*   CGCSA News!

*   In Memoriam - Steve Badger

*   2008 U.S. OPEN  & 2007 Nationwide Tour Championship VOLUNTEERS

*   Online Membership Directory 

*    2007 CGCSA Annual Conference, Trade show & Golf Championship

*   Equipment For Sale & Equipment Wanted

*   CGCSA Government Relations

*   Job Opportunities

*   GCSAA "News"

*   Williams Leadership Endowment

*   Target's Charity Golf Tournament

*   Cal Poly SLO

*   Members Profile 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

The CGCSA webcast board meeting was held on August 22, 2007.
CGCSA Board of Directors Webcast Meeting called to order at 9:00 am, by President Bruce R. Williams, CGCS

Agenda item: 2007 California GCSA Annual Conference, Trade show & Golf Championship planning was briefed by Kevin Breen & Bob Tillema.
Annual Conference Education Program speakers list was reviewed, California DPR classes for Nov. 11th, was discussed. DPR classes will be submitted to the California DPR education department, we are requesting four (4) hours of LAWS & REG's hours. Greg Fernald with Target Specialty Products has developed the Calif. DPR classes.
The Annual Trade show booth sales are selling at a steady pace, there are 30 booths still available.
The Annual Conference Brochure will be mailed on September 1, 2007 to all members.
The Annual Golf Championship will be limited to the first 144 registrations, members have priority over guest golf registrations.
The California GCSA room block will be released on October 22, 2007, at the present time there are 52 rooms still available in our room block.

Agenda item: 2008 California Hospitality Suite planning was briefed by Bill Culbertson.
The Hospitality Suite in Orlando, FL, will be at the Howl At The Moon, on International Drive.
Date is January 31, 2008, time 6:30 - 9:30 pm.
Bill Culbertson & Greg Fernald will be requesting hospitality Suite sponsorship funding from our affiliate members.

Agenda item: CGCSA Web Site & E-Magazine Report:
The CGCSA Web Site visits have been on a steady increase over the pass 12 months. Visits total an average of 6500 per month in July 2006
to an increase in July 2007 to 9025 visits.
Revenue obtained from advertising in both web site & E-Magazine was briefed.

Agenda items: Old Business
      CGCSA Committee Reports; Bruce Williams briefed the committee reports.  NCGA research project funding request was discussed. Many of the board members hadn't read the proposal, therefore funding wasn't approved at this time. The research proposal will be sent to the board members for review, than a vote the approve the research funding will requested from each board member.
      Online Membership Directory; Bob Tillema briefed the directory is completed, five chapter membership databases have been uploaded into the online membership directory.
      Thank You letter from the Nor Cal Section PGA; Bruce Williams briefed the letter the CGCSA received, thanking us for supporting the Play Golf America Day, at Haggin Oaks Golf Complex on May 18, 2007.

Agenda items: New Business
       Northern California Affiliate Board Member Appointment: The California GCSA Board of Directors welcomed, Greg Fernald to the California GCSA Board of Directors.
       Voting Delegate appointment; Gill Stiles was appointed as the California GCSA Voting Delegate, for the 2008 GCSAA Elections.
       Pat Finlen's GCSAA directorship campaign; The CGCSA voting to support Pat Finlen's campaign.
       Association Manager's contract renewal; The CGCSA voted to renew Bob Tillema's Association Manager's contract.
       CGCSA Logo (GCSAA affiliation logo); The board of directors voted to approve the use of the new logo.

Meeting adjourned; at 10:30 am

Steve Badger passed away at Kaiser Hospital in Woodland Hills.
Steve went in the hospital with what he thought was pneumonia, but was diagnosed with very advanced lung cancer. Steve was Superintendent at Riviera, moved over to UCLA in charge of their grounds and retired after 16 + years at Bel Air Country Club. He came out of retirement to consult and work on a few golf course projects these past 10 + years.
Steve is survived by his wife Margie and his step – children.

Sandy Clark, CGCS
President San Diego GCSA

State regulators adopt tough rules requiring huge cutbacks in fumes from construction industry equipment. Next up: big trucks.

By Margot Roosevelt
Times Staff Writer
July 27, 2007

SACRAMENTO — California's diesel-powered bulldozers, scrapers and other heavy construction equipment must be retrofitted or replaced over the next 13 years to reduce the air pollution that sickens tens of thousands of residents every year, state regulators decided Thursday.

Under tough new rules adopted by the Air Resources Board, California is the first state to make construction companies fix existing diesel-powered machines. Heavy equipment can last 30 years or more, so without the new mandate, it would take decades for fleets to upgrade to cleaner equipment.

Although the fumes are most often associated with big trucks and buses, 20% of California's diesel pollution comes from the construction industry. Building, mining and airport vehicles are responsible for an estimated 1,100 premature deaths statewide every year and more than 1,000 hospitalizations for heart and lung disease, along with tens of thousands of asthma attacks, scientists say.

The air board's new rules will slash diesel soot — also known as particulate matter — from construction equipment by 92% over 2000 levels. Smog-forming nitrogen oxides will be cut by more than a third. And greenhouse gases, a byproduct of fuel burning, also will drop as a result of a ban on idling equipment.

"This is a very progressive rule with a lot of flexibility," said board Chairwoman Mary Nichols. "Beginning in 2010, we will be breathing far less of the smog and fine particulates that are so damaging to our health."

The building industry hotly contested the rule, saying it would cause job losses, increase highway construction costs and damage the state's economy. Michael Lewis, a lobbyist for the industry-led Coalition to Build a Cleaner California, said industry could not afford the retrofits. "And a regulation that is not achievable will not save one life," he said.

The new regulation signaled a comeback for the powerful board, whose reputation was damaged in the wake of the recent firing of its former chairman, Robert Sawyer, by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, and allegations that the governor's staff had tried to weaken proposed pollution standards.

Nichols, an environmental lawyer appointed by Schwarzenegger to replace Sawyer, took an aggressive stance during Thursday's daylong board meeting, opposing an industry proposal to delay enforcement.

The diesel rule, the result of three years of debate, drew applause from environmental groups.

"This was a great debut by Chairwoman Nichols," said Kathryn Phillips, a lobbyist for Environmental Defense. "It shows that science and public health are still the main forces that drive the agency."

The rule, which air board staff say will cost the industry up to $3.4 billion, is one of the most expensive adopted by the board. As part of an aggressive diesel cleanup, the board has also adopted restrictions on garbage trucks, buses and ships. Next on the agenda: heavy-duty trucks, which could cost even more to clean up than construction equipment.

The building industry operates 180,000 pieces of diesel machinery statewide. It costs up to $40,000 to buy particulate filters for a single million-dollar scraper.

Overall, contractors contended, the cost of the rules could reach $13 billion and boost the price of homes, highways and commercial buildings.

The discrepancy in the estimates of the cost to industry caused the board to delay action in May to allow staff to evaluate new economic data. In the last two months, air board economists and individual board members held dozens of meetings with industry groups and examined the financial records of companies.

Industry figures were based on an exaggerated rate of equipment turnover, among other factors, staffers told the board.

On a vote of 6 to 3, with Nichols leading the opposition, the board defeated an effort by industry groups to extend the compliance schedule. It maintained annual reduction targets for soot, rather than moving enforcement to a three-year schedule, which staff said could cut health benefits by as much as 12%.

In addition to an overall state standard, the board adopted a provision that will allow Los Angeles and nearby counties, the San Joaquin Valley and other particularly polluted regions to accelerate the diesel equipment cleanup schedule in their districts. 

"It's a good day for clean air," said Barry Wallerstein, executive officer of the South Coast Air Quality Management District.

Wallerstein said the region must achieve twice the amount of construction pollution cuts as the overall state goal in order to meet federal standards. The region, one of the dirtiest in the country, is under a strict mandate to improve its air by 2015. The AQMD will offer construction companies $120 million in incentives to purchase particulate filters or buy new machines.

To soften the economic hardship on mom-and-pop businesses, the new rule gives small fleets until 2015 to begin compliance, while large fleets must begin in 2010.

margot.roosevelt@latimes.com

Agenda -
Note: If you do not have Microsoft Word, or are unable to open the agenda document, please e-mail me directly at mailto:jseelhoff@gcsaa.org, 
and I will e-mail the agenda to you in an Adobe Acrobat (PDF) version.

A notebook with the meeting materials will be sent to you by Sept. 28. You'll want to read this information in preparation for the delegates meeting and gather feedback from your chapter's leaders and members.

Pre-meeting assignment - One of the agenda topics will be a discussion on chapter effectiveness. At the delegates meeting, there will be small group discussions about six questions related to chapter effectiveness. Please discuss these with your chapter board and be prepared to share your chapter's responses at the meeting: 
1. Does GCSAA need chapters to successfully serve members? 
2. Do the chapters need GCSAA to successfully serve members? 
3. Should the GCSAA work in unison or collaboration with the chapters to serve members? 
4. Would professional management help chapters successfully serve members? 
5. Should all chapters and GCSAA share the same mission, vision and goals? 
6. Would your chapter be willing to enhance the partnership with GCSAA to more effectively serve members? 

Information for first-time delegates 
Please note that the webcast orientation has been rescheduled to Friday, Sept. 14 at the following times: 

10 a.m. Pacific 
11 a.m. Mountain 
12 p.m. Central 
1 p.m. Eastern 
An e-mail with a special webcast invitation will be sent to you soon. You will also receive information about the orientation session at GCSAA Headquarters on Friday, Oct. 12. 

If you have questions regarding the meeting, please contact Janet Seelhoff, CAE, at (800) 472-7878, ext. 3603 or mailto:jseelhoff@gcsaa.org or refer to the website: http://www.gcsaa.org/chapters/leadership/delegates/default.asp

The following individuals will appear on the ballot: 

Note: The title “CGCS,” after a superintendent’s name, stands for Certified Golf Course Superintendent, which recognizes the achievement of high standards of professionalism through education and experience. 

For president:

David S. Downing II, CGCS, vice-president of operations and construction for Signature Golf Group in Myrtle Beach, S.C.

For vice president:

Mark D. Kuhns, CGCS, director of grounds at Baltusrol Golf Club in Springfield, N.J.

For secretary/treasurer:

James R. Fitzroy, CGCS, director of golf at Wollaston Recreational Facility/Presidents Golf Club in North Quincy, Mass.

Robert M. Randquist, CGCS, director of golf course and grounds at Boca Rio Golf Club in Boca Raton, Fla.

For director (electing two):

Patrick R. Finlen, CGCS, director of golf course maintenance operations at The Olympic Club in San Francisco

John J. O'Keefe, CGCS, director of golf course management at Preakness Hills Country Club in Wayne, N.J.

Sanford G. Queen, CGCS, manager of golf operations for the city of Overland Park, Kan.

Roger M. Ruff, CGCS at Outlaw Golf Club in Park City, Utah

Keith A. Ihms, CGCS at Country Club of Little Rock in Little Rock, Ark., will remain on the board with one year remaining in his two-year director's term. Ricky D. Heine, CGCS, general manager and director of grounds at The Golf Club Star Ranch in Austin, Texas, will serve on the board for one year as immediate past president. Sean A. Hoolehan, CGCS at Wildhorse Resort & Casino on the Umatilla Indian Reservation in Oregon, is retiring from the board of directors after serving the last year as immediate past president.

More than $50,000 has been raised through contributions by GCSAA chapters, organizations and individuals and by GCSAA Past President, Bruce R. Williams, certified golf course superintendent (CGCS) at The Los Angeles Country Club, who established the Williams Leadership Endowment in 2002. The endowment recognizes GCSAA Past President Robert M. Williams and his son, Bruce, for their contributions and ongoing commitment to mentoring golf course superintendents to become leaders in the golf course management profession. Both have dedicated their careers to strengthening the profession and instilling leadership qualities in superintendents.

"We have been involved with GCSAA in many ways for more than 85 years collectively," said Bruce Williams. "We are especially proud to be involved in an exciting program to help enhance leadership training, development and support to chapter leaders."

Now fully funded, the Williams Leadership Endowment will help support the GCSAA Chapter Leaders/Executive Symposium, which focuses on interpersonal and organizational leadership. The symposium brings together chapter leaders and executives for leadership training, networking and opportunities to more effectively serve members. Attendees in the program learn about leadership, communication styles, providing a more meaningful chapter experience through the engagement of members and volunteer involvement, developing goals and a plan for their chapter, and sharing best practices and innovative ideas.

"We applaud the leadership provided by Bob and Bruce Williams," said GCSAA Secretary/Treasurer David S. Downing, II, CGCS at Rivers Edge Golf Club in Shallotte, N.C., and chairman of the Chapter Relations Committee. "The GCSAA Chapter Leaders/Executive Symposium will continue to expand on the education opportunities for our members."

The Environmental Institute for Golf, the philanthropic organization of the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America (GCSAA), is a collaborative effort of the environmental and golf communities, dedicated to strengthening the compatibility of golf with the natural environment. The Institute concentrates on delivering programs and services involving research, education and outreach that communicate the best management practices of environmental stewardship on the golf course. For more on The Institute, visit www.eifg.org.

SANTA FE SPRINGS, CA – Target Specialty Products hosted its 8th Annual Charity Golf tournament benefiting the American Cancer Society at the Tustin Ranch Golf Club in Tustin, Calif on July 18, 2007.  The event raised over $54,000 for the American Cancer Society.
Over 130 golfers representing the pest control, landscape, golf, nursery and vegetation management industries turned out for the tournament. 
 The event honored five cancer survivors with close ties to Target Specialty Products.  The honorees included Jill Brierley, wife of Casey Brierley, V.P. and Regional Manager, Target Specialty Products; Gary Maxwell, V.P. and Regulatory Affairs Manager, Target Specialty Products; Jeff Jones, Vice President, Admiral Pest Control; Dick Scoville, President, Pest Control Center; and Dave Taylor, Entomologist and Training Director, Antimite Termite and Pest Control.
After playing 18 holes, participants enjoyed dinner along with a silent auction and raffle.  During the dinner, attendees heard from honorees Dick Scoville and Jeff Jones who shared their personal experience with cancer.

  “Thank you to the entire Target team for a memorable event,” said Jane Lastusky, Vice President of the American Cancer Society’s Los Angeles Region.  “What a pleasure it is for me to be here as you honor these five individuals.  Thank you [honorees] for sharing your stories with us today.”
The tournament’s Malcolm Stack Award went to Brian Houtchens, Anthony Cortez, Ryan Brawley and Steve Lackey of Team Too.  Named in honor of the late Malcolm Stack, President and Founder of Bell Laboratories, Inc., the award goes to the foursome with the low gross. 
Target’s Charity Golf Tournament has raised over $290,000 for the American Cancer Society since the tournament began in 2000.

Editor’s Note: Target Specialty Products is a wholesale distributor of specialty agricultural chemicals, fertilizers and application equipment.

Terry L. Vassey
Assistant Professor of Turfgrass Management

I can not believe that a year has come and gone since my family and I left Tennessee on our four day journey across the desert to the central coast of California and Cal Poly.  And what a place to drop anchor—beautiful Mediterranean climate, close to the ocean, great people and a wonderful University.  Really, a dream has come true for us. 

I have to also say what a year it has been. I have met so many enthusiastic people and have visited so many wonderful places that I can not remember it all. I have so busy that the year has literally flown by--a blur at times.

We (the students and I) have not been idle here either. We have gotten so many things accomplished at Cal Poly and, with your continued help, we have plans for a great deal more. 

To get right to it, as I have only a little room here, let me provide a short list of the things we have going as of this summer. First, we have completely redone the turfgrass demonstration plots/facility—changing from large blocks of a single species cultivar to many small plots of different cultivars. For instance, we now have 12 different cultivars of tall fescue and not just one as was the case before. We have done this for each of both the cool and warm season turfgrass types. 

We have also stepped up the maintenance program for our 10,000 sf bentgrass green and its quality has improved greatly. As a matter of fact the Cal Poly golf coach feels it is good enough now that he would like to set up a schedule for his players to start using it for practice. [As a side note - the University has obtained funds to build a genuine short game practice facility for the team of which the turf students will be involved in the construction and maintenance.]

Second, we have taken a weed blighted area west of the turfgrass plots and have turned it into a nine-hole putting course, a lawn entry feature and a tall grass prairie. The putting course consists of three bermuda greens, three sea shore paspalum greens, and one each of a fine fescue, Poa, and bentgrass green for the last three. Our goal will be to maintain these at ~0.150” and provide a novelty area for the students to enjoy as well as learn. 

Around the greens we are planting tall grasses ornamental and native to the five Mediterranean zones of the world.   These will be identified with signage and will be consistent with the theme set by the Cal Poly Arboretum adjacent to the north and with the efforts of Audubon International, an organization I have been involved with from their start going back to my efforts with the Standard Club of Atlanta and Carolina National in coastal North Carolina.

As regards research, I have now brought on board three graduate students to manage the funded projects already underway. One project is designed to identify better tall fescue cultivars for central California, another to examine the compatibility of buffalograss and fine fescue grown together as a home/commercial lawn mixture, and third, a project to evaluate optimum cutting strategies for many of the tall grasses used on golf courses as part of their wildlife habitat projects (we are still in need of funding for the last project). 

I am also very interested in developing projects related to sub-surface irrigation strategies for turfgrass slopes and in management practices for high quality kikuyugrass turf. These areas of study are also in need of funding.

In summary, I think it is easy to see we have been very busy my first year. I believe we are on the right track and that many of the students are already seeing the benefits of getting involved. Our goal is to continue moving the program forward making Cal Poly a respected member of the academic turfgrass community both here in California and the Nation as a whole. I hope all of the readers will agree and continue to support our efforts.

With that said, I would like to also take the opportunity now to personally thank many of those who have been so helpful to me, the students and to the University. Without their help, much of what we have done would not have been possible. 

Specifically, and in no significant order, I would like to share the names of those that have contributed above the call as relates contributing to my cause. The list is long and some may not be remembered here—to them I apologize.

First, to Gordon Vosti, Michael Sommer (with wife Anitra), Rich Records, and Bob Schneiderhan my words do not go far enough to express my appreciation for what they have done in my first year. They have been there for me not only as industry professionals but as new found friends as well. They have contributed greatly to me. 

As an example, Target Specialty Products, with the encouragement from Rich, graciously donated $10,000 to fund as close to a full time technician for me at the turfgrass facility as possible. Having a person there almost full time has advanced the quality of the facility many fold. With continued and additional support, it will only get better, as maybe we can turn this into a permanent fulltime technician’s position.

Additionally a special thanks goes out to all of those that made my students and me so welcome as we toured the various industry sites this year. People like Bob and Jean Goodrich – Central Coast Sod, Lynda Wightman and her colleagues at Hunter Irrigation, Steve Wightman – QUALCOMM Stadium, Mike Tarantino - Poway School District, Bryan Foster - West Coast Sod (who donated much sod to our cause), Frank Wong and his staff – UC-Riverside, Jorge Morales - Alta Vista GC, Bruce Williams and his staff - LA Country Club, Will Schnell – The Rose Bowl, all those at Delt Bluegrass Sod, Brandon Morgan - Big League Dreams, Dave Barlow - Simplot, John Lohman and all of his associates - Valley Crest, Ed Ott - Colony Landscapes, Manny Sousa, Brad Coleman, and Billy Hausch - all managers on “The Peninsula”, Scott MacVicar - SF Giants, Tim Powers - Crystal Springs GC, and Mike McCullough – NCGA. Without their help I would not have heard/read things like “this was the best class I have taken at Cal Poly”, as one of the students wrote in their evaluation of one of my classes. 

As I said, these represent only a fraction of the people I have met my first year. To all the others, I say “Thank You”. Know that you have made a Southerner feel most welcome far far away from home.

To close and to in essence stick my hand out some more, I would like to be so bold as to list some items that would contribute greatly to the efforts here and to “Learn by Doing” as is the motto so proudly held at Cal Poly. If you can help or know of someone else who might, please let me know. No contribution will be overlooked and we may be able to fix anything that is not in good repair. These are not listed in any order of importance as they are all necessary to us.

· Bunker machine w/ spiking attachment
· Triplex greens mower with tee and verticutter reels
· Walk behind blower
· Greens roller
· Trim mowing unit
· Topdresser (walk or pull behind)
· Greens aerator with multiple tine types
· New (second) storage building
· Toro 500 walk behind greens mower (to mow the putting course)
· Turfgrass utility vehicle

Finally, we can provide a gift-in-kind document that will allow contributors to obtain a tax credit for their gift.

Again, let me thank everyone for a great year. I am so grateful to be here and I know this will become the premier program it should be. Along with the other outstanding universities in this state we hope to advance the cause of turfgrass management throughout California. You can help  by staying involved with us and continuing your support the University, the program and the students at Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo.

Lastly, if you are an alumnus of Cal Poly - SLO, please send me your name and particulars. I am trying to start a CP Turfgrass alumni association and want to get you back home and involved with Cal Poly again. Also, look for the new golf and tee shirts, hats and wind jackets soon to be available this fall.

Sincerely,

Terry L. Vassey
Assistant Professor of Turfgrass Management
805-756-2858
tvassey@calpoly.edu 
 
 

Watering fairways and greens with a hose at 7pm at night was something I never had heard of until I met Alex Galaviz. Alex started in the golf industry in 1958 at Saticoy Country Club. At that time there was no irrigation on the golf course except a few sprinkler heads on a couple of greens. Alex began helping his Uncle working from 6pm until lam watering the course using a hose. 
Galaviz was born in Phoenix, Arizona, but moved with his family to Oxnard, California. Alex lived in Oxnard for several years. After attending Oxnard High School, Alex began working at the original Saticoy Country Club now known as Saticoy Regional. Alex quickly moved up becoming the Superintendent of the nine hole course. 
As the area populated and grew, Saticoy Country Club built a new course in which Alex became the Assistant Superintendent. While working at Saticoy Country Club, Alex still oversaw operations at the old course. In this time Alex married his wife, Jovita. They have 4 children: two girls, Rachel and Sandra and two boys, Alex and Robert. Alex Junior is following in his father's foot- steps and is the Assistant Superintendent at Brook- side Golf Course in Pasadena, California. 
Alex stayed at Saticoy Country club for 25 years. At Saticoy Country Club he said he witnessed the funniest thing that he ever saw on a golf course. It was a member in the 1960's known as "Mr. Winkler". Alex had a hard time telling me the story as he imitated the swing that Mr. Winkler had. According to Galaviz, Winkler would start his swing by bouncing in a springing motion 10-12 times while at the same time bringing his club back and forward at a faster pace like a baseball player. When Winkler felt he had done this routine to his satisfaction he would unwind and smack the ball. I could only imagine what this must of looked like in person, all I had to compare it with was the amusing imitation Alex was doing. When you see Alex you must ask him to do the "Winkler". 
Alex took a position at Wilshire Country Club in 1984. Alex spent the next 20 years maintaining the course as well as hosting the PGA Seniors Tour for six years. After 45 years working on golf courses, Alex retired to spend more time with his eleven grandchildren and four great-grandchildren. 
Alex does enjoy golf, however, he does not play very often. His Best round was an 83 at Wilshire Country Club. His lowest handicap was around a 16. His favorite course is Saticoy Country Club especially with the new renovations. 
In his mid-sixties Alex decided he wasn't ready to quit working. He accepted the superintendent position at the 36-hole Robinson Ranch. We will get the chance to play the mountain course next month. The mountain course at Robinson Ranch has Bermuda tee boxes and fairways along with A-4 Bentgrass greens. 
Alex Galaviz is a great superintendent as well as a nice guy. Be sure to say hello to him next month at the Robinson Ranch and don't forget to ask him to do the "Winkler".

By Tim McGuire / PW Gillibrand
Sea to Sand, August 2007

GCSAA Webcast Series
GCSAA's live education webcasts will be 90 minutes long and will take place at the computer of your choice. 
To increase the event's interaction, we recommend the use of a microphone, but you can ask questions and participate using the text chat feature.
Visit the system check today to learn more about what's required and test your system, free of charge.

GCSAA's live education Webcasts Series 
09/06/07   You Manage Your Course's Stress - Now Manage Yours! 10:00:00 AM Details
09/11/07   Making the Most of the Internet 10:00:00 AM Details
09/18/07   How to Read Your Soils Report 10:00:00 AM Details
10/17/07    Improving Your Powerpoint Skills 12:00:00 PM
10/23/07    Organic Golf  12:00:00 PM

To register today, use our online shopping cart. From the details description page, select "Add to Cart" from the quick facts box to put your course in a shopping cart. 
When your cart is full, "View cart/Check out" will take you to the payment options. You may also complete and fax the registration form to (785) 832-4449. 

Visit the ON DEMAND Webcast events, Choose any of our recorded webcasts - view them when you want and as many times as you want (within one year from purchase.)

For Details; visit the GCSAA Webcast ON DEMAND Address: http://www.gcsaa.org/education/webcast/archivedwebcast.asp
Or call Kyle Kreighbaum 800-472-7878 x5167 

By Pat O'Brien and Chris Hartwiger
Putting green aeration and topdressing are literally and figuratively dirty words. Golfers begrudgingly accept the fact that to protect the long-term health of the grass on a putting green, it is necessary to aerate and topdress each year. With more sophisticated products and techniques, gone are the days when putting greens were aerated in the spring and fall and buried in a blanket of sand. But lost in the changes to these programs may be an incomplete understanding of how much aeration and topdressing are needed to protect the long-term health of the greens.

The long-term health of putting greens depends on maintaining sand as the primary medium. If organic matter accumulates beyond a reasonable degree, the physical benefits of sand are diminished and putting green physical properties decline along with the health of the turf. For too long golf courses have been making changes in their aeration and topdressing programs without comparing these changes to a standard or target level. A previous Green Section Record article titled "Core Aeration by the Numbers" detailed how tine size and spacing affects the amount of surface area impacted by an aeration treatment and made a recommendation to impact 15-20% of the surface each year (O'Brien and Hartwiger, 2001). This recommendation did not go far enough because it did not include surface topdressing applications, which go hand in hand with core aeration in diluting organic matter accumulation. This article expands upon these concepts and links core aeration and sand topdressing.

The Significance of Core Aeration and Sand Topdressing

According to University of Georgia turfgrass researcher Dr. Bob Carrow, the number-one problem experienced on sand-based putting greens is the excessive accumulation of organic matter in the upper portion of the soil profile (Carrow et al., 2002). Core aeration and sand topdressing are the two most effective means to control the content and distribution of organic matter in this zone. The scientific literature is full of references to the benefits of core aeration and sand topdressing. Unfortunately, details on how much aeration and topdressing are needed are lacking.
 
 
 

Ft.3 of Sand Lbs. per 1,000 ft2	Lbs. per 1,000 ft2 Dry Sand	Depth of Application in inches
0.50	50	0.006
1.00	100	0.012
2.00	200	0.024
4.00	400	0.048
50.00	5000	0.600

The moment any type of grass is planted on a putting green rootzone mix, the soil physical properties in the upper few inches of the rootzone begin to change (Habeck and Christians, 2000; Curtis, 2001). In a new putting green the cycle of root growth, decline, and new growth is repeated year after year. Roots grow down through the soil in the large soil pores (macropores) and provide the plant with needed water, oxygen, and nutrients. When a root is no longer viable, it begins to plug up soil macropores and can hinder the ability of living plants to function.

Dr. Carrow conducted extensive research (Carrow, 1998) in the mid-1990s on the organic matter dynamics in the rootzone of sand-based putting greens. He concluded as organic matter in a sand-based putting green reaches 3-4% by weight, the percentage of soil macropores begins to decrease. The reduction of pore space has three distinct implications, and a host of primary problems can be expected: 1) The diffusion of oxygen into the rootzone begins to decline. Oxygen is vital for plant growth as well as soil microorganism balance and function. 2) Water infiltration decreases, which can result in puddling and saturation of the surface. 3) Moisture content in the upper rootzone increases, which can make the surface less firm. The decrease in macropores (aeration pores) is accompanied by an increase in capillary or water-holding pores.

If organic matter accumulation begins to exceed 3-4% by weight, putting greens become vulnerable to a host of secondary problems such as disease, wet wilt, soft surfaces, poor root growth, black layer, and more frequent high-temperature injury. These secondary problems are often called summer bentgrass decline (Carrow et al., 2002), and trying to treat them curatively can be expensive. They occur often at courses that have not adequately aerated and topdressed the greens. Many of these courses are doomed to many years of frustration because they are not willing to make the effort to do the additional aeration and topdressing needed to prevent the situation.

Dr. Carrow's research shows that core aeration and applying sand can help dilute organic accumulation and create new macropores. The remainder of this article will be devoted to developing an aeration and topdressing program that keeps organic matter levels below 3-4% by weight. This proactive approach ultimately will cause less disruption and be less expensive than trying to alleviate primary and secondary problems through a curative approach.

The organic matter dilution program is a catch-all term that includes core aeration accompanied by sand topdressing to fill the holes and sand topdressing applied directly to the surface. References to core aeration refer only to hollow-tine aeration at a standard depth of 3 inches. Aeration depth can vary significantly based upon machine and type of tine used. Deep-tine aeration or similar practices designed to correct deep rootzone issues are not considered. Surface topdressing refers to sand applied directly to the turfgrass canopy. Light, medium, and heavy topdressing applications are approximately 0.50 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2, 2.0 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2, and 4.0 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2, respectively.

Aerating and Topdressing Recommendations

The case has been made for the importance of using core aeration and sand topdressing to dilute the accumulation of organic matter. The question is, How much of each needs to be done? We propose answering this question in a slightly different way. The answer requires linking the topics of aeration and topdressing together. We link the two together because they are the key elements in an organic matter dilution program. Core aeration removes organic matter. Filling the holes with sand makes sure those columns stay open. Dustings of sand applied directly to the surface also help manage organic matter accumulation.

Applying at least 40-50 ft.3 of sand per 1,000 ft.2 per year is recommended to keep organic matter content below 3-4% by weight in the upper portion of the rootzone. Although this recommendation is brief, understanding all its ramifications is more complex, and it should stimulate many questions that will be addressed in the following sections.
Understanding Sand Volumes

Rates of sand topdressing can be difficult to conceptualize. Table 1 shows quantities of sand expressed in different units and yields some interesting comparisons. Conveniently, it turns out that 100 pounds of dry sand is equivalent to 1.0 ft.3 of sand. Wet sand is approximately 6-10% heavier for an equivalent volume. Finally, the sand quantities are expressed in inches, which are easier to conceptualize for large quantities of sand.

To Core or Not to Core, That is Not the Question

By now, many readers will have looked at the recommendation and said, "Aha. If we apply 40-50 ft.3 of sand per 1,000 ft.2 through regular topdressing applications, we will not need to core aerate the greens." It is easy to see how this interpretation could be made, but this strategy is not recommended. There are agronomic and practical reasons for not trying this approach. There are merits to removing organic matter through core aeration and packing these vertical columns that cut through the high organic matter zone with sand. Applying 50 ft.3 of sand per 1,000 ft.2 through surface topdressing would only require approximately 25 applications of 2.0 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2, or one application every two weeks. This would be far too stressful during the summer and would be difficult to work into the canopy during periods of slow winter growth. Invariably, interference with play and weather make this program impractical.

Similarly, do not try to meet the topdressing requirement with only core aeration and filling the holes with sand. This method could result in layering. All applied sand is not worked into the holes; some falls between the holes. This excess sand would only be mixed into the canopy twice per year if the greens are aerated twice per year. Additionally, it would be difficult to keep sand as the primary component of the rootzone matrix near the surface without regular surface topdressing applications.

Sample Programs

The best program is one that includes a certain amount of core aeration along with regular sand topdressings. When considering tine sizes, select a size that allows easy and complete backfilling of the aeration holes. Based upon field observations, the smallest hole that can be reliably filled with sand is created by a tine of just less than 1/2 in. Holes of 3/8 in. diameter are not easily filled, even with the driest sand. Outlined below are a few sample programs to stimulate thought. There is no single program that is right for everybody, but with an overall goal of total topdressing applied, a plan that meets the needs of any course can be developed.

Program 1: Big Holes, Big Spacing. This approach uses traditional aeration equipment with 5/8 in. tines on a 2 in. ¥ 2 in. spacing. The greens are aerated once in the spring and once in the fall. A total of 36 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2 (3,600 lbs. per 1,000 ft.2) is applied for the two core aerations. See Table 2 to see sand volumes required to fill aeration holes for other tine sizes and spacing patterns. 
The remaining 14 ft.3 of sand necessary per 1,000 ft.2 to meet the 50 ft.3 goal is applied via light to moderate topdressings throughout the year. A light to moderate topdressing is considered to be anywhere from 0.5 ft.3 to 2.0 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2 This is roughly equivalent to 50 to 200 lbs. of sand per 1,000 ft.2

Program 2: Dethatching. This program is for new construction only or for a putting green that has met the topdressing requirement. A dethatching machine is used to physically remove organic matter from the upper portion of the profile. Spring and fall dethatching treatments are performed. Less disruption to play is the primary advantage. This program is not recommended as a curative approach on greens with excessive organic matter. It is too difficult to incorporate sand into the channels made by the dethatching equipment, especially when the grooves are cut greater than 0.25 in. deep. 
The amount of sand incorporated into the canopy following dethatching is much lower than with core aeration. As channel depth increases, sand incorporation decreases because the channels collapse and seal off. This may be considered a disadvantage because much more time must be spent applying light and moderate topdressings throughout the year. For example, assume the greens are dethatched with 9/64 in. blades. Approximately 14% of the surface area is impacted, but only 1-3 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2 of sand is applied. This amount is highly variable and depends on how well the dethatching channels stay open. This leaves 40-44 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2 left to be applied through light and moderate topdressings. 
Many courses that use a dethatching machine use it in combination with an aerator. Some dethatch and aerate at the same time, while others dethatch and aerate on separate dates.

The moderate topdressings (2.0 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2) should be applied at a time of year when organic accumulation is most rapid. On bentgrass putting greens in the South, the period of October through April is the most prolific period of organic matter production. Bermudagrass greens generate the most organic matter in the summer months. Light topdressings can be applied at any time of the year.

Small Holes, Small Spacing. A sample program using this approach might include the following: super quad tines with an outside tine diameter of 0.420 on a 1 in. ¥ 11/8 in. spacing. The greens are aerated twice in the spring and once or twice in the fall. The total amount of sand required to fill the holes after each aeration is approximately 6.15 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2 or 18-24 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2 per year. The remaining 16-32 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2 can be applied through light or moderate topdressings throughout the year. 

Seeing is believing with volumetric measurements. Light, medium, and heavy surface topdressing rates are approximately 0.50ft.2 per 1,000ft.2. 2.0ft.2 per 1,000ft.2, and 4.0ft.2 per 1,000ft.2. respectively.

This approach relies on smaller tine diameters and a tighter spacing pattern. The advantage of this program is reduced healing time because smaller diameter holes require less time to heal than larger holes. The disadvantages are the need for special equipment and more difficulty filling the aeration holes. As hole size decreases, the likelihood of sand particles bridging over the surface of the hole increases. The super quad tine only goes 1.75 in. into the rootzone, which could be a concern with a thick layer of organic accumulation. An aerator with variable spacing and a tractor with a creeper gear are necessary to duplicate this program. For best results, take the time to make sure the holes are open and clean, and try to use the driest sand possible.

Theory Vs. Reality: Calculating Sand Volume

Every golf course is faced with a unique set of circumstances. Determining the total amount of topdressing applied can be challenging. Table 2 shows the approximate amount of sand necessary to fill aeration holes with sand for common tine sizes and spacing.

When recommended topdressing amounts are in hand, the turfgrass manager must adjust the topdressing applied if it is determined that the sand is not working easily into the holes. Sometimes the greens are damp or the sand is wet. The degree to which sand is filled into the holes can vary, too. The key point is not whether the suggested amount is applied to fill the holes, but how much sand actually is applied. This information is helpful when calculating yearly volume and determining how much sand must be added through light or moderate topdressing applications.

When calculating sand volume applied, another consideration is estimating how much sand is thrown onto areas other than the putting green. This is an issue when spinner topdressers are used to apply light or moderate topdressings.

Meeting the Recommendation: Is More or Less Needed?

The beauty of coupling aeration and topdressing together and making an annual topdressing recommendation as a target value is its simplicity and flexibility. It may need to be adjusted upward or downward, depending on individual circumstances. The Atlanta, Georgia, climate was selected for this recommendation. Other areas may require a higher topdressing or lower requirement based upon some of the factors listed below.

Nitrogen Levels. Nitrogen is directly related to organic matter production. Higher nitrogen programs may be required on putting greens with extremely high traffic levels or on greens that must be grown in from some type of seasonal damage. More topdressing may be required. Greens managed under low nitrogen programs may require somewhat less sand. 
Soil pH. A soil pH > 5.5 is optimal for bacterial activity and organic matter decomposition. Soil pH much below this level reduces organic matter decomposition, and more topdressing may be required. 
Turfgrass Species. The 40-50 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2 recommendation is the minimum requirement for many bentgrass and/or Poa annua putting greens and may need to be adjusted annually. Non-overseeded Tifdwarf or Tifgreen bermudagrass putting greens will have a slightly lower annual topdressing requirement, somewhere in the range of 35-40 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2 Non-overseeded ultradwarf greens may require 40-50 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2 Overseeded Tifdwarf or Tifgreen bermudagrass putting greens will require 40-50 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2, but with newer ultradwarf cultivars that tend to accumulate organic matter in the surface 1-2 in., a somewhat higher amount may be necessary. For newer bermudagrass cultivars, the "small holes, small spacing" program applied at more than two times per year is a good option. High annual topdressing sand rates are important for the newer bentgrass cultivars that tend to accumulate organic matter in the surface or in climates where organic matter accumulation is favored. In these situations, the "small holes, small spacing" program is worth trying. 

Unusual Field Conditions

Two common field conditions exist that may require a higher sand requirement or an adjustment as to when sand should be applied.

Rapid Root Dieback. This condition is characterized by the rapid death of a bentgrass root system caused by high temperatures in the summer months. When bentgrass roots die back suddenly, the nature of some of the organic matter changes from live root structures to decomposing organic matter with a gel-like consistency. Dr. Carrow states, "It is not the lack of roots from root dieback that is the problem, but the creation of an excessively moist layer from the decomposing root tissues with very low oxygen during hot weather in response to the rapid root dieback" (Carrow et al., 2002). The remaining roots are under low oxygen stress and cannot take up enough water for transpirational cooling. Reduced water uptake, stomatal closure, and high-temperature kill can follow. Field symptoms are a yellowing of the turf and death over a one- to three-day period of hot, humid weather. This scenario can occur at organic matter levels of 3-5% by weight in the top 1 in. of the rootzone, but it is much more likely when organic matter is greater than 5% by weight (Carrow et al., 2002). After the hot weather has ended, it will be necessary to continue diluting this rapid accumulation of organic matter created from the dead roots as well as organic matter arising from new root initiation. The topdressing requirement will increase and should be met through a combination of surface topdressing and filling aeration holes. 
Cool-Weather Organic Accumulation. Root growth can be rapid during periods of cool weather. Roots grow down through the macropore channels and adventitious roots grow near the surface. Although live organic matter does not reduce oxygen availability as severely as decomposing organic matter, oxygen infiltration and water infiltration can decrease as the roots fill many of the macropores. This is commonly observed in the winter to early spring months when greens begin to puddle more substantially after a rain. The problem is more severe in cooler climates with prolonged soil temperatures above 32°F, but less than 55°F. Bentgrass/Poa annua will grow in temperatures above 32°F, but soil microbes necessary for organic matter decomposition do not function below 55°F. These conditions are more common in northern climates and, particularly, coastal northeastern and coastal northwestern climates. Other than a reduction in water infiltration, surface symptoms are not observed, but suboptimal oxygen levels can reduce the rate of deeper rooting. After spring aeration, adequate oxygen will be available for maximum root growth. 

Progress Report

Turf managers who have embarked on an organic matter dilution program will be curious about how the program is working. There are three ways to assess the program's effectiveness.

The first is to send a core sample of the top 1-2 in. of the rootzone profile to a physical soil testing laboratory. Request a test to determine organic matter by weight.

A result of less than 3% organic matter by weight is good news and indicates that organic accumulation has been well diluted with sand. A result of 3-5% organic matter by weight is borderline, and problems caused by plugged macropores could occur. Pay careful attention to the organic matter dilution program over the next few seasons. A result of 5% or more is cause for concern. A serious effort must be made to reduce organic matter buildup. Place more emphasis on core aeration and topdressing to fill the holes. Some superintendents may sample and find organic matter contents greater than 5% without any apparent symptoms at the time of sampling, but the chances for future problems are much greater.

In the cooler regions of bentgrass adaptation, organic matter content can be above the 5% limit without immediate concern. The reason is that these climates have fewer hot periods in the summer. When periods of high heat do occur, bentgrass can decline rapidly. Also, in these climates organic matter can continue to increase to a point where decline occurs from oxygen stress, regardless of the temperature.

Cases of seasonal organic matter accumulation fluctuations occur on bentgrass during the winter in the southern transition zone and on overseeded bermudagrass greens in the late spring. Root growth during cool periods may increase organic matter 1-2% from the fall level due to live roots contributing to the overall organic matter content. The seasonal changes suggest that sampling for organic matter for both bentgrass and bermudagrass should be in May and late summer. The highest organic matter content will occur during May, especially on overseeded bermudagrass greens, and late summer should be the time of the year with the lowest organic matter content.

A second method to assess the program's effectiveness is to take field observations of the soil profile. If layering is present, as evidenced by a distinct sand or organic matter layer(s), it is likely that topdressing applications are being made too far apart or that light applications between moderate applications are too light. Also, look for the columns of sand created by aeration and top-dressing. Checking this right after aeration allows the turf manager to see if the holes are being completely filled with sand.

A final assessment method involves the use of a double ring infiltrometer to take seasonal infiltration readings. Readings taken in conjunction with organic matter sampling can be especially useful. By taking an infiltration measurement at the same place on a green a few times a season, the superintendent can obtain several important pieces of information. First, the changes in infiltration by season will be apparent. Second, after taking readings for a few years, the superintendent can see if infiltration rates are increasing, decreasing, or staying the same in response to the organic matter dilution program.

Seeing is believing with volumetric measurements. Light, medium, and heavy surface topdressing rates are approximately 0.50 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2, 2.0 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2, and 4.0 ft.3 per 1,000 ft.2, respectively.

Organic matter accumulation in the upper rootzone is the primary reason why putting greens sometimes fail over time. Proper aeration and topdressing programs can prevent excess organic matter accumulation.

Rapid root dieback on bentgrass putting greens in the summer produces a gel-like layer in the upper rootzone and low soil oxygen levels. Turf loss can occur within 24 to 72 hours, and extra aeration and topdressing will be needed to promote recovery.

Conclusion

"More sand, laddie," is a quote attributed to Old Tom Morris. Although Old Tom probably never imagined that the science and art of putting green maintenance would ever reach today's quality levels attained on a daily basis, his emphasis on sand still rings true. The information presented in this article has the scientific backing to confirm what most in the industry know that aeration and topdressing are the foundation for successful putting greens.

Acknowledgments

A special thank-you to Dr. Bob Carrow, University of Georgia, and Mike Pilo, golf course superintendent, Charlotte Country Club (Georgia).

References
Beard, J. B. 2002. Turf Management for Golf Courses, 2nd ed. Ann Arbor Press, Chelsea, Mich.
Carrow, R. 1996. Summer decline of bentgrass greens. Golf Course Management. 64(6):51-56.
Carrow, R. 1998. Organic matter dynamics in the surface zone of a USGA green: practices to alleviate problems. The USGA 1998 Turfgrass and Environmental Research Summary. Golf House, Far Hills, N.J.
Carrow, R., P. O'Brien, and C. Hartwiger. 2002. Why Putting Greens Sometimes Fail. Unpublished manuscript.
Curtis, A. 2001. Evolution of a sand-based rootzone. Golf Course Management. 69(3). www.gcsaa.org/gcm/2001/- mar01/03evolution.html.
Habeck, J., and N. Christians. 2000. Time alters greens' key characteristics. Golf Course Management. 68(5). www.gcsaa.org/gcm/2000/may00/oftime.html.
Hartwiger, C. 1997. A shower a day fills the holes ok. USGA Green Section Record. 35(3):18.
O'Brien, P., and C. Hartwiger. 2001. Core aeration by the numbers. USGA Green Section Record. 39(4):8-9.
Pat O'Brien, director, and Chris Hartwiger, agronomist, run the Green Section's Southeast Region.

The purpose of the Chapter Cooperative Research Program is to help chapters fund applied research on golf course turf or soil problems or both, that have been identified by the chapter as a significant local issue. A chapter, or two or more chapters combining their resources, must match dollar for dollar the funding requested from GCSAA. A maximum of $10,000 per year for up to three years may be requested.

Chapters are encouraged to participate in the Chapter Cooperative Research Program. The most important step in getting research conducted that is of greatest interest to chapter members is to clearly identify the problem to be studied. After chapter members have identified the problem to be studied, contact a turfgrass scientist in your area to discuss the problem identified and the need for research. Work collaboratively with the scientist to prepare the research proposal. Superintendents can be a great asset in proposal preparation to clearly identify the problem and describe the magnitude of the problem. Superintendents can also help decide which treatments should be included in the experiment.

(Washington, DC, August 9, 2007) – Following its recent decision to reregister 2,4 dichloro-phenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) yesterday announced its Decision Not to Initiate a Special Review of 2,4-D, one of the most widely used herbicides in the U.S. and around the world. (Link to the EPA decision)

EPA’s decision states: “Because the Agency has determined that the existing data do not support a conclusion that links human cancer to 2,4-D exposure, it has decided not to initiate a Special Review of 2,4-D, 2,4-DB and 2,4-DP.” 

EPA first considered Special Review for 2,4-D in 1986, and after more than 21 years of research and reregistration evaluation, the Agency was able to determine that no correlation exists between the proper use of 2,4-D and cancer.

“Based on extensive scientific review of many epidemiology and animal studies, the Agency finds that the weight of the evidence does not support a conclusion that 2,4-D, 2,4-DB and 2,4-DP are likely human carcinogens,” according to a notice released by EPA. The herbicides 2,4-DB and 2,4-DP were also being considered for Special Review based on their similarity to 2,4-D. 

“The impact of this decision should not be understated,” said Jack Dutra, executive director of the Industry Task Force II on 2,4-D Research Data. “Today EPA definitively stated that 2,4-D is not a human carcinogen when used according to label directions. This has been one of the most widely used and successful herbicides in history, and growers around the U.S. and the world will continue to use it with confidence.” 

2,4-D is commonly applied to a variety of crops such as wheat, corn, rice, soybeans, potatoes, sugar cane, pome fruits, stone fruits and nuts. It controls invasive species in aquatic and federally protected areas, and broadleaf weeds in turf grass. An economic evaluation by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (NAPIAP Report 1-PA-96) concluded that the loss of 2,4-D would cost the U.S. economy $1.7 billion annually in higher food production and weed control expenses. 

Since 1989, the Industry Task Force II on 2,4-D Research Data developed and submitted to EPA over 300 Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) toxicology, environmental and residue studies which EPA scientists reviewed to assess the herbicide’s safety under the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA). 

The Industry Task Force II will continue to develop studies required by EPA’s reregistration review of 2,4-D, most of which are being required of all pesticides. 

For more information about 2,4-D visit www.24D.org or call 1-800-345-5109. 
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 About the Task Force

The Industry Task Force II on 2,4-D Research Data was formed, as allowed under U.S. pesticide laws, to fund the new research required by both the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Canadian Pest Management Regulatory Agency under their current pesticide re-registration/re-evaluation programs. The Task Force does not conduct any research, it simply must fund it. The actual research, under both U.S. and Canadian law, must be done by GLP qualified laboratories. The current companies making up the Task Force are Dow AgroSciences (U.S.), Nufarm Ltd. (Australia) and Agro-Gor Corp., a U.S. corporation jointly owned by Atanor, S.A. (Argentina) and PBI-Gordon Corp. (U.S.)

By M. Ali Harivandi

Within the United States as well as the rest of the world, the future of the golf industry is tied to water availability and price. Even in areas where water was once an unlimited resource, it is now viewed as limited and highly valuable, particularly in arid, semi-arid, and highly populated regions. The price of potable water rises with scarcity; both rising cost and the increased politicization of using a scarce resource for leisure and entertainment purposes put pressure on golf courses to use something other than potable water for irrigation. 

In many locations, using recycled water (i.e., treated municipal sewage water, which may also be known as reclaimed or effluent water) for golf course irrigation is a viable strategy for coping with water shortages and the rising cost of fresh water. Some states, in fact, have already mandated recycled water irrigation on new golf courses and landscapes. Elsewhere, interest in recycled water irrigation continues to increase as more and better-quality recycled water becomes available for re-use.

Irrigating a golf course with recycled water poses unique challenges for a course superintendent. Whether a course is new and in the development phase or well established and switching to recycled water irrigation, issues arise in the areas of environmental stewardship, health, and agronomics. These issues are more easily addressed when a course can be designed and built with recycled water irrigation in mind than when an established course decides to retrofit (or convert) to recycled water use. In both instances, however, a number of concerns are best handled during the planning phase; in fact, preparing for recycled water irrigation is almost always more efficient and effective than managing the potential negative effects of its misuse.

Resolution of the following infrastructure and management issues will ensure minimal negative impact of recycled water irrigation on the playability and agronomic health of a golf course. It will also ensure that legal and financial responsibilities are carefully considered and all parties are clear on their roles and responsibilities should problems arise. Most of these issues apply equally to courses under development and those being retrofitted for recycled water irrigation. Every site, however, will also be subject to specific health and environmental regulations which, due to the great variation between sites and communities, are not discussed here. Readers are therefore advised that the following discussion is not exhaustive with respect to such issues, complete evaluation of which should occur before contracts are signed.

RECYCLED WATER TREATMENT PROCESS

Recycled water used for golf course irrigation must be at least secondary, and preferably tertiary, treated wastewater. Secondary treatment is a biological process in which complex organic matter is broken down to less complex organic material, then metabolized by simple organisms that are later removed from the wastewater. Secondary treatment can remove more than 90 percent of the organic matter in sewage. The secondary liquid effluent is always chlorinated or otherwise disinfected before release. Often, sewage treatment facilities associated with residential developments consist of aerated lagoons, a less sophisticated secondary treatment process.

Advanced wastewater treatment consists of processes similar to potable water treatment, such as chemical coagulation and flocculation, sedimentation, filtration, or adsorption of compounds by a bed of activated charcoal. Because advanced treatment usually follows high-rate secondary treatments, it is sometimes referred to as tertiary treatment. These processes can provide highly purified waters. Reverse osmosis, an advanced method of water treatment, can actually produce pure water; however, very high initial and operational costs and environmental problems related to disposal of reject saline brine limits the use of this process for golf course irrigation.

Generally, secondary and tertiary treated waters do not differ significantly chemically — i.e., in their dissolved salt content. However, due to the greatly reduced level of suspended (i.e., not dissolved) solids, tertiary waters are much more desirable for golf course irrigation. Suspended solids can plug irrigation heads and seal sand-based (USGA or California type) golf greens, thereby reducing drainage. Consequently, installing an efficient filtration system is essential when using recycled water for golf course irrigation, especially if the recycled water is only secondary treated effluent.

AGRONOMIC AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS FOR RETROFIT

There are unique challenges associated with using recycled water to irrigate golf courses originally designed for freshwater irrigation. Depending on the quality of the recycled water available, the costs of converting an irrigation system and adapting course maintenance to the new irrigation can be substantial. The following items all bear careful consideration in planning for conversion of a course to recycled water irrigation. Most have both cost and management consequences, although some are cost free. Some of the items may have already been addressed by local authorities — e.g., regulatory issues. Every effort is made to include all items of potential concern in this report; however, other, site-specific issues that are not apparent initially may come to light as the conversion project progresses.

IRRIGATION SYSTEM ISSUES

• Cross connection. Protection of cross-connection systems may be necessary if the golf course irrigation system is connected to a potable water system or any dedicated fire line using potable water. In general, all physical connections between the recycled water irrigation system and the potable water system must be disconnected.

• Lakes, wells, and creek protection. On-site lakes, wells, and creeks whose water is used for potable purposes should be protected from overspray or runoff from recycled water irrigation. Drinking-water fountains on the property should also be protected from overspray. Local regulations may require modification or redesign of the irrigation system to ensure these protections.

• Quick couplers. It may be necessary to tag or replace all quick couplers on the course with specialized couplers that prevent inadvertent drinking of recycled water by maintenance personnel or others.

It is commonplace that purple irrigation system components generally signify and warn unsuspecting users of the presence of recycled water.

• Labeling, tagging, and painting. On new golf courses, purple irrigation system components generally signify (and warn unsuspecting users of) the presence of recycled water. On existing golf courses, all buried components of the existing irrigation system are often “grandfathered in.” However, a golf course may be required to label all visible irrigation system components with purple tape, tags, paints, etc. It may also be necessary to install signs warning of recycled water use in more than just English (in most cases, warnings in Spanish are also mandatory) throughout the course, at the clubhouse and pro shop, and on scorecards. The cost of this “publicity” will depend on the type and magnitude of labeling a course chooses.

• Pumping costs. Depending on the pumping capacity and pressure requirements of the existing system, a booster pump and electricity for additional pumping may be required. The pressure provided by the treatment plant releasing the recycled water is often inadequate for irrigating a golf course.

• Water storage facilities — construction and maintenance. If recycled water cannot be stored in existing lakes on the course, additional storage facilities may be required. Covered storage tanks or “lined” ponds are options. The size and location of such storage facilities must be thoroughly evaluated in relation to environmental issues as well as for both fixed and operational costs. Note: Recycled water storage facilities require a high level of maintenance. Generally, covered (or buried) storage tanks require less maintenance than lakes, since the absence of light eliminates algae growth; on the other hand, settling of suspended matter is a problem in tanks. With frequency depending on water quality, storage tanks must be periodically emptied and cleaned. The initial cost of constructing lined storage lakes may be less than that of installing covered tanks; however, the maintenance cost is generally higher. Due to elevated levels of nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus, algae and weed growth is a constant problem in storage lakes. Substantial labor and chemicals are often needed to keep pond water clean and suitable for irrigation. Depending on the quality of the water, the cost of maintaining a storage pond for recycled water could be several times higher than maintenance costs for a pond of potable water (due primarily to algae and weed growth, and odor problems). If any existing lake at a course is converted for storage of recycled water, it may require lining to prevent potential groundwater contamination.

• Irrigation water filtration. Given the suspended matter content of recycled water, a dependable irrigation filtration system may be essential. Particularly if recycled water is stored in ponds, where algae bloom is a constant problem, filtration must be of high quality. If the existing filter system at a course is sub par, it must be replaced before beginning recycled water irrigation. Without effective filtration, algae and other suspended matter will plug irrigation nozzles, reducing irrigation efficiency and uniformity, and requiring additional labor for repeatedly unplugging heads. In addition, without adequate filtration, the fine, suspended particles delivered in recycled water may plug pore spaces in the rootzone of sand-based golf greens, impeding both drainage and leaching — costly problems!

• Irrigation water blending. Recycled water may need to be blended with fresh water to reduce its salt content. If blending, often done in a storage tank or lake, is not possible, a course may be alternately irrigated with recycled and fresh water to leach salts (a process called “flushing”). Cost and logistics would determine which approach is used at a given golf course.

• Adjacent properties. Depending on local regulations, golf courses irrigated with recycled water may be required to protect adjacent properties from runoff or overspray from their irrigation. Compliance with such regulations may mean redesigning the irrigation system to allow irrigation of the perimeter with fresh water.

AGRONOMIC ISSUES

• Recycled water dissolved salts. In most cases, recycled water will have a higher dissolved salt content than the water already being used for irrigation. In addition to salinity, other important chemical components of the recycled water are pH, sodium, calcium, magnesium, chloride, boron, bicarbonate, and residual chlorine. Depending on the levels of these chemical constituents, management practices on the course may need to change to counteract potential negative effects on soil, turfgrasses, and other plants. Such effects may range from slight to substantial. Without an analysis of the recycled water, it is impossible to predict the extent of its effect on management; however, any or all of the following may be needed:

1. Irrigation water blending (i.e., recycled with fresh).

2. Injection into the irrigation water of acids, gypsum, or other amendments. 

3. Application of gypsum, sulfur, and other amendments to the soil.

4. Additional core aerating to reduce soil impermeability caused by elevated sodium levels.

5. Installation of additional drainage lines in low-lying areas to remove leached salts.

6. Application of additional herbicides and fungicides to combat weed and disease problems if existing grasses are stressed by the presence of salt.

7. Application of more water than is currently applied to leach salt below the grass rootzone (leaching requirement).

8. Regular and more frequent soil and water testing. Twice a year, soils must be lab tested to identify potential salinity problems. Soil samples should be taken from representative greens, tees, fairways, roughs, and general landscaped areas. Recycled water must be lab tested at least quarterly to determine the level and fluctuation of dissolved salts.

• Trees, shrubs, and other non-turf plants. Depending on the recycled water’s salt content as well as the sensitivity of the course’s trees, shrubs, and other plants, remedial actions may be required to prevent plant injury. The most common remedial practice is modification of the irrigation system so that water from sprinklers does not wet plant leaves. Although trees and shrubs may tolerate certain levels of salt accumulation in the soil, they can exhibit injury from saline water sprayed on their foliage.

• Consultant fees. Agronomic issues relating to recycled water can be complex, requiring the input of consulting specialists. Most golf course superintendents work closely with a turfgrass water quality consultant. The cost of such service, as well as lab test fees, is a consistent recurring cost associated with recycled water irrigation, and it should be added to the management budget.

ENVIRONMENTAL AND MANAGEMENT ISSUES

• Groundwater monitoring. If a golf course is located above a drinking water aquifer, a comprehensive groundwater quality monitoring program may be required if the course is irrigated with recycled water. At issue is whether the golf course or the sewage treatment plant is responsible for mounting and paying for such a program.

• Odor problems. Depending on the level of treatment, recycled water irrigation may cause an odor problem. It should be decided in advance who will be responsible for correcting the situation.

This special design protects the water fountain from being struck by recycled irrigation water.

• Liability issues. Although extremely rare, human health problems, adjacent property contamination, and other negative impacts may result from recycled water irrigation. It is highly advisable to determine ahead of time whether the golf course or the sewage treatment plant, or both, will take responsibility for such outcomes.

• Equipment deterioration. Turfgrass maintenance equipment rusts and deteriorates in other ways more quickly when exposed to saline irrigation water. How big a problem this may be at a given golf course will depend on the salinity of the recycled water.

• Golf course superintendent compensation. Switching from fresh to recycled irrigation water will add to the responsibilities (and therefore on-the-job time) of the golf course superintendent. In addition to extra agronomic tasks that the use of recycled water imposes, the superintendent will spend more time inspecting, keeping records, preparing reports, and filing documents with environmental and regulatory agencies. He will also have to spend more time with regulators, community representatives, consultants, laboratories, and vendors providing goods or services related to recycled water. Total labor needs on the course, including that of the superintendent, often rise 10-20% when recycled water irrigation replaces freshwater irrigation, the actual figure depending on the quality of water used.

ADVANTAGES OF RECYCLED WATER 

• Conservation and availability. Using recycled water is an excellent means of conserving fresh water. Water availability, especially during a drought or other water shortages, is almost guaranteed when using recycled water.

• Cost. Recycled water is almost always less expensive for golf course irrigation than fresh water.

• Nutrient Content. All recycled waters contain nutrients required by turf plants (e.g., nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium). The quantities of nutrients available at a given site and their impact can only be evaluated after recycled water becomes available and can be tested for nutrient content. This limitation notwithstanding, most recycled waters contain enough nutrients to completely eliminate fertilization of roughs and even fairways, and to substantially reduce the fertilizer required by greens and tees.

AUTHOR’S NOTE

Use of recycled water for irrigation is rapidly spreading worldwide. The author is interested in staying abreast of issues arising from recycled water irrigation on golf courses in regions with varying social, environmental, political, and climatic conditions. Readers are encouraged to communicate issues related to recycled water irrigation that are not covered in this article. The author will compile and periodically cover these issues in new publications. The author may be reached at: maharivandi@ucdavis.edu.

M. Ali Harivandi, Ph.D., is an environmental horticulturist for the University of California Cooperative Extension in the San Francisco Bay Area. He also is a member of the USGA Turfgrass and Environmental Research Committee.

August 22, 2007 

MISSION VALLEY – There is no silver bullet to forestall cutbacks to San Diego County's allotment of drinking water, a panel of experts on water, global warming, agriculture and the environment said yesterday. 

An ongoing drought, climate change and shrinking supplies from the Colorado River and the San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta have put the region on the edge of a severe water shortage. 
The speakers predicted many challenges. Among them: 

 Residential customers may be forced to significantly reduce water usage for landscaping. 
 Some local growers' businesses could fold if water cutbacks hurt their bottom line. 
 Even if desalination – converting seawater into drinking water – is adopted along the county's coastline, the product will likely be expensive and unable to meet demand. 
 It's almost certain the cost of water will continue to rise, the experts said. 

They spoke to movers and shakers at the Hilton San Diego in Mission Valley. The San Diego County Taxpayers Association held the panel discussion. 

If current trends continue, Southern California's primary water purveyor could reduce the county's allotment by up to 50 percent, said Pete Silva, a senior policy adviser with the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. 

After suffering a 31 percent cutback and being threatened with 50 percent cut from Metropolitan during the drought of 1987-92, the San Diego County Water Authority increased its storage capacity and cultivated other sources of water. 

This strategy has made the region more self-sufficient and less dependent on Metropolitan, which 15 years ago supplied 95 percent of the county's water. Today, Metropolitan provides about 76 percent. 

Nevertheless, a 50 percent cutback from Metropolitan would translate to a 35 percent reduction in the overall water supply for San Diego County, said Maureen Stapleton, general manager for the county water authority.

CEDAR FALLS, Iowa (July 6, 2007) - Standard Golf Company's new Microfiber Tee Towel has seven time the absorbency and three times the "wicking" action of a standard cotton towel. 

Produced as an antimicrobial product, the Microfiber Tee Towel repels odors and stains and includes a handy grommet for easy attachment.  This premium, washable towel comes in a variety of ultraviolet-resistant colors that includes black, red, white and green and can be embroidered with clubs' logos. 

For additional information, please contact 1-866-743-9773 or visit www.standardgolf.com.