Arkansas Turfgrass - Fall 2020

T H E A R KA N S A S T U R F G RA S S A S S O C I AT I O N M AG AZ I N E • F A L L 2020

THE BASICS OF FIELD TESTING PLUS, The

ResistPoa Project Enters A New Phase

Bet on the Right Horse

TifTuf is 38% more drought tolerant than other bermudas based on USDA drought stress trials.

*TifTuf topped Tahoma 31 every single year in NTEP drought stress trials.

*TifTuf placed in the top NTEP trial categories 93% of the time. Tahoma 31 a distant 73% finish.

TifTuf the Clear Winner, Running Away. www.THETURFGRASSGROUP.com * (NTEP) National Turfgrass Evaluation Program

T H E A R KA N S A S T U R F G RA S S A S S O C I AT I O N M AG AZ I N E CO N T E N T S • F A L L 2020

6

10

14

FEATURES

5 News from ATA –

DEPARTMENTS

ATA Annual Education Conference and Trade Show

6 Feature Article –

The ResistPoa Project Enters A New Phase

10

Cover Story –

The Basics of Field Testing

14

Member Spotlight –

ATA Board Member Josh Landreth

4 President’s Message 5 Index of Advertisers 5 University of Arkansas Turf Team

Find this issue, Podcasts, Events and More: T H E T U R F Z O N E.C O M

Fall 2020

•

ARKANSAS TU R FGRASS

•

3

P R E S I D E N T ’S M E S S AG E

Arkansas Turfgrass Association P.O. Box 185 • Bryant, AR 72089 Tel: 501-860-0187

HEAT STRESS Richard Covert ATA President

OSHA

has a Quick Card called Protecting Workers from Heat Stress (OSHA 3154). It discusses heat illness, risk factors, symptoms of heat exhaustion, heat stroke, and prevention, as well as how protect your workers and what to do if a worker is ill from the heat.

This card should practically be required reading for turfgrass managers in the summer and early fall. Be careful, stay safe, and watch for signs of heat stress in your co-workers.

Just as people can become heat stressed, so can your lawn. If you know what signs to watch for in your lawn, you can prevent turfgrass loss or long-lasting damage. When you see gaps or cracks in the soil across your yard, it is time for some water. Gaps in the perimeter of your lawn along the driveway or sidewalk are also signs that you need to turn on the sprinklers. If you have flower beds that have grass edges, you can see down a few inches to see how deep the dryness goes.

Footprints are another easy way to know if your grass is dehydrated. If simply walking across your yard leaves imprints of your foot, it is because the grass is too dry.

When it is time to water your lawn, be sure to be smart and use best practices.

The best time to water is in the early morning, between 5 am and 8 am. This allows your lawn to soak up that water without losing it to evaporation from heat and sun. Giving your lawn at least 1" of water per week will sustain it. The “cycle and soak” method works well, especially in a commercial setting. Running the sprinklers for approximately 10 minutes per zone and letting the system cycle through all zones twice reduces runoff. It is always important to be a good steward of water.

The ATA Board of Directors recently voted to move the 2021 Conference and Trade Show to an all-virtual event, scheduled for January 28–29, 2021. This decision was made in response to the continued threats of COVID-19 and by making the decision now, we were able to avoid financial penalties with the Hot Springs Convention Center. The online event will include a variety of education offerings and will provide opportunities to get points for pesticide recertification with the Arkansas Plant Board as well as professional development points for GCSAA members. More information will be published on the ATA website soon!

Richard Covert 2020 ATA President

4 • A R K A N S A S T U R F G R A S S • Fall 2020

Published by: Leading Edge Communications, LLC 206 Bridge Street Franklin, TN 37064 Tel: 615-790-3718 Email: info@leadingedge communications.com ATA OFFICERS Richard Covert, President Baptist Health Systems Richard.covert@baptist-health.org Kyle Sanders, Immediate Past President Sanders Ground Essentials 501-315-9395 kylesanders@sandersground.com Jeff Haskins, Treasurer Paragould Country Club 870-780-5883 Ja1116@earthlink.net Karen Cooper Executive Director 785-331-9225 arkturfgrassassn@att.net Doug Karcher, Ph.D., Education Chair University of Arkansas • 479-575-5723 karcher@uark.edu Pat Berger, Director Emeritus University of Arkansas • 479-575-6887 pberger@uark.edu Charlie Bowen, Director Emeritus Arkansas Hydroseed • 501-315-7333 charliebowen@yahoo.com Seth Dunlap Arkansas State Plant Board seth.dunlap@agriculture.arkansas.gov 501-225-1598 Mark Brown Nabholz • 501-749-7459 rmbrown2@ualr.edu Rodney Fisher Life Member, Founding Member Agra Turf, Inc. • 501-268-7036 agrarod@yahoo.com Ron Fisher Agra Turf, Inc. • 501-268-7036 agraron@yahoo.com Steve Ibbotson Conway Parks & Rec. • 501-328-4173 Steve.ibbotson@cityofconway.org Josh Landreth Ace of Blades • 479-530-7001 aceofblades@cox.net Mark Mowrey, Director Emeritus Oaklawn • 501-538-1600 bntgrns@yahoo.com Guy Oyler Jerry Pate Turf & Irrigation goyler@jerrypate.com • 501-317-5980 Rodger Pevehouse Life Member Michael Rush Rush Lawn Care • 501-279-8980 mrush@rushlawn.com Ricky Self Cypress Creek r.self@yahoo.com • 501-605-8000

N E W S F RO M ATA

Plans are moving forward for the

ATA ANNUAL EDUCATION CONFERENCE AND TRADE SHOW,

Karen Cooper ATA Executive Secretary

scheduled for January 28–29 in Hot Springs!

• The ATA Board of Directors recently voted to move the 2021 Conference and Trade Show to an all-virtual event, scheduled for January 28–29, 2021. This decision was made in response to the continued threats of COVID-19.

Making a decision now rather than waiting until later in the fall allowed us to avoid financial penalties with the hotels and convention center.

• The online event will include a variety of education offerings and will provide opportunities to get points for pesticide recertification with the Arkansas Plant Board as well as professional development points for GCSAA

members. More information will be published on the ATA website soon!

Your ATA website is getting a new look! The new site will launch soon and will have opportunities for listing equipment for sale, open positions, and more.

I’m looking forward to meeting all of you in January!

Please do not hesitate to reach out if I can be of assistance to you this fall!

Karen Cooper ATA Executive Secretary

U N I V E R S I TY O F A R KA N S A S T U R F T E A M

INDEX OF A DV E RT I S E R S

Doug Karcher, Ph.D. Professor 479-575-5723 karcher@uark.edu

Agra Turf, Inc............................ Back Cover www.agrainc.com

Mike Richardson, Ph.D. Professor 479-575-2860 mricha@uark.edu

Beam Clay................................. Back Cover www.BEAMCLAY.com • www.PARTAC.com

John Boyd, Ph.D. Visiting Assistant Professor Cooperative Extension Service Little Rock 479-575-2354 Jwb019@uark.edu

Leading Edge Communications....................... Back Cover www.LeadingEdgeCommunications.com

John H. McCalla Jr. Program Technician III 479-575-5033 jmccall@uark.edu Eric DeBoer Program Technician / Ph.D. Student ejdeboer@uark.edu Thomas Walton – M.S. Student

Progressive Turf Equipment Inc.............. 9 www.progressiveturfequip.com

Smith Seed Services................................. 5 www.smithseed.com

The Turfgrass Group....Inside Front Cover www.theturfgrassgroup.com

Fall 2020

•

ARKANSAS TU R FGRASS

•

5

F E AT U R E S TO RY

THE

ResistPoa Project ENTERS A NEW PHASE

By Jay McCurdy, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Mississippi State University

The

ResistPoa project seeks new and innovative strategies that help practitioners make informed decisions regarding annual bluegrass (Poa annua) control. The project is funded by a $5.6 million United States Department of Agriculture – Specialty Crop Research Initiative (USDA-SCRI) grant and involves 16 universities as well as their research laboratories and lab members. This is one of only a few federally funded turfgrass projects in the nation, and we’re grateful to reviewers and stakeholders who were involved in its selection.

Our objectives are to characterize nationwide distribution of herbicide resistant annual bluegrass, seek out new and

6 • A R K A N S A S T U R F G R A S S • Fall 2020

novel means of control, and identify socio-economic constraints that affect practitioner behavior.

The project is now in its second year. We are proud to have teamed up with Leading Edge Communications to bring our stakeholders an update through a series of podcasts and written communications.

PHOTO 1 (ABOVE ) – The ResistPoa team of includes researchers from Texas A&M, University of Tennessee, Mississippi State, University of Georgia, North Carolina State, Clemson, University of Florida, Rutgers, Purdue, Virginia Tech, Penn State, University of Arizona, Portland State, Oregon State and Auburn.

OUR CHALLENGE As a turfgrass weed, annual bluegrass’s color and texture are an aesthetic problem. It disrupts athletic performance as well as ball roll. It can survive and reproduce at almost any mowing height. It results in thinned and vulnerable turfgrass stands. Practitioners and researchers alike find that controlling and managing it seems to be more art than it is science.

As an industry, we too quickly start our conversations regarding annual bluegrass by discussing chemical control options, but any astute turfgrass manager knows that we can’t keep doing the same things if they’re not working.

We must also acknowledge societal and economic variables that influence our decision making. David Ervin at Portland State University and George Frisvold at University of Arizona are doing just that. Socio-economic investigations are collecting data through the use of focus groups and surveys. This approach challenges us to look beyond chemical control as a single dimension solution. Jim Brosnan from the University of Tennessee says: “This is the first time that I’ve been involved in an effort that is really trying to get at the sociological piece, the human element or decision-making piece of what we do. And my hope is that by trying to understand those dynamics, it’s going to make the solutions that come from the research easier to adapt.”

Beyond chemical control strategies, a critical objective of the ResistPoa project is to develop sound best management practices (BMPs) based upon a better understanding of the ecology and biology of annual bluegrass. “[W]hat it’s going to do is expand our knowledge a little bit better on those aspects of Poa annua control that are now solely dependent on which synthetic herbicide to spray today or tomorrow or next week,” says Shawn Askew from Virginia Tech. “We’re looking more at the biology of the weed and trying to exploit its weaknesses.”

Controlling annual bluegrass requires a diversified approach, incorporating proper cultural practices that favor the desired turfgrass species, appropriate herbicide application timings and combinations that account for known resistance issues.

Another objective is to understand seed production and seedling germination. Given adequate soil temperature and moisture, annual bluegrass seed germinate and establish relatively quickly. The project seeks to understand this through a series of experiments.

In ongoing studies, investigators at Georgia, Mississippi, Penn State, Purdue, and Tennessee have been studying the effects of growing degree day (GDD) accumulation on annual bluegrass seed formation and subsequent germination. In 2019 and 2020, we tracked GDD accumulation from January 1 through flowering and eventual seed ripening. Across sites, it appears that seed germination rates rise rapidly after 1,250 GDD (base 32°F) accumulation and

that the highest germination rates occur for seed retained longest on the plant. Ongoing experiments at Texas A&M, Auburn, Clemson, Tennessee, Oregon State, Purdue, and Rutgers also seek to determine the effects of seed burial and persistence as well as seedling emergence patterns. Those efforts are complemented by studies investigating seedling emergence (led by researchers at Penn State) and other studies evaluating fraze-mowing as a mechanical means of depleting the soil seed bank (at Tennessee and Florida).

A Long-Rooted History: Poa Annua Through the Years Annual bluegrass (Poa annua) is a troublesome weed in managed landscapes and crops, alike. It is one of the most widespread in the world. In fact, it has been reported on every continent, including Antarctica (Olech, 1996). Annual bluegrass is thought to have resulted from a cross between weak bluegrass (Poa infirma) and creeping meadow-grass (Poa supina) perhaps 2.5 million years ago during the interglacial ice age periods on the European continent. More recently, these two parent species have been shown to cross quite readily (Tutin, 1957).

Annual bluegrass is an annual comprised of numerous biotypes or “populations” — many of which are capable of perennating, meaning that they may exist in a vegetative state throughout the year, all along reproducing through aggressive tillering and seed production.

Though perennial biotypes are much less common than annual biotypes, they tend to occur in frequently mown or grazed scenarios in temperate climates with adequate year-round soil moisture.

Poa in ancient Greek means ‘fodder’; therefore, it should come as no surprise that temperate, cool-season pastures of the old-world have historically been comprised of at least some Poa species, including annual bluegrass and Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis).

In the temperate environments of England, Poa annua is in fact referred to as annual meadow-grass, while Kentucky bluegrass is called smooth meadow-grass.

Annual bluegrass has been a research interest since the early 1900’s.

An often-cited early publication concerning annual bluegrass control was published by the USGA Green Section in 1922 — “How we controlled Poa annua at Old Elm.” This introspective piece is part self-congratulatory, part admission of defeat. It’s easy to find and well worth the read.

In our interviews with co-authors, one thing is clear: annual bluegrass isn’t going anywhere. We’re just trying to keep up. The ResistPoa project has a unique role to play. John Kaminski, a Penn State investigator, summed this up well: “This has been a long battle that people have dealt with, and I don’t think we’re going to solve all those battles, but by consolidating all the people from various geographic regions that really have different management styles and practices based on where they’re located, I think we’re going to be able to come up with concentrated information for people managing turf in specific regions. I think that hasn’t been done before.”

Fall 2020

•

ARKANSAS TU R FGRASS

•

7

PHOTO 2 – Poa annua survives where few others can.

HERBICIDE RESISTANCE One of the most comprehensive objectives of the ResistPoa project is a national survey of herbicide resistant annual bluegrass. This has proven to be a challenging objective.

With more than 30 researchers involved, we have standardized procedures for population collection and developed workflows that keep whole greenhouses of plants alive at more than a dozen locations. We have developed techniques for rapid screening of an unprecedented number of annual bluegrass populations. Our findings will be made relevant through the development of a user-friendly decision-support tool that helps facilitate herbicide mode of action rotation, as well as the incorporation of effective cultural practices.

To date, we have screened more than 1,500 annual bluegrass samples for postemergence resistance to the following herbicide modes/sites of action (and respective herbicides): • 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate-dioxygenase or HPPD (mesotrione) • 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase or ESPS (glyphosate) • acetolactate-synthase or ALS (trifloxysulfuron, foramsulfuron, and others) • glutamine synthetase (glufosinate) • microtubule assembly (pronamide) • photosystem I (diquat) • photosystem II (simazine)

8 • A R K A N S A S T U R F G R A S S • Fall 2020

And preemergence resistance to the following herbicide modes/sites of action: • inhibition of cell wall biosynthesis (indaziflam) • microtubule assembly (prodiamine and pronamide) In year 1 of our study, we identified suspected resistance to many sites of action studied. Most of the resistant populations were from southern states. Of 776 samples collected in winter of 2018/2019 from Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia, 13% were suspected resistant to ALS-inhibiting herbicides, 8% to glyphosate, 5% to simazine applied postemergence, 3% to pronamide applied postemergence, and 5% to microtubule synthesis inhibitors applied preemergence.

Our work analyzing for herbicide resistance has only just begun. Suspected resistant populations that escaped preliminary screens of labelled rates are now moving though secondary rate-response screens to confirm and quantify resistance. Confirmed resistant populations will then move through target-site resistance screens at Auburn, where researchers will analyze for mutations within the genetic sequence for targeted enzymes. Unique cases (for instance, populations with multiple-herbicide-resistance) will then be screened for non-target site resistance by researchers at North Carolina and Georgia.

THE PROGRESSIVE ADVANTAGE Sports field, Park and Estate Mowers

Contour / Rough Finishing Mowers

Turf Grass Production Mowers

Steep Slope Remote Controlled Mower

The Slope-Pro® is a steep slope, rotary mower capable of 50º slopes

Widest range of rotary finishing mowers available from one source

An extensive Dealer network that you can rely on

Features to reduce your cost of operation over the long haul

Proudly designed and manufactured in North America

Tri-Deck cutting widths: 12’, 15.5’, 22’*, 36’* Roller Mower cutting widths: 65”, 90”, 12’, 15.5’, 22’*, 29.5’* Contour/rough finishing mower: Pro-Flex™ 120B 10’ cut Steep Slope mower: Slope-Pro® 52” cut * available with bolt-on galvanized deck shells

FIND OUT MORE The best way to keep track of our results is by monitoring our @ResistPoa Twitter handle. We’re posting updates and re-tweeting relevant information there. The website ResistPoa.org is a handy tool for stakeholders. We have included a search function that allows folks to look for published information by State, Turf Type, and Control Method. There are educational videos and a repository of webinar recordings. We’ll be adding a decision support tool over time. This tool should account for herbicide application history, site/mode of action, and much more.

We look forward to sharing knowledge and best management strategies with you in the future.

For more information, please visit ResistPoa.org, follow us on Twitter (@ResistPoa), and listen to podcasts at the TheTurfZone.com.

Contact us for more info or to find an Authorized Dealer near you. progressiveturfequip.com info@progressiveturfequip.com

(800) 668-8873 (519) 527-1080

PHOTO 3 – ResistPoa.org offers resources for turf managers.

3A (ABOVE ) – The tools tab provides links to support best management practices for controlling annual bluegrass. 3B ( BELOW ) – The search feature allows visitors to find targeted information using filters for turf type, control method and state.

REFERENCES Alexander, W. A. 1922. How we controlled Poa annua at Old Elm. Bulletin of the Green Section of the USGA 2(7): 213-214.

Olech, M. 1996. Human impact on terrestrial ecosystems in west Antarctica. In Proceedings of the NIPR Symposium on Polar Biology (pp. 299-306). National Institute of Polar Research.

Fall 2020

•

ARKANSAS TU R FGRASS

•

9

COV E R S TO RY

THE BASICS OF FIELD TESTING

By Kyley Dickson, Ph.D. and John Sorochan, Ph.D. – This article was originally published in SportsField Management.

A

thletic fields require maintenance whether they are natural or synthetic. The challenging aspect for athletic fields is that they change as a season progresses. One of the best ways to reduce injuries and increase performance is to have a consistent playing surface that is within acceptable ranges for athlete safety. Without regular field testing, it is hard to determine variances in playing surface consistency as use/wear increases. Knowing how a field is changing throughout the year can help field managers make data driven decisions to optimize the performance of the playing surface and in turn the safety of the surface for the athlete. Keeping records of different field properties across a season and years can help paint the picture for the field managers on what is also going on below the surface.

Unfortunately, testing takes time and can be expensive, and these draw backs can lead to many overlooking the need to test a field. However, testing is another important tool to have in the field managers toolbox.

One of the main benefits of testing a field is it indicates consistency and characteristics of a field’s impact on athletes.

Tests that are conducted give clues to the health of a field and help identify maintenance practices that are needed.

While there are different testing criteria for natural and synthetic surfaces, there are shared tests beneficial for both. However, not all tests can be used on both types of fields. In determining what tests are needed for a surface, a few questions need to be answered: first, is it natural or synthetic; second, what sport or sports are played on the field; and lastly, what is the budget and time available for testing. This information will help determine what tests would be the most beneficial information for a surface.

To start, some basic tests need to be established for field managers as a base.

The University of Tennessee Center for Athletic Field Safety (UTCAFS) has a suggested basic kit for natural and synthetic fields. Natural field basic test kit should include

10 • A R K A N S A S T U R F G R A S S • Fall 2020

a soil moisture probe, a side soil profiler, and a rotational traction testing device. The cost for the components to buy new will range from $2,500 to $5,000 depending on which products are selected. On a synthetic surface the basic kit recommended is an infill depth gauge, surface temperature measuring device, and some type of rotational traction device. The costs for synthetic turf range from $850 to $1,000. All kit estimates are from price researching different suppliers’ websites and totaling the cost. The purpose of this article is not to promote one specific brand’s testing equipment, there are a variety of products available.

All testing done is a snapshot of that field at that particular time, the same test could be conducted the following week with different results being observed. That is why taking multiple readings in a year will give a more detailed picture of what is happening. The other key in getting a good snapshot is testing for the variables that have the greatest impact. Published research has identified a few variables that have been found to influence many parts of the field (Baker, 1991; Dickson et al., 2018). For natural grass fields, the soil moisture content of the field has been found to impact: surface hardness, traffic tolerance of grass, rotational traction/resistance, increase in soil bulk density when trafficked, head injury criterion, and translational traction (Baker and Gibbs, 1989; Baker, 1991; Dickson et al., 2018a, Dickson et al., 2018b). Soil type of a field is important, because soil moisture content will have a greater influence on the playability of a soil that is higher in silt plus clay than a sand based field (Dickson et al., 2018).

While there are a multitude of tests for additional field performance parameters, getting the soil moisture content right could improve safety, longevity, and performance of a field, in addition to improving the overall quality of the grass. There are several different kinds of devices that measure soil moisture, and most of them can test fields relatively fast.

FIGURE 1 – Side cut of soil from a side soil profiler

FIGURE 2 – Sand based root zone that has a pocket of clay

Fall 2020

•

ARKANSAS TUR FGRASS

•

11

COV E R S TO RY • continued

Another tool for natural grass is a side soil profiler. This is a device that lets you take a side cut out of your field to see what is really going on below the surface (Figure 1).

This device can be used to determine: root depth, layering issues, black layer, and buried objects just to name a few.

Figure 2 shows a sand based root zone that has a pocket of clay preventing consistent grass growth. The grass above the clay was worse than the surrounding areas, and a soil profiler revealed the problem. After a soil profile is taken, it can be reinserted back into the area tested with minimal surface disruption.

Rotational traction is an additional tool that is very useful for both natural and synthetic surfaces. These testing devices give more of a performance and safety standpoint for the athletes on the field. Trying to keep a field consistent for rotational traction is helpful in providing a consistent footing and potentially safer playing surfaces. Rotational traction has been associated with both lower extremity injuries and grass health (Orchard et al., 1999; Stier et al.,

1999). The smaller portable devices are relatively easy to use and quick. These devices will slightly disrupt the playing surface where tested, but it is still considered minimal surface disruption.

For synthetic turf, infill depth can be just as important as soil moisture is for natural grass. The infill depth is something that is taken for granted on many synthetic fields. As seasons progress on synthetic turf, infill can be moved around and create spots on the field that are lower/higher than other areas. Variances in infill depth have been found to impact: surface hardness, surface temperature, and rotational traction (Center for Athletic Field Safety Reports). Infill depth is a very easy measurement and can be done very quickly. This test lets the field manager know infill is needed because the levels are too low, or if the infill simply needs to be redistributed from areas that are too high to areas that are too low.

The goal is keeping the infill depth as close to manufactures recommendation.

FIGURE 3: Sample test location outline

12 • A R K A N S A S T U R F G R A S S • Fall 2020

continued

Surface temperature is another important variable.

Synthetic turfs have temperatures that can be much higher than natural grass fields during full sun hot conditions (Lim and Walker, 2009; Thoms et al., 2016). As heat increases, it has a detrimental impact on athletes, decreasing performance and increasing the need for breaks and rehydration (Charalambous et al., 2016). Surface temperatures can be taken with a variety of tools, but the temperature gun used by most automotive repair shops is a fast and easy device to determine the surface temperature. While little can be done to reduce synthetic turf temperature after a system is installed, educating field stakeholders of potential heat concerns is one potential plan of action.

Difficulty comes in choosing what tests have time and the budget to be completed. The last thing a field manager needs are tests that take a long time to complete. Some of the tests do not need to be collected before every game, some could be done once a year. In addition, the cost of testing devices has a wide range from affordable to very expensive. Each addition of a test can increase the cost and time to complete but give greater detail about the field.

There are companies that test both natural and synthetic athletic fields. These companies can provide a wide range of tests and provide a summary of their findings and recommendations for any actions needed. While more information is always desired, selecting the most important tests can save time and money.

The tests described above are just the basics while there are many more tests available if budget and time permits.

Another consideration is what sport/sports are played on the field. In soccer, FIFA has requirements about ball roll and ball rebound that take place on a field. While in football, knowing surface hardness and rotational traction are of greater importance than ball to surface interaction questions. One way to help determine what tests are important for a particular sport are generally listed by a professional sports governing body (i.e. FIFA handbook).

Currently, most field testing is only required at the professional level and some sports do not have sports specific tests. However, there are universal tests such as surface hardness and rotational traction on most surfaces that can be completed.

Another key in field testing is being able to interpret the results in a meaningful way and have a record of the testing.

It is recommended to test the same 8–12 spots (Example, Figure 3) on a field each time while testing additional areas that may be of concern. Testing the same spot will tell you how it is changing each time testing is completed. The more locations that can be tested on a field, the better.

A representative sample of the field is desired for testing.

Keeping data in a spreadsheet or some type of record keeping system to go back and review is vital. If comparing multiple fields on a complex each field will have some variation from each other due to soil type, construction,

• COV E R S TO RY

grass, infill, etc. Focusing on the testing within each field shows variability that can be addressed to improve safety and performance.

While there are more tests available, the basic tests suggested can potentially increase the performance and eventual safety of an athletic field and can be completed quickly with minimal expense. These quick data snapshots throughout a season would take less than an hour to complete per field and would provide extremely useful information for the field manager. When you put the snapshots together for the entire year, you get a pretty clear picture of the changes that occur throughout the season. Ultimately, these data will also aid in maintenance decisions needed to provide a consistent playing surface. When it comes to field testing start with the basics and work out from there.

Work Cited Baker, S.W. 1991. Temporal variation of selected mechanical properties of natural turf football pitches.

J. Sports Turf Res. Inst. 67:83–92.

Baker, S.W., and R.J. Gibbs. 1989. Making the most of natural turf pitches. Case studies: II. Playing quality.

Nat. Turf Pitches Prototypes Advis. Panel Rep. 4. Sports Council, London.

Charalambous, L., und Wilkau, H.C.V.L., Potthast, W. and Irwin, G., 2016. The effects of artificial surface temperature on mechanical properties and player kinematics during landing and acceleration. Journal of sport and health science, 5(3), pp.355-360.

Dickson, K.H., J.C. Sorochan, J.T. Brosnan, J.C. Stier, J. Lee, and W.D. Strunk. 2018a. Impact of soil water content on hybrid bermudagrass athletic fields. Crop Sci. 58:1416-1425.

Dickson, K.H.,W. Strunk, and J. Sorochan. 2018b.

Head impact criteria of natural grass athletic fields is affected by soil type and volumetric water content.

Proceedings 2:270. doi:10.3390/proceedings2060270 Lim, L., and Walker, R., 2009. An assessment of chemical leaching, released to the air and temperature at crumbrubber infilled synthetic turf fields. New York State Dept. of Health. pp. 1-140 Orchard, J., H. Seward, J. McGivern, and S. Hood. 1999.

Rainfall evaporation and the risk of non-contact anterior cruciate ligament injury in the Australian Football League. Med. J. Aust. 170:304–306.

Stier, J. C., J. N. Rogers, J. R. Crum, and P. E. Rieke.

1999. Flurprimidol effects on Kentucky bluegrass under reduced irradiance. Crop Sci. 39:1423-1430.

Thoms, A.W.; Brosnan, J.T.; Zidek, J.M.; Sorochan, J.C. Models for Predicting Surface Temperatures on Synthetic Turf Playing Surfaces. Procedia Eng. 2014, 72, 895–900, doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2014.06.153. •

Fall 2020

•

ARKANSAS TUR FGRASS

•

13

M E M B E R S P OT L I G H T O N

JOSH LANDRETH O W N E R O F AC E O F B LA D E S

How many years have you been in this position?

What path led you to your current position?

15 years

I started a Master’s program, but realized that I did not want to do academia the rest of my life. While in grad school, I got married and wanted to earn some extra money.

So I started the business on the side. That part time job grew into the business we have now.

How did you decide to pursue a career in turfgrass management?

I ran track for the Razorbacks. My first year, I was a chemical engineering major. The spring track season was a nightmare, and I decided to pursue a career in something that actually made me happy versus what people expected.

I thumbed through the catalog of studies and found turf management. I loved sports, and wanted to do something sports related, and thought that fit. I met with Dr. Richardson, and the rest is history.

What is the best part of your job?

The flexibility I have to spend time with my family.

I also love dealing with numbers, budgets, etc.

What are some unique challenges of your job?

Finding good employees and balancing being able to pay them well with profitability. For whatever reason, people tend to not treat people in the service industry very well.

So dealing with the public is always a challenge.

What inspired you to become a part of ATA and serve on the ATA board?

I had not been involved with the ATA for several years.

When they started giving the awards for site of the year, we were encouraged to apply to support the award. When we won, it provided a reason for me to get back involved with the ATA. The next year, Doug asked me to speak about the award. From that experience, Kyle Sanders and I became friends. We share a similar vision and motivation.

He encouraged me to accept a position on the board as we try to help our industry move the right direction.

What do you feel is the biggest challenge facing the turfgrass industry right now?

Pre-Covid, employment issues were definitely becoming the biggest issues. It was just really hard to find people.

Post-Covid, we have no idea what that’s going to look like. Is it going to be easier to find people? Maybe. But it also may be hard to find people that want to work. The other huge issue that poses challenges long term is the “Anti-Roundup” type lawsuits that are happening.

14 • A R K A N S A S T U R F G R A S S • Fall 2020

What is one lesson you’ve learned the hard way in your career?

Dealing with the public in customer service will change you. I’ve definitely been hardened over the years. The biggest lesson would be not to allow the job to change you.

I would also start planning earlier for capital investments, buildings, vehicles, etc. I learned the hard way about the growing pains of a business that is outgrowing its space quickly.

Do you have a mentor in the industry?

Mike Richardson and Doug Karcher are both mentors. I owe my career to them. John McCalla is not specifically a mentor, but I probably learned more from him than anyone else. John is Dr. Richardson’s research technician. When I worked for Doug, John and I worked together. I had studied the turf industry, but never truly “worked” in it. Working with John, I got a ton of hands on experience with everything imaginable. I don’t see or talk to him that much now, but he definitely helped me a lot during that time.

Tell us about your family and what you do in your free time.

I do a lot of kayak fishing. My wife and I have been married 16 years. We have 2 boys, Hudson and Hayes. We spend a lot of time together as a family. We love hiking, fishing, exploring the Natural State. Prior to the pandemic, we spent a lot of time with people from our church. We lead a Bible study for young married couples.

What would your advice be for people entering the turfgrass industry now?

Dr. Richardson told me when I was a student something on the lines of, “You gotta put the hard work at some point in your career to get where you want to be in life. Some people choose to do that at the front end of their career.

Some people choose to put the hard work at the back end.

I chose to do that hard work on the front end.” I hold to that philosophy. Hard work still matters. Hard work, intelligence, doing the right thing, and treating people right does pay off. If you truly care about others, people respect that.

If someone is going to start a business in the turf industry, my advice would be to always remember, you didn’t get there on your own. At Ace of Blades, we are a team, 100%. Yes, I started the business, but I can only take it so far on my own. We can’t reach the goals that I have set for this business without 100% buy-in from everyone. In order to get 100% buy-in from my employees, I have to treat them right. I have to allow them to do their jobs. I have to “Let go.” Once I figured that out, our business exploded. Every entrepreneur is different — each has his/her own set of strengths and weaknesses. But you must have a vision and a plan of how to obtain that vision. •

Josh with his wife

Josh with Hudson and Hayes

To discuss advertising opportunities, contact Leading Edge Communications:

Specialty Distribution

Rodney Fisher PO Box 9168 Searcy, AR 72145 www.agrainc.com

Cell: 501 230-7303 Business: 501 268-7036 Ext: 107 Fax: 501 268-0606

Email: agrarod@yahoo.com

800-247-BEAM www.BEAMCLAY.com STATE APPROVED CO-OP PRICING

email: sales@beamclay.com

THE STANDARD OF EXCELLENCE FOR INFIELD MIXES, MOUND CLAYS & RED WARNING TRACKS OVER 5,000 INFIELD & SPORTS PRODUCTS

615-790-3718 888-707-7141 ( ) TOLL FREE

sales@leadingedgecommunications.com www.LeadingEdgeCommunications.com

The statements and opinions expressed herein are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Arkansas Turfgrass Association, its staff, or its board of directors, Arkansas Turfgrass, or its editors. Likewise, the appearance of advertisers, or their identification as Arkansas Turfgrass Association members, does not constitute an endorsement of the products or services featured in this, past or subsequent issues of this quarterly publication. Copyright Š 2020 by the Arkansas Turfgrass Association. Arkansas Turfgrass is published quarterly. Subscriptions are complimentary to members of the Arkansas Turfgrass Association. Third-class postage is paid at Jefferson City, MO. Printed in the U.S.A. We are not responsible for unsolicited freelance manuscripts and photographs. Contact the managing editor for contribution information.