month
Cost/year

$ 160.00
36.00
80.00
$2404.00

FERTILIZING
Once Monthly - March-October
1 lb N/1000 ft 2
Fertilizer - $250.00/ton
2 men - 2 hr/month
Equipment
Cost/year

$ 500.00
160.00
118.00
$ 778.00

SWEEPING
Twice Monthly
2 men - 3 hr
Equipment - truck and sweeper
Cost/year

$ 960.00
72.00
$1032.00

AERATING FIELD
Six Times Per Year
1 man - 1 hr
Equipment - truck and aerator
Sweeping - 1 man - 2 hr
Cost/year

$ 60.00
$ 81.00
$ 120.00
$261.00

SPRAYING FOR TURF WEED CONTROL

$ 250.00

TOTAL COST
Cost/ft

2

$4725.00

- ltf per year

This cost does not include watering since I did not
have an accurate record of the amount of water used.
This cost will vary with type of field, and the cost of
thatching should be added.

THERE AIN'T NO FREE LUNCH 1
J.M. Vargas, Jr. 2
Kentucky bluegrass is the most widely grown coolseason grass in the northern United States and Canada.
It is used on homelawns, general turf areas, and on
golf course fairways and roughs. Kentucky bluegrass is
culturally adapted to a l%-2 inch height of cut although
it can be maintained at higher heights of cut and to
minimal irrigation. Kentucky bluegrass has three major
diseases, HzlminthoAposUuiri melting-out caused by HzZmlnTKOAPOSILM vagans,
FUACVUUM blight caused by FuAaJvium
sioAzum and stripe smut caused by UAtltago ^t^ii^o^irrUA.
In the western United States striped rust caused by
Puccyiyua ^Vhil^onmoi is also a major problem. Kentucky
bluegrass has several minor problems including powdery
mildew caused by EHjy&ipJriz ghmiivuA. The rusts caused
by PucclyiicL species, dollar spots caused by
Scle/iotinla
komzoccuipcL, CosUZcsLim red thread caused by Cosuticim
{¡uclfiosime. and fairy ring caused by various fungi in the
class of basidiomycetes. It also has a few insect problems, mainly the chinch bugs, the bilbug, white grubs,
and sod webworm.
Maintaining Kentucky bluegrass on irrigated golf
course fairways has met with little success. Kentucky
bluegrass is not adapted to a heavy irrigation regime.
When irrigation is used to keep fairways soft and lush,
the 3/4-1 inch height of cut is employed. Kentucky bluegrass disease and insect problems often go untreated on
fairways usually under the guise of being too expensive.
Under such conditions the Kentucky bluegrass usually
disappears and is replaced by annual bluegrass.

^ Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, W A , September 2527, 1979.
Plant Pathologist, Michigan State University, East
Lansing, MI.

Annual bluegrass has been cursed over the past 50
years as the number one problem on golf course fairways.
Turf experts have often suggested if you can get rid of
your annual bluegrass and replace it with Kentucky bluegrass, all your problems are solved. The annual bluegrass that replaced the Kentucky bluegrass, while adapted
culturally to the 1/2 to 3/4 inch mowing heights also
had its disease and insect problems which were also not
treated because it was too expensive and because most of
the dying was attributed to high temperature kill. But
unlike Kentucky bluegrass annual bluegrass was capable
of reseeding itself, from the abundant seed supply in
the soil. When the annual bluegrass continued to die
season after season, it was cursed as the scourge of the
golf course, as something that had to be gotten rid of.
Most turf experts offered a very simplistic solution to
the problem. Simply get rid of the annual bluegrass in
the fairways, replace it with Kentucky bluegrass and all
your problems are solved.
Researchers who made such suggestions obviously
have never embarked on a program of trying to eliminate
annual bluegrass and replacing it with Kentucky bluegrass. It cannot be done until the cultural regime is
changed; this consists of raising the height of cut on
the fairway to 1% inches allowing them to become hard and
dry in the summertime. Also, the inference was made that
once the Kentucky bluegrass was established that one's
problems would simply all go away, but it is a matter of
trading one set of disease and insect problems for another.
Neither species is all good nor is either species all
bad. Each has a place to which it is culturally adapted,
each should be grown under that cultural system and the
pest problems of each should be taken care of. Anyone
who thinks he can grow Kentucky bluegrass without taking
care of its insect and disease problems is soon going to
be managing annual bluegrass at lower height of cut or
tall fescue, quackgrass and crabgrass at the higher
height of cut, because there ain't no free lunch.
Let us assume we are going to maintain Kentucky
bluegrass fairways. First, we need to select the cultivars most adapted for this cultural system. There are
really only three which appear aggressive enough to com-

pete with annual bluegrass under such a regime. They
are Touchdown, Brunswick and Bensun. Other cultivars
which may be used where a lower cultural intensity is
invoked are Cheri, Adelphi, Majestic, Baron, Parade and
Enmundi. Three or four of these cultivars should be
planted in a blend. This blend should be maintained
at a minimum of 1 inch height of cut and preferably
closer to 1% inches. Supplemental irrigation should
be kept at a minimum. The Kentucky bluegrass should
only be irrigated when it begins to show signs of wilt.
This will discourage the entry of annual bluegrass into
the Kentucky bluegrass turf. While these cultivars offer
the best disease control currently available, they are
not perfect, and therefore, some type of fungicide management program will have to be followed in order to
prevent the Kentucky bluegrass from being destroyed.
Insecticide programs will also have to be followed if
the Kentucky bluegrass is not to be lost. With this in
mind, the following will be a discussion of the disease
problems which occur on Kentucky bluegrass.
MINOR DISEASES
Powdery mildew is a problem on some Kentucky bluegrass varieties (i.e. Merion, Baron, Fylking) when they
are grown in the shade. The solution is to avoid planting susceptible varieties in the shade, using Kentucky
bluegrass cultivars like Bensun (Warren's A-34) and Nugget that are shade-adapted. You may also wish to consider using other species of grass in the shade. The
fine leaved fescues will do well in open shade and Voci
£A¿V¿CL¿ÍA can be used under dense, moist shade. The
leaf and stem rusts are a problem on slow growing turfs,
usually due to the lack of nitrogen fertility. The rust
problem can be eliminated by increasing the amount of
nitrogen or the frequency of the nitrogen application so
the turf is mowed at least once a week. If the Kentucky
bluegrass fails to respond due to cool weather, applications of a fungicide like Fore, Zineb or Tersan LSR
should correct the problem. Dollar spot can usually be
controlled in Kentucky bluegrass by increasing the nitrogen; however, chemical control may be necessary on cultivars like Nugget.

Fairy ring is a unique problem. It is really not a
disease problem in the sense of a pathogen attacking a
grass host; it is simply a fungus growing in the thatch
or organic matter, the fungus body (mycelium) which is
hydrophobic, forms a water-impervious layer. Consequently, where the main body of the fungus is located, the
turf dies from lack of water. The only controls are to
remove the fairy ring along with the contaminated soil
and replace it with clean soil, or else fumigate the
area. Fairy rings are most often found in turf areas
where tree branches, roots or trunks have not been removed or where they have been used as fill. Avoiding
such practices will help prevent the development of
fairy rings.
I am sure most of you do not consider Helmlntho¿ponlum melting-out to be a major problem in Kentucky
bluegrass. It is not a major disease problem because of
the many H&lmin£koApo^m-resi stant cultivars which have
been available for many years. 'Merion's' popularity
and wide use can be directly attributed to the fact that
it was the first and only Helrnlntho 6 podium-resistant cultivar available for many years. Today, FuAaAium blight
and stripe smut receive all the notoriety as the major
diseases of Kentucky bluegrass; however, if it were not
for the many HeZinintko^po^Uum-resistant cultivars which
are available, FUAOLXIUM blight and stripe smut would
not be important because melting-out would have eliminated
the desirable Kentucky bluegrasses long before F u A c v U m
blight and stripe smut had a chance to be a problem!
What are the best HelnuntkoAposUum-resi stant cultivars?
There are many cultivars which have excellent He£mL\itko&potvLum melting-out resistance, but this disease
cannot be looked at alone. FuAcvUum blight and stripe
smut must also be taken into consideration. Merion and
Windsor have excellent resistance to melting-out but are
very susceptible to stripe smut and FUACVUUM blight.
Fylking, Nugget and Pennstar, likewise, have excellent
resistance to melting-out, but all are highly susceptible to FuAa/Uum blight. Using any of these cultivars
will result in an unsatisfactory turf.

Rather than trying to list all the Kentucky bluegrass cultivars that are susceptible to stripe smut and
FuAcuiiuni blight, it is better to accent the positive
and list what appear, today, to be the varieties with
the best resistance to all three diseases:
Cheri
Adelphi
Majestic
Touchdown

Enmundi
Parade
Baron
Warren's A-20

Since blends give added strength to a turf, especially against such diseases as stripe smut, a blend of 3
or 4 of these Kentucky bluegrass cultivars would be ideal.
This is not to say that these cultivars will always
remain resistant or that some new disease won't come
along and destroy them. However, based on our present
knowledge, these are the best varieties available. At
least there is a chance to have a disease-free turf using
these resistant cultivars. No such chance exists when
you use the disease-susceptible cultivars like Merion,
Fylking, Pennstar, Nugget and Windsor.
The use of proper cultural practices consists of
watering in the daytime to allow the foliage to dry before dark, maintaining adequate levels of phosphorus
(P2O5) and potassium (K2O), based on yearly soil tests,
and proper timing of nitrogen applications. Table 1 has
a schedule for the Kentucky bluegrass turfs on fairways,
park areas, industrial sites or homelawns in the Pacific
Northwest. Assuming we start with a cultivar of Kentucky
bluegrass which is resistant to Hiilmlyitko^ponlim meltingout, our two main concerns are going to be FLLSCVUUM
blight and stripe smut. The nitrogen fertility schedule
was developed with this in mind. By limiting the nitrogen fertility in the spring, the severity of FuAcvUum
blight should be reduced and by limiting the nitrogen
fertility in the summer, the amount of turf lost to stripe
smut should also be reduced. Not fertilizing in the fall
and avoiding lush growth going into the dormant season
will reduce the severity of Typkuta blight and FuAcvUum
patch.

KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS TURFS WITH EXISTING DISEASE PROBLEMS
If you have a Helmintko^poAXum melting-out problem
in your turf now, you must be growing one of the "common
types" of Kentucky bluegrass. To control melting-out,
you should really begin your fungicide spray program in
the fall when the cool, wet weather begins (temperature
below 70°F) with a fungicide like Daconil 2787, Dyrene,
Acti-dione, Thiram, Tersan LSR or Fore on a 7-10 day
basis or Chipco 26019 at 3-4 week intervals. With the
arrival of spring, one of the fungicides applied in the
fall will have to be applied again on a 7-10 day basis
until the warm weather of summer arrives. I think you
can see that a fungicide program for the control of
min£koAposu,u.m can be very time consuming and costly,
which all goes back to "do it right the first time,"
specifically, plant a resistant cultivar.
FUSARIUM BLIGHT
FUACVUUM blight symptoms appear when the infected
plants are under drought stress. Light, frequent waterings during dry periods will help suppress symptom development. Heavy, infrequent waterings are of little
use because infected plants have short roots, usually no
longer than an inch in length. FuAcvUum blight infected
turfs need no more than 20 minutes watering at any time,
but they need it daily during warm weather and every two
to three days during cool, dry weather. The ideal time
to water would be at mid-day when it is the warmest.

CHEMICAL CONTROL
Chemical control can be obtained with any of the
benzimidazole systemic fungicides (Tersan 1991, Fungo,
Cleary's 3336) provided they are applied properly. This
means irrigating the area the night before and drenching
the systemic fungicide in before it has a chance to dry
on the foliage. You are dealing with a crown and root
rot problem, and that is where you need to get the fungicide. It will be translocated upward, but it is not
translocated downward. This treatment is very expensive
and because of the expense, many people have the idea
that one treatment will cure their problem forever. It

won't and you will need to treat every year if you don't
want the problem to recur. It is no different than
spraying your roses or apples every year for their disease problems.
Resistance by some strains of F u s a d u m fungi to the
benzimidazole systemic fungicides have been reported.
This should not be surprising since the development of
resistance to the benzimidazoles has been reported for
every other major pathogen they were used on exclusively.
This means that you will probably have success in controlling your FusaAium blight for 2 or 3 years after
which time you may not be able to obtain control.
In Michigan we have also found nematodes to be involved in the development of FusaAim blight. The two
most common nematodes associated with the disease are,
the stunt nematode [TylenckoAkynckus dubius) and the ring
nematode {CAtconmoides
spp). They appear to predispose
the Kentucky bluegrass plants to infection by FusaAium.
The nematodes continue to feed upon the plant's roots
even after infection by FusaAium has occurred, causing
additional stress on the infected plants. We have been
able to control the disease with 3 lb/1000 ft 2 of nematicides like Dasanit. These nematicides are extremely toxic and should only be used by professionals. Because of
their toxicity, they should not be used on home!awn turfs,
but rather on golf course or general turf areas. The
day the nematicides are applied, these areas should be
closed to the public. The nematicides should be drenched
in order to receive maximum benefit and for safety reasons. In addition to the nematicides, we have shown that
the systemic fungicides can reduce the nematode populations when they are drenched into the soil.
STRIPE SMUT
A turfgrass plant infected with stripe smut is infected for life. All plants arising from that infected
mother plant will be infected. It is a systemic disease
that may remain dormant in the crown of the plant, or it
can spread up the veins of the leaves, eventually rupturing the epidermis and releasing many black spores which
may attack other plants. Whether you see the spores or

not, the plant is always in a weakened condition and the
first stress that comes along will kill it. The most
common stress is drought. If you have a healthy Kentucky
bluegrass turf, it will go dormant when it is not watered
and will revive again once water is applied; however, a
stripe smut infected turf will die. It is important not
to let a stripe smut infected turf dry out.
CHEMICAL
Stripe smut can be "controlled" (more like arrested)
with high rates (4-8 oz/1000 f t 2 ) of the benzimidazole
systemic fungicides. The best results are obtained when
the systemic fungicides are applied as dormant drenches.
However, applying the systemic fungicides as dormant
drenches increases the amount of melting-out in the
spring. Even
posUum-resistant cultivars like
Merion become susceptible after such treatments. This
means that the stripe smut treatment must be accompanied
by a melting-out treatment, and the PCNB fungicides are
the only ones which give this long term H^lmintho^po^Ucm
control over the entire dormant period.
Late spring and early fall applications of the benzimidazole systemic fungicides are also effective against
stripe smut, if they are applied when the grass is actively growing. Avoid applying them when grass growth is
beginning to slow down because of warm or cold temperatures. While this is not as effective as dormant applications, it does avoid HoZmlntko^pcA^um melting-out problems. But what is the bottom line? The bottom line is
that these are merely stop gap measures. The systemic
fungicides, no matter when they are applied, do not eradicate the disease and it comes back every year. Resistance
to the benzimidazole systemic fungicides has been reported for every major pathogen on which they have been
used exclusively and resistance to the systemic fungicides in the smuts will also occur. So, you may be able
to obtain 2 or 3 years of stripe smut control.

TURFGRASS PERFORMANCE
UNDER IDAHO CONDITIONS 1
R.D. Ensign, V.G. Hickey, W.R. Simpson 2
The performance of many turfgrasses under Idaho conditions have been reported in previous Northwest Turfgrass Conference proceedings. We have been able to
evaluate the performance of most major cool-season turfgrasses under two district environments: the cool and
moist air, and heavy soils of northern Idaho; and the
arid, warm summer temperatures, and relatively high pH
silt soils of southwest Idaho. The latter is more typical of intermountain conditions of Idaho, Oregon, Nevada
Utah and western Wyoming.
There turfgrass plots, which were established in
1972 and 1975 respectively at Moscow and Parma, Idaho,
are maintained through 1979 and significant notes were
recorded.
MOSCOW LOCATION
At this location, about one-half of the 111 cultivars were Kentucky bluegrasses and the balance were fineleaf fescues, perennial ryegrasses, bentgrasses, and
others.
These plots were fertilized with a total of six (6)
lb of N, two (2) lb of P and four (4) lb of K per 1000
f t 2 , applied equally in four applications. The grasses

^ Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 2527, 1979.
University of Idaho, Moscow, ID.

were irrigated weekly or as conditions required. Three
levels of mowing were made; one-inch level, two inch
level, and 3 inch level. Notes on color, diseases, and
general appearance were taken. A summary of the scores
are provided on a separate sheet.
The "best" color of the grasses in 1979 are relatively the same as from previous years. The grasses with
outstanding color were:
Early Season 3/29

Mid Season 7/5

Late Season 9/6

KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS
Adelphi
Baron
Delta
Garfield
Park
Touchdown
K2-100

Adelphi
Baron
Fyl king
Glade
Newport
Nugget
Pennstar
Ram #1
P-164
Bri stol
Brunswick
Majestic

Baron
Fylking
Glade
Newport
Pennstar
Victa
Ram #1
Merit
Birka
Continental
Galaxy
Majestic

FINE LEAF FESCUE
Barfalla
Koket
Fortress
Scarlet
Aberystwyth S-59

Biljart
K4-21
K5-28
Dawson

Barfalla
Koket
Jamestown
Biljart
Banner
Fortress
Kensington

PERENNIAL RYEGRASS
Servo
Yorktown II

Manhattan
Yorktown II
Loretta
Norlea
NK-200
K-137

Citation
Diplomat

MOWING HEIGHT
There were performance differences among cultivars
with respect to mowing height. The desired mowing height
of bluegrasses appeared to be the 2 inch level although
grasses like Glade, Nugget, Victa, Majestic, and Galaxy
retained good color and turf quality with the 1 inch
clip. The 3 inch height left more residue in many bluegrasses and created a less favorable appearance. The
fine leaf fescues generally favor the 3 inch cut, especially late in the season. Biljart (C-26) hard fescue
gave excellent quality turf under these conditions.
The higher mowing height of 3 inches was generally
most desirable for the perennial ryegrasses. The several
cultivars of perennial ryegrasses have been performing
very well under these conditions.
DISEASES
The winter diseases were expressed well during the
1978-79 winter periods when we experienced one of the
longest winters of snow cover, with over a continuous
100 days of cover. FUACVUUM and TypkuZct were especially
destructive on some fine leaf fescues and some perennial
ryegrasses. The damage was more severe at the 3 inch
level of cut than at the lower cuts. Apparently the
extra residue on the turf surface provided better conditions for the snow mold pathogens. Reactions of ryegrasses and fescues to the snowmold pathogens are:
RESISTANT

INTERMEDIATE RESISTANCE

SUSCEPTIBLE

Servo
Norlea
Biljart
Fortress
Kensington
K5-29 *
Scarlet
Wintergreen
Koket

Omega
Yorktown II
Manhattan
Pennlawn
Jamestown
Aberystwyth
Banner
K4-21
K5-28
Atlanta
Dawson
RV 45 C

Diplomat
Loretta
K5-92
Citation
K-137
NK-200
Pennfine
Halifax
Barfalla

Very little winter diseases were noted on the Kentucky bluegrasses, and all bentgrasses were treated with
fungicides.
PARMA - SOUTHWEST IDAHO
Twenty (20) turfgrass cultivars were planted in
April 1975 at this location which has an arid climate
The soils are flood irrigated and are generally 7.5+
pH. All cultivars were mowed weekly during the 1979
season at a 1.5 inch and 3.0 inch level. Color readings and quality performances were recorded.
The five outstanding cultivars measured by dark
green color for two representative 1979 dates were:
May 16
1.5 inch
3.0 inch

September 12.
1.5 inch
3.0 inch

Vieta
Nugget
Baron
Belt Turf
Touchdown

Touchdown
Belt Turf
Biljart
Vieta
Meri on

Nugget
Vieta
Touchdown
Baron
Biljart

Touchdown
Belt Turf
Biljart
Vieta
Merion

Cultivars having light green-yellowish appearances
were: Delta, Arboretum, Park, Garfield, Cougar, and
Barfalla chewing fescue.
MOWING HEIGHT
Affects grass quality. The grasses perform best
and give the best color appearances at the 3 inch mowing
height as compared to the 1 inch cut. Touchdown, Nugget,
Merion and Biljart seem to tolerate close mowing better
than other cultivars.
Seasonal performance for color varied. The Septemver color evaluations were superior to the May readings.
Cool nights, adequate irrigation, and good nutrition
favored better readings and overall turfgrass quality.

Diseases were not noted to be significant problems
except Nugget KBG. A distinct dark fading-out symptom
was noted in September with this particular cultivar.
The causal agent was not identified at this writing. As
in the past, some H ^ m l n £ k o * p o s U m leafspot was noted on
some bluegrasses. No other serious leaf diseases of rust
or smuts were noted in 1979 at Parma.
Cool nights, adequate irrigation, and good nutrition
favored better color readings and overall turfgrass quality.
NEW REGIONAL TURFGRASS TESTS - IDAHO
Turfgrass researchers in the western states have
planned a region-wide project to evaluate new turfgrasses for adaptability and desirable turfgrass characteristics. These grasses are from plant breeders and
seed companies throughout the world. Currently the
cooperating states are Arizona, California, Colorado,
Idaho, Nebraska, and Washington. Other states may become involved in a limited basis. The research is
planned and coordinated by a Western Regional Turfgrass
Committee.
The plots were planted in Idaho May 15-16, 1979
at our Southwest Research and Extension Center at Parma.
This is an area which is representative to much of the
arid intermountain irrigated area.
The Idaho test has 160 cultivars; 70 of Voa
48 of FeAtucci spp., and 42 of the Lotium genera. These
are the major cool-season turfgrasses in the U.S.A.
The entries were planted in 2m x 2m plots replicated three times. Uniform planting and management conditions were prescribed by the committee. This includes
seeding rates, fertility, irrigation, mowing and note
taking. The cultivars are to be uniformly evaluated for
emergence, diseases, color, textural evaluation, density,
turf quality, weeds, and cutting quality. Data will be
recorded periodically over a 3-5 year period.

At this writing only limited data have been taken.
It is evident that significant differences in performances and adaptability will be of interest to many
turfgrass people.

SLOW RELEASE NITROGEN STUDIES 1
R.D. Ensign, V.G. Hickey, R.E. McDole 2
In continuation of a project started in 1978, several slow-release N formulations were compared with more
soluble N formulations on 3 northern Idaho golf greens.
Objectives were to determine optimum N rates, most favorable timing of applications, and response to different
formulations.
The experiments were conducted on three different
type construction greens with three different cultivars
of bentgrasses. The University of Idaho golf green has
an 18 inch sand layer seeded to Seaside bent in 1968.
The Moscow Elks green was constructed in 1946 with a
find silt loam base, seeded to Highland bent. The Lewiston Municipal Golf Course green, constructed in 1974 of
river run sand and decomposed peat, is seeded to Penncross bent.
The fertilizer materials were applied at 6 lb of
actual N per 1000 ft 2 per year. The N applications were
made in early April, mid June, and early September with
the exception of treatment 5, applied in September and
April, and treatment 6, applied in September and April,
at 8 lb actual N per year. The materials used, and
color response follow in Tables 1 and 2.

^ Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 2527, 1979.
University of Idaho, Moscow, ID.

CONCLUSIONS
The fast-release N materials provided early greenup, with excellent color. The slow-release materials
did not give adequate color early in the season. As the
season progressed, the IBDU treatments improved in color
By October, when the highly soluble materials were lacking in good color, the IBDU treatments showed excellent
color.
Our initial results indicate that the combination
of a slow-release and a more rapid release N source, as
being made by some fertilizer companies, would be more
desirable than either an all fast-release or all slowrelease N formulation.
The type of green construction is important in
maintaining color. Sand greens are more subject to
leaching of highly soluble N materials, so slow-release
formulations would have an advantage in maintaining
color on sand textured greens. There were less differences among treatments on the green composed of a fine
silt loam.
Additional years of testing are needed to assess
potential accumulation of slow-release N formulations,
and their effect on grass color and quality.

TABLE 1.

Fertilizer materials utilized.
Average seasonal
color response^

Treatment

Source of N

1.

Scotts 29-3-3

22.4% WSN Methylene Urea
5.8% WIN Methylene Urea
0.8% Ammonical N

6.1

2.

Scotts 22-0-16

14.0% WS Methylene Urea
7.5% WIN Urea

4.5

3.

Nitroform-M 38-0-0

Organic Urea Formaldehyde (UF)
27.5% WIN UF
10.5% WS UF

4.1

4.

IBDU 31-0-0

Isobutylidene Diurea
27.9% WIN
3.0% WS

4.9

5.

IBDU 31-0-0

Isobutylidene Diurea
27.9% WIN
3.0% WS

4.9

5.

IBDU 31-0-0

Isobutylidene Diurea
27.9% WIN
3.0% WS

4.9

6.

IBDU 31-0-0

Isobutylidene Diurea
27.9% WIN
3.0% WS

5.3

7.

Milorganite 6-2-0

Natural organic activated
sludge 5.5% WIN

4.4

8.

Ammonium nitrate

Nitric N 17%

6.1

9.

Ammonium sulfate

10.

2

Amnionic N 17%

(NH4)2S04

5.4

Ammonium sulfate
Blend3 14-4-11-20

(NH4)2S04

5.3

11.

IBDU blend 22-2-12

12.4 units IBDU
5.65 Units AmSO d
2.95 units KN0 3

4.9

12.

Ammonium nitrate
Blend 23-4-10-4

Nitric 17%
Ammonic 17%

5.7

WSN means water soluble nitrogen.
~ Treatments 9-12 are tested only at the Lewiston Municipal course.
* Composed of 50# A m S 0 4 , 8# 42% P 2 0 5 ; 16# K 2 S 0 4 .
r? Composed
vv
of 50# AmNOo, 15# 42% P 2 0 5 , 50% K0SO4.
l=Dark green; l=Lighï green.
2

_CD
Q

O
O
o

co
^t-

00 co

CO LO
CD LO

3
•"0

C\J evi

CL
c

00

CD

oo co

LO

4->
fO
soo 4->
CD

CD
co
03
CD
i—
CD

Cd
1

o

i—
co

E
O
M—
O
ZD
4->
O
C O •i—
i—i

CD

C(T3O
CD
i—
CD
OC
1
4->

C03O
l_L_

1
CT)

£Z

E
3
I- 1 O
C
O
-M C

(XI

+->

O

O

O E i
O
E OO
OO C

TWO PESTS OF GRASS IN WASHINGTON 1
R. Lee Campbell 2
ApkodLuA pcuidaL¿6 is a tiny white grub which feeds
on grass roots, where it may reach populations of as
high as 500/ft2. At high levels of population, infected
turf turns brown and, since the roots are generally
pretty well eaten away, patches of it can be rolled back
like a rug. Beginning in mid-June adults appear and lay
eggs. The larvae are the over-wintering stage. This
beetle occurs sporadically from southern British Columbia throughout Washington and Oregon and over into
southern Idaho. One turf superintendent wiped out an
infestation this year with Dylox applied in mid-May.
It is probable that any insecticide labeled for control
of white grubs would be effective, if it were watered
in so that it reached the level where the grubs are.
The sporadic nature of these infestations make it inadvisable to treat routinely and I would suggest that all
of you just watch for turf turning brown for no apparent
reason.
The European cranefly (TcpaCa patudoAa) is a pest
of lawns, golf courses, pastures, and hay fields in
northwestern Washington. The larvae feed on roots,
stems, and leaves of a wide variety of grasses, legumes,
and other plants; seriously damaging them during heavy
outbreaks. Also, the adults, because of their great
abundance and their habit of collecting upon the sides
of buildings, can be a great nuisance to people. This

Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 2527, 1979.
Associate Entomologist, Western Washington Research
and Extension Center (WSU), Puyallup, WA.

cranefly is a native of Europe, ranging from lower Scandanavia to northern Italy and from Great Britain to the
USSR. In this hemisphere, the cranefly was first found
in Newfoundland in 1952. It is believed that soil ballast dumped from ships was the original source of the
infestation. Here, on the west coast, the European
cranefly was first discovered in British Columbia,
causing damage to lawns on the outskirts of Vancouver,
in 1965. The first find in the United States was in
the summer of 1966, at Blaine; and by 1974 there were
30,000 acres of western Whatcom County infested by the
cranefly. It has since spread south as far as Seattle
and west as far as Port Angeles. The mountains limit
its spread to the east. In order to survive, the cranefly needs moist soil during the month of September. Of
course our area is ideal for that and our mild winters
help too. Dry soil in September really knocks populations down.
Larvae make burrows in the top few inches of the
soil. During the day they generally feed just below
the ground level, eating small roots and chewing on the
crowns of plants, but at night, or on damp cloudy days
when the humidity is high, they generally feed above
ground. They, in fact, prefer the tender green leaves
to the roots and stems; but, they will eat almost any
vegetable matter. Some of the recorded hosts are lawn
and turfgrasses, cabbage and its relatives (including
turnips), beets, wheat, ryegrasses, strawberries,
flowers, corn, potatoes, various weeds, buckwheat, lettuce, and peas. Clover is really a preferred host and,
if you have an extensive planting of clover, defoliation really looks terrible. You will end up with just
the rhizomes; but, after they are through feeding,
those rhizomes refoliate and by the middle of June you
can't tell anything has happened. Larvae can survive
on decaying vegetative matter in the soil even though
there are no living plants available; so they are really
quite indiscriminate feeders.
From mid-September until winter the very small larvae are in the ground and they do a minimal amount of
feeding from now until the onset of cold weather. They
overwinter as medium-sized larvae and really don't cause

any damage during the fall, but beginning in warm spells
in February and at least by early March, they have begun
to do a considerable amount of feeding and grow rapidly.
The larvae stop feeding about the middle of May, but
they don't form pupae immediately, as we would expect.
Instead they remain there in the soil all summer long
as larvae. They don't feed, but they are active; they
respond to stimuli. We really don't know what they are
doing during this period or why this resting larval
stage is part of their life cycle. Beginning in early
August they start to pupate and the pupal period lasts
about 11 days. By late August they start to emerge and
are most numerous during the first week of September.
Ninety-five percent of emergence occurs between August 23
and September 13. Generally the adults disappear after
the middle of September. The adults are sexually mature
as soon as they emerge from the pupal cases and usually
females are inseminated by the males immediately after
they emerge. The female quickly begins laying eggs and
usually within 8 hours she has laid half of all the eggs
that she will lay, and by 24 hours has completed oviposition. The average number of eggs laid per female is
about 350. Most of the adults emerge just about sunset
or a little after, and have finished mating by midnight.
Oviposition, for the most part, is done by late the next
morning. Any females that are still alive may fly during
the day and, although they have laid most of their eggs
the night before, or early that morning, there are frequently still a few eggs left in those flying females.
This is one way that the species is dispersed from one
area to another. Another factor in dispersal is movement of larvae in infested soil.
It takes a lot of larvae to injure turf. We did
an economic study on a hay field in Whatcom County a
few years back and determined that anything less than
50/ft2 really had little impact on the grass. We've
seen some places where as many as 90/ft* were apparently
doing nothing to the grass in the way of diminishing
stand or permanently injuring the turf. The larger
larvae feed mostly on the vegetative part of the plants
and once they stop feeding, in the middle of May, the
stands recover. The only danger being that, if there
is a substantial amount of defoliation, you may get some

weeds coming into the bare areas. Always where we have
seen heavy cranefly infestations, serious injury has
been very spotty. In a 20-acre field you may have only
an area 20 ft 2 that really shows damage, even though the
craneflies are pretty generally distributed throughout
the field. They seem to thrive and do best in low areas
of fields where drainage may not be the best; they generally do not do well on high spots or sandy areas. Often
where we have seen damage it has been on slopes, and I
really don't understand why that is.
Birds really enjoy eating the larvae in the spring
and, if you have an infested golf course, the probing of
birds and the presence of large flocks may be some distraction to your golfers. If you decide that it is
necessary to use a chemical control, the larvae are not
hard to kill. We found that Scott's Western Lawn Insecticide or Ortho's 25% EC Diazinon or Geigy's Spectricide 6000 or Ortho's Dursban 5.3% EC, each at the commonly used labeled rates; or FMC Dursban Coated 2G at
the higher of the 2 rates that are on the label, all
gave nearly complete control of the larvae. The secret
to successful control is in timing.
Let's look back at the life cycle and the biology
of the beast. The two times when you are likely to be
most tempted to apply control measures are in May when
you are seeing bare spots in your turf or in early September when there are masses of adults flying about.
Neither of these times is really appropriate for chemical
control measures. As I have told you, the adults that
are flying have mostly laid their eggs, and killing them
off is of no great advantage to you, and, as for the
time when bare spots occur in the spring, the damage has
already occurred, feeding is about over; it is too late
at that point to attempt chemical control. Those of you
who are thinking ahead have probably had the flash "Ahah,
the time to get them is in the fall, after the eggs have
hatched and when those young larvae are about --- before
they can possibly do any damage and while they are young
and tender." Well, true, you can control them easily
then, but you may be wasting an insecticide application.
We have seen numerous instances where there were large
numbers of larvae in the field in the fall, but, for one

reason or another, they were unable to survive the winter and by the time spring arrived there were no, or very
few, larvae present. So, "yes, it is possible to control
larvae in the fall and you will prevent damage by doing
so", but you may be wasting money. The thing we suggest
is waiting until spring, late February or early March,
and then checking to see if you do have a large number
of larvae present. If so, then we suggest that, if you
want to make a chemical application, you do so before
the middle of April. By doing that, you have avoided
the possibility of making an unnecessary application in
the fall, but you have still gotten your material on in
time to prevent the damage that occurs in the late spring.
The ideal time is probably mid-March to mid-April. Of
course, if you didn't have adults in September, you won't
have larvae in the spring.

THE INFLUENCE OF AMMONIUM SULFATE AND UREA
ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF AVAILABLE N
IN THE SOIL SURFACE 1
A.S. Baker and S. Kou 2
ABSTRACT
During a study of nitrogen (N) fertilization of
orchardgrass for forage it was found that there was much
less nitrification of the reduced N in topdressed ammonium sulfate, (NH4)2S04, than in urea. This occurred because the (Nfy^SO^ caused the surface 2 cm of soil to
become strongly acidic and the N H 4 ions were absorbed in
same locale. The strong soil aciaity depressed the acti
ity of nitrifying bacteria. On the other hand, previous
to hydrolysis urea can be leached to lower depths because it has not electrical charge. Upon hydrolosis of
urea, the soil becomes more basic resulting in rapid bio
logical nitrification. Thus ( N H ^ S C ^ is a superior N
fertilizer for turf because the readily available N from
this source remains near the surface where most of the
root system is concentrated. It is also a good source
of sulfur (S) and S deficiencies have been induced by
high N applications on forage and turfgrasses in western
Washington. There is some evidence that the strongly
acidic surface soil condition induced by (NH^oSC^ may
discourage annual bluegrass invasion and OpkLoholuA and
FUACVUUM patch diseases.

Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 2527, 1979.
Soil Scientist and Assistant Soil Scientist, Western
Washington Research and Extension Center, (WSU), Puyallup, WA.

INTRODUCTION
A study is being conducted at the Western Washington
Research and Extension Center to investigate several aspects of nitrogen (N) fertilization of orchardgrass for
forage production. The main thrust is to study means of
maintaining high yields of forage grass using high N applications without resulting in high levels of nitrate
(NO3) in the forage which may be toxic to ruminants.
Another aspect of this study stems from the fact
that negatively charged NO3 ions are readily leached
from the negatively charged soil system while the positively charged ammonium (NH4) ions are not. Since
grasses can utilize both forms of N , anything that will
hamper nitrification (biological oxidation of NH4 to
NO3) will decrease leaching losses of reduced forms of
fertilizer N.
It was found that a total of 600 kg N/ha (535 lb/A
or 12.3 lb/1000 f t 2 ) applied in three, equal, split
applications during the growing season resulted in dangerously high levels of NO3 in orchardgrass sampled
during the warm part of the season. Although the N in
(NH4)2SÛ4 and urea has the same oxidation state, the NO3
levels in orchardgrass from plots on which (NH4)2S04 was
applied were only 1/2 to 2/3 as high as those found in
grass from urea fertilized plots. This indicated that
the urea-N was nitrified more rapidly than the (NH^^SO^N. This was confirmed by soil tests. It is this soil
test data that we feel will be of interest to people
working with turfgrass production and maintenance.
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
The soil samples were taken at the end of the 1978
growing season; about 2 months after the final N fertilizer application. Five cm (2 inches) of irrigation
water was applied immediately following the fertilizer
application and there were approximately 14 cm (5.5 inches)
of rainfall between fertilization and sampling. Even considering évapotranspiration losses this was sufficient
water to cause some leaching beyond the sampling depth.
Soil cores were taken to a depth of 12 cm (4.7 inches)

and subdivided into the 0-1, 1-2, 2-7 and 7-12 cm depths.
These were tested for pH, exchangeable NH4 and concentration of NO3. The soil pH was determined in .01 M
CaCl2 which prevents pH fluctuations caused by soluble
salts but gives pH values that are about 0.6 pH units
lower than the pH ordinarily obtained when it is determined in distilled water.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Figure 1 shows that topdressing with ( N H ^ S C ^
resulted in a drastic drop in soil pH especially in the
top 2 cm. It is well known that acidic conditions impede the oxidation of NH4 to NO3 by the major nitrifying
bacteria. Indeed Figure 2 shows that high levels of exchangeable NH4 were associated with the very acidic top
2 cm of soil while the NO3 levels (Figure 3) were relatively low when (Nh^^SC^ was applied.
Topdressing with urea did not result in as marked
a drop in soil pH with respect to the control (or no N)
treatment (Figure 1). If sampling had occurred close to
the time that urea was applied the soil pH would have been
found to be higher than the control because of the following hydrolysis reaction.
C0(NH 2 ) 2 + 3 H 2 0
+
C0 2 + + 2 NH 4 0H
urea
urease
The carbon dioxide (C0 2 ) is volatilized and the
ammonium hydroxide (NH4OH) is basic. The slight acidification of the upper soil profile (Figure 1) associated
with urea occurred when the NH4 ions were nitrified to
NO3. The higher initial pH associated with the urea
application resulted in rapid nitrification and low
levels of residual, exchangeable NH4 (Figure 2) and higher
levels of NO3 (Figure 3). To avoid volatilization losses
of N from urea in the form of ammonia (NH3) gas it is
necessary to water the urea into the soil before it hydrolyzes. Previous to hydrolysis urea is not adsorbed
near the surface and moves with the leaching water because it has not electrical charge and is very soluble.

3.8 4.0
J

0

Soil pH
4.5
5.0

5.5

' '

I -

2-

(NHJ

2

S0j

Urea^

Control

E

0

1

"S. 7
a>
Q

Urea
Control-

o
CO

(NH 4 ) 2 S0 4

12Fig. 1. The effects of no N and 600 kg N/ha as urea and
( N H ^ ^ S O ^ on the variation in soil pH with depth.

6.0

NH4-N
40
•

80
i

Control
Urea

ppm
120

160
I

r

(NH 4 ) 2 S0

E
0
1

Q. 7 Q>
Q

O
CO

12Fig. 2. The effects of no N and 600 kg N/ha as urea and ( N H 4 ) 2 S 0 4
on the variation of exchangeable soil N H 4 with depth.

N O 3 - N ppm
0

8

16

2 4

0-»

I

32
I

-

2 -

E

Control

Urea

0
1

7a>
Q

o
co

1 2 Fig. 3. The effects of no N and 600 kg N/ha as urea and
on the variation of soil N0^ with depth.

(NH^SO^

The major portion of the root system of most turfgrasses is concentrated near the surface. Moreover well
managed turfs receive copious amounts of supplemental
water and transpiration losses are minimal because of
close cropping. All of this leads to the strong possibility that any NO3-N that is not immediately taken up
by the grass will be leached beyond the effective root
zone. Thus ( N H ^ S C ^ should be a superior source of N
for turf because nitrification is minimal and a high concentration of NH4 ions remains in the shallow root zone.
There are other attributes of ( N H A ^ S O * that can
be advantageous in turf maintenance ana production. High
rates of N sources which contain no sulfur (e.g. urea,
ammonium nitrate, calcium nitrate) can induce sulfur
deficiency to occur on forage and turfgrasses on many
soils in western Washington. There is evidence that
the very acidic surface condition caused by topdressed
(NH4) 2 S04 may discourage invasion by annual bluegrass
and reduce the incidence of OpkloboluA and FUL&CVOLIM
patch J

Personal communication with R. L. Goss, Agronomist,
Western Washington Research and Extension Center,
Washington State University, Puyallup, WA 98371.

TURFGRASS DISEASE RESEARCH REPORT 1
Gary A. Chastagner and Worth Vassey 2
NEMATODES
Thirteen putting greens on eight golf courses were
surveyed for nematodes in August and September of 1979.
Dr. Fred D. McElroy's report contained in this Proceedings on the incidence of nematodes in turfgrass in the
Pacific Northwest contains more information about the
survey and the results on the populations of various
nematodes found. Table 1 shows the number of various
nematodes found and fungi observed in each sample.
Plant pathogenic fungi were only found in 7 of the
26 samples examined. The presence of these pathogenic
fungi was not consistently associated with samples obtained from diseased or abnormal turf.
Tests are planned during 1980 to expand the area
surveyed and determine the extent of damage being caused
by some of the nematodes found during the present survey.
RED THREAD
Recent testing of growth retardants by Drs. John
Roberts and Roy Goss have revealed that increases in
the incidence of red thread caused by Co^ticA.um ¿ucxonmz can occur following the use of these materials
Table 2). Reduced growth of turf has been shown to

^ Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 2527, 1979.
Assistant Plant Pathologist and Agriculture Research
Technologist III, Western Washington Research and Extension Center (WSU), Puyallup, WA.

result in the increase of red thread and this is probably why increases in this disease are seen following the
use of growth retardants.
Thirty-three ryegrass varieties were planted in
September of 1978 as part of a Western Regional Variety
Trial. Red thread became well-established during August
and September, 1979, and data collected on September 6
revealed that the percent area covered by red thread
varied between 8 and 53%. The varieties with significantly less red thread were Pennfine, Citation, Acclaim,
Yorktown II, and Loretta, while Servo consistently had
the most.
RJSARIUM PATCH
Most of our effort this past year on this disease
has been to develop a greenhouse system to study the
interaction between this disease and sulfur. A solution
culture method has been developed which will allow us to
determine if there is a direct relationship between sulfur and susceptibility of bentgrass to this disease.
Through such studies it is hoped that we will have a better understanding of why we consistently see a reduction
of the incidence of this disease in association with the
use of sulfur or sulfur-containing materials.
During the 1978-79 winter, FuAcvUum patch was widespread on our 'Highland' bentgrass/Poa annua test plots
near Puyallup. On March 19, a test plot was established
to determine the effectiveness of 11 fungicides in aiding this diseased turf to recover. Treatments were
replicated five times and applied on March 19, April 9,
and April 30 in the equivalent of 10 gal water/1000 f t 2 .
Applications of sulfur (16 oz a.i./lOOO f t 2 ) and Chipco
26019 (1-4 oz a.i./lOOO f t 2 ) resulted in the fastest
recovery (4 weeks) of the diseased turf. Other materials
tested were Fore 80W, Tersan 1991, Bayleton, and the experimental fungicide CGA 64251 at the rate of 2.5 to 10
g a.i./lOOO f t 2 . Applications of this fungicide resulted
in a dark, blue-green slowly growing turf.

cu

cu

cu

cu

cu

cu

cu

cu

cu

I

I

(}OU>j 10CU)
au^6opLO[9W
(^s/CD)

l

i

l

i

(aoue[)
snujj.n[0Ld0H
(Le*nds)
snipu9|/lODLL9H

l

i

l

i

l

i

l

i

co

l

i

l

co

o

LO

I

I

I

00

CO

<T)

(TÍ

LO

CO

l

í

I

I

I

I

I

I

o

co co o
00
LO O 00o

i

I

(9Lpaeu)
sruopj.6ucn
(locu X'qqnq.s)
sruopoipuj.
(ULd)
snipugi/ieued
(lun^s)
snipuAjuoipu9|/i
(6ULU)
S9PL01U9U0DLU3
(U0LS9[)
sntjDU9L^pjd

l

I

l

I

l

i

I

l

l

l

i

I

^

LO
LO
I

I

I

L

CO
CO
O

CO
CO
C

I

O

C O C O L O O O L O L O C M i —
O
C O C O C T t l O C O C M L O C O C O O

I

I

o c x j o t ^ i —

r^-cviLO

L o r ^ c o r - « . . —

i—

cm

I

|

I

I

CO

I

I

r-*. cr»
co cr»

I I

í

I

I

UOLILPUOO

LO

l

I

l

i

l

I

l

O

I

l

LO
O

LO
LO

O
O

i o o i ^ t - i

i

C\J

o

I

i

i

O
o

O
o
cr»

co
co

i

oiiionzorroiEorna
cococrtcn»—

cu
V) cu
"O
=5 O
O o

l

.—

cr»cr»i—

>—

cnjcxi

r—

CO

(}0U>| } O C U )

au/CßopLOLaw
(TS/Co)

euapcwaian
(aouet)
snujLn[0Ld0H
(Ti LO
CM CO

( L eu L d s )

snipuai/iooL lbh

cxj en
exi l o

lo
lo

o

r-»

CO
IO

»— en

r^

(aLpaau)
snuopLßuon

(loou Xqqnqs)
sruopoipLui

i

i

(ULd)

(lunqs)
snipuXl|uoqDua|/]_

(6ULJ)

sapLOiuauoDUQ

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

co
cn LO
CT»
i— CXI

co
co

cn
CT»
O
i—

1

1

i

i

i

i

S-

^f «sf

C M i o ^ r o ^ o i ^ - i o
i— cxj o
i— i—

( uo L sa [ )

sni|oua[^eud
UOL^LpUOO

co CD
3 O

vo

CO

I

I

I

I

CT»

I

I

nzoiiionroino

TABLE 2.

Effect of growth retardants on the incidence of red
thread on a mixture of Astoria bentgrass and red fescue.

Growth retardant
None

Rate/Ac
-

Percent area diseased'3
8.3 X

Maag

0.25 lb. a.i.

10.7 X

Maag

0.50 lb. a.i.

10.0 X

Maag

0.75 lb. a.i.

11.7 xy

Embark

0.25 lb. a.i.

15.0 xy

Embark

0.50 lb. a.i.

30.0

yz

Embark

0.75 lb. a.i.

35.0

z

Sustar

1 gal

56.7

1

a

Growth retardants applied on May 2 3 , 1978, disease data taken
on June 15, 1978.

b

Numbers followed by the same letter are not significantly
different, P = 0.05, Duncan's multiple range test.

CONTROL OF VERONICA FILIFORMIS
1978-1979

(SPEEDWELL)

1

2

Roy L. Goss , John Roberts 3 and S.P. Orton 2
A new experimental herbicide coded as ACR 1255
(Dikegulac) was compared with our standard treatment
of DCPA (Dacthal) for the control of speedwell. The
ACR 1255 material was applied at a rate of 15, 20 and
25 1/ha while Dacthal was applied at 13.5 kg/ha active
ingredient. The results of the 1978-79 test are summarized in Table 1.
The first applications were applied in July 1978.
Although the concentration of speedwell was rather
light, significant control of ?oa annua occurred particularly at the 20 and 25 liter rate of ACR 1255.
The experiment was moved to a site at Tacoma
Country and Golf Club where more extensive populations
of speedwell could be tested. The site was a mixed
stand of bentgrass and Poa annua with populations of
IJoAoviiaa ranging from 35 to 70%. Treatments were applied on October 3, 1978, and early frost and freezing
temperatures occurred lower than in normal years to
produce some interesting results. Phytotoxicity ratings

Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 2527th, 1979.
2

Agronomist/Extension Agronomist and Agricultural Research Technologist II, Western Washington Research and
Extension Center, WSU, Puyallup, WA.
Extension Turf Specialist, University of New Hampshire,
Durham, NH.

were high with ACR 1255 when applied in October with
25 1/ha resulting in 80% yellowing of the plots. Dacthal produced no yellowing. Data shown in Table 1 indicate that by spring, 95% control of speedwell was
obtained by all treatments and there were no indications
of phytotoxicity by March, 1979 from any treatment.
There was an apparent interaction between temperature
and ACR 1255 which indicates that this material probably should not be applied as late as October. We would
judge from these tests that the latest application date
should be September 1 , approximately.
Tests were continued in 1979 and were initiated on
4/26/79. On May 17, 1979, observations were made.
There was no discoloration to desirable turfgrasses
and a significant yellowing of 1/anovilaa. was evident.
There was 90-100% depression in flowering of the \loAoviiaa,.
during its maximum flowering period.
On July 2 , 1979, there was 96% control of VeAonica
with ACR 1255 at 25 1/ha as compared to 47% for DCPA
(Dacthal) at that time. Later observations not shown
in these data have shown that control with Dacthal continued to a point of 93% by August 1979.
We have a continuing interest in discovering other
materials for the control of VeAovLica {¡¿Lipoma* other
than DCPA (Dacthal) since there have been reports of inadequate control of MoAoyvtaa with DCPA due to soil variability. The availability of Dikegulac for the control
of speedwell is solely in the hands of the MAAG Agrochemicals Company and its availability will be predicated upon
the extensiveness of its use in other cropping areas.

TABLE 1.

Control of Veronica filiformis (speedwell)
1978-1979 tests.
Mean control %
1978
1979

Treatment

Rate/ha

ACR 1255

15 1

95

90

ACR 1255

20 1

95

96

ACR 1255

25 1

95

96

Dacthal (DCPA)

13.5 kg (a.i.)

95

47

Phytotoxicity 12/11/78:
Dacthal = 0.

25 1 = 8; 20 1 = 6; 15 1 = 5;

Mean % Veronica = 50%.

THE INFLUENCE OF NITROGEN SOURCES
AND VARIABLE RATES OF S AND P ON BENTGRASS
COLOR, POA ANNUA,
AND FUSARIUM

PATCH

QUALITY
DISEASE1

Roy L. Goss 2 , John Roberts 3 and S.P. Orton 2
The results reported in this paper are a continuing
report of a project that was established in the summer
of 1975 on a 75% sand-25% sawdust media. The test area
was seeded to Emerald creeping bentgrass and maintenance
fertility practices were conducted during the summer and
fall of 1975, and the treatments shown in Tables 1 and 2
were initiated in the spring of 1976.
POOL annua seed were distributed uniformly over the
area to insure a "start" of this weedy grass to determine
the effects of treatment during ensuing years.

Fertilizers are applied to these plots from January 13 through December 14 of each year at approximately 2-week intervals to apply the total amount of
nutrients shown in Tables 1 and 2. The only variability in the application schedule is that in Treatments No. 10, 11 and 12 where all sulfur is applied in
the spring. All other sulfur applications are made uniformly throughout the year. All nutrients applied are
expressed in their elemental form and not as oxides.

Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 2527, 1979.
2

Agronomist/Extension Agronomist and Agricultural Research Technologist II, Western Washington Research
and Extension Center (WSU), Puyallup, WA.
Extension Turf Specialist, University of New Hampshire,
Durham, NH.

COLOR RESPONSES
March ratings for color as shown in Table 1 indicate that high sulfur treatments produced the best color
although mean color ratings were lower than other periods
of the year. This effect has generally been observed in
the past and is possibly due to the fact that the availability of sulfur is less when soils are cold, therefore,
higher levels of S make more sulfur available during this
period of time.
April ratings were generally higher than March.
During 1979 April was one of the warmer months on record
for many years and produced this more rapid greening and
growth. The ranges of color responded similarly to those
in March.
May ratings were depressed somewhat except for the
high sulfur treatments. Most treatments receiving sulfur
were about the same as in April although somewhat depressed. All plots treated with Milorganite rated very
low and had thin turf. This effect has been noted for
2 or 3 years and efforts are being made to determine
this cause.
All June ratings were high with all sources of
nitrogen. Plots receiving additional sulfur were best
except with Milorganite. There were little differences
in color with respect to sulfur variability. It should
be noted that the Milorganite ratings significantly improved during June. We don't understand why this happened except for the possibility that trace minerals
were applied in May, although Milorganite should be
well supplied with micronutrients. No doubt, warming
trends during June also caused release of nitrogen and
other nutrients from Milorganite. It should be noted
also that during the month of June six plots rated near
perfect.
In July all plots rated high but lower than June
due to heat stress. Milorganite, on the other hand, was
not affected in the same way as urea and ammonium sulfate and continued to hold a trend of good quality.

August ratings were moderately high for all plots
and all of the nitrogen sources were holding well.
It should be pointed out that OpkioboluA patch disease invaded some of the plots before treatments were
initiated in 1976. Some of the OpklobotuA is still
active but is diminishing under high applications of
sul fur.
POA ANNUA
Poa annua got off to an early start in all plots
since they were overseeded with viable Poa annua seed.
Due to the slow start of Milorganite initially, Poa
annua made significant increases within those plots
but this trend may change with time.
The lowest percentages of Poa annua were recorded
with urea at 10 lb, phosphorus at 0.5, potassium at 3,
and sulfur at 4.5 lb/1000 ft2. This plot was rated at
21.3% Poa annua. All other plots rated higher than
this with Milorganite averaging 73% indicating that sulfur has not exerted a controlling effect on Poa annua in
the Milorganite plots at this time. The above statement
in regard to the poor start of the plots with Milorganite and the high levels of P within Milorganite may possibly account for this high level of Poa annua and possibly
may persist.
It is expected that Poa annua percentages will
change within the next two years according to previous
experience in other research. In general, significant
responses to sulfur with regard to Poa annua decreases
have generally been observed after 4 to 6 years.
QUALITY
All plots have maintained good quality throughout
the duration of this test with the exception of brief
periods of poor quality from Milorganite treatment early
in the spring. The highest quality of turf was recorded
with high sulfur treatments and low phosphorus on plots
treated with urea. The addition of sulfur has made little difference on ammonium sulfate treated plots, but

there has, likewise, been no adverse effect from additional high applications of sulfur. It should be
pointed out that no OpkioboZuA patch disease has occurred in any of the ammonium sulfate treated plots
with additional sulfur added.
FUSAR1UM

PATCH DISEASE

All ammonium sulfate plots show the least amount
of FUACVLILIM patch disease regardless of the sulfur level
and can be seen in Table 2. High sulfur levels significantly reduce FUACVULLM patch disease in all ureatreated plots. Some of the highest Fiua/Uim counts occurred within the urea treatment and especially those
plots not receiving sulfur. Milorganite treated plots
continue to exhibit good resistance to FUAO/UUM NIVAZE
although somewhat more susceptible than those treated
with ammonium sulfate.
It is planned that this test will continue for two
or three additional years.

TABLE 1.

The effects of N sources and variable rates of S and P on bentgrass color.
March

April

May

June

July

U-10 P-2 K-3 S-0

7.0

7.5

6.3

8.3

8.5

8.1

U-10 P-2 K-3 S-l

7.5

7.8

6.8

8.9

8.9

8.1

U-10 P-2 K-3 S-2.5

7.8

7.8

7.0

8.6

8.1

8.4

U-10 P-2 K-3 S-3.5

8.0

7.8

6.5

8.6

8.5

8.9

U-10 P-2 K-3 S-4.5

8.3

7.8

7.8

8.4

8.3

8.8

U-10 P-.5 K-3 S-l

6.5

7.5

5.8

8.5

8.3

8.4

U-10 P-.5 K-3 S-2.5

7.0

8.3

7.8

9.0

8.8

8.8

U-10 P-.5 K-3 S-3.5

6.8

7.8

8.3

9.0

8.5

8.8

Treatment

August

U-10 P-.5 K-3 S-4.5

6.5

7.8

7.5

9.0

8.3

8.9

U-10 P-.5 K-3 S-2.5 Spring

7.0

8.3

7.8

9.0

8.3

8.8

U-10 P-. 5 K-3 S-3.5 Spring

7.8

8.3

7.5

9.0

8.5

9.0

U-10 P-.5 K-3 S-4.5 Spring

7.0

8.5

7.3

9.0

8.5

8.9

AS-8 P-. 5 K-3 S-0

7.5

7.5

7.3

8.1

8.1

8.0

AS-12 P- .5 K-3 S-0

7.5

8.8

7.5

8.3

8.0

8.9

AS-10 P- .5 K-3 S-0

7.8

8.0

7.3

8.5

7.9

8.6

AS-10 P- .5 K-3 S-l

7.5

7.8

7.3

8.5

7.9

8.9

AS-10 P- .5 K-3 S-2.5

7.8

7.8

7.5

8.1

8.0

8.6

AS-10 P- .5 K-3 S-3.5

7.8

8.0

7.5

8.5

8.0

8.6

AS-10 P- .5 K-3 S-4.5

7.5

8.0

7.3

8.4

8.1

8.6

M-10 K-3 S-0

5.5

6.0

4.0

8.0

9.0

8.0

M-10 K-3 S-l

6.0

5.8

4.0

7.6

9.0

8.0

M-10 K-3 S-2.5

6.0

6.5

4.0

7.6

8.5

8.0

M-10 K-3 S-3.5

6.0

6.0

4.0

7.3

8.9

7.9

M-10 K-3 S-4.5

5.8

6.0

4.0

7.6

8.9

8.0

TABLE 2.

The effects of N source and variable rates of S and P on
Poa annua, quality and Fusarium patch.

Treatment

% Poa annua

Quality

% Fusarium

U-10 P-2 K-3 S-0

23.8

8.1

18.8

U-10 P-2 K-3 S-1

38.8

8.4

11.3

U-10 P-2 K-3 S-2.5

37.5

8.4

12.5

U-10 P-2 K-3 S-3.5

31.3

8.5

5.5

U-10 P-2 K-3 S-4.5

46.3

8.3

2.8

U-10 P-.5 K-3 S-1

33.8

8.1

31.3

U-10 P-.5 K-3 S-2.5

30.0

8.9

7.5

U-10 P-.5 K-3 S-3.5

37.5

9.0

7.0

U-10 P-.5 K-3 S-4.5

27.5

8.8

10.0

U-10 P-.5 K-3 S-2.5 Sp.

33.8

8.6

12.8

U-10 P-.5 K-3 S-3.5 Sp.

30.0

9.0

6.5

U-10 P-.5 K-3 S-4.5 Sp.

21.3

9.0

6.5

AS-8 P-.5 K-3 S-0

45.0

8.1

2.5

AS-12 P-.5 K-3 S-0

40.0

8.3

0.5

AS-10 P-.5 K-3 S-0

40.0

8.4

4.5

AS-10 P-.5 K-3 S-1

47.5

8.5

0.5

AS-10 P-.5 K-3 S-2.5

48.8

8.1

1.25

AS-10 P-.5 K-3 S-3.5

41.3

8.5

1.25

AS-10 P-.5 K-3 S-4.5

36.3

8.4

1.75

M-10 K-3 S-0

70.0

7.6

7.0

M-10 K-3 S-1

72.5

7.5

5.3

M-10 K-3 S-2.5

75.0

7.8

1.5

M-10 K-3 S-3.5

78.8

7.5

7.0

M-10 K-3 S-4.5

70.0

7.8

2.5

REGIONAL TURF VARIETY EVALUATIONS 1
S.E. Brauen and Roy L. Goss 2
During the summer of 1978 the Western Washington
Research and Extension Center joined with the states of
Colorado, California, Idaho, Arizona and Nebraska in
the establishment of uniform turfgrass variety evaluations. The trials included only named varieties of
33 perennial ryegrasses, 55 Kentucky bluegrasses and 43
chewings, spreading, and hard fescues. All varieties
were seeded at Puyallup in September of 1978. Many of
the bluegrass varieties and fescue varieties are repeat
evaluations from those begun in 1973. However, a number of new Kentucky bluegrass and perennial ryegrass
varieties have been added.
The greatest information from these tests will be
obtained from the perennial ryegrass tests. Recent
development of improved turf-type varieties of perennial ryegrass has resulted in increased use of ryegrass
throughout the United States, particularly in the stress
environments. Greater attention to management may be
required to get perennial ryegrasses to perform really
well and for users to be really happy with their performance. The evaluation of these varieties will help to
identify adapted types and will be an important part of
the developmental use of perennial ryegrasses in the
Pacific marine climates.

^ Presented at the 33rd Annual Northwest Turfgrass Conference, Admiralty Inn, Port Ludlow, WA, September 2527, 1979.
Associate Agronomist/Extension Agronomist and Agronomist/Extension Agronomist, Western Washington Research
and Extension Center (WSU), Puyallup, WA.

Turftype varieties presently on the market include
Manhattan, Pennfine, Birdie, Citation, Omega, Derby,
Regal, Yorktown, Yorktown II, Diplomat, Fiesta, Dasher,
Blazer, Loretta and Caravelle. All of these varieties
have improved finer texture, persistence, mowability and
attractiveness. Experimental varieties, some included
in these tests, may show even greater improvement in
mowability, disease resistance and tolerance to heat and
cold.
These new perennial ryegrasses may give species
relief to problem areas. They can provide quick temporary turf in heavily shaded situations. Their quick
establishment and good wear tolerance make them very
useful on school grounds, play areas and parks receiving heavy use. The improved mowability, the finer texture, attractive appearance and rapid establishment of
the better turftype ryegrasses make them especially
valuable for overseeding putting greens, fairways and
lawns. These evaluations will be interesting to follow
over the next three years and provide needed improvement in our knowledge of turf variety performance and
adaptability to this area.

TABLE 1.

Sand green - fertility tests

Mean color
4-24-78

9

lbs/1000 ft /yr

Mean Poa annua
4-24-78

Mean color
6-20-78

N

p

K

S*

u

10

2

3

0

8

16

8

u

10

2

3

1

9

12

8

u

10

2

3

2.5

9

15

8

u

10

2

3

3.5

9

8

8

u

10

2

3

4.5

9

14

8

u

10

.5

3

1

9

8

9

u

10

.5

3

2.5

9

6

9

u

10

.5

3

3.5

9

6

9

u

10

.5

3

4.5

9

9

8

u

10

.5

3

2.5(S)

9

6

9

u

10

.5

3

3.5(S)

9

5

9

u

10

.5

3

4.5

9

6

8

(S)

AS

8

.5

3

0

9

9

7

AS

12

.5

3

0

9

4

8

AS

10

.5

3

0

9

8

7

AS

10

.5

3

1

9

8

8

AS

10

.5

3

2.5

9

7

7

AS

10

.5

3

3.5

9

8

8

AS

10

.5

3

4.5

9

8

8

M

10

0

3

0

5

50

9

M

10

0

3

1

5

53

9

M

10

0

3

2.5

5

50

9

M

10

0

3

3.5

5

48

9

M

10

0

3

4.5

5

48

9

U = urea
AS = ammonium sulfate
M = Milorganite
P and K = Elemental
* = All S applied throughout the year except (S) - applied in Feb., M a r . ,
and April.

234 05/03
28587