July/August 2019
2019 Sod Producer’s Report Plus, A Roundup on Glyphosate
A Publication of the Turfgrass Council of North Carolina
A BreAkThrouGh In SuSTAInABIlITy
“ While researching TifTuf TM, i was impressed by the cultivar’s tolerance to adverse conditions, particu- larly drought, low fertility, traffic and cool weather. in the trial work i conducted, TifTuf TM was the first cultivar to green up in the spring, the last to go dormant during drought conditions and the most tolerant to traffic. Other notable characteristics of TifTuf TM include fine leaf texture and high turf density, as well as aggressive growth and establish- ment rates.” Alec Kowalewski, Ph.D., Oregon State University
As water restrictions tighten in many drought-stricken areas of the U.S., golf course superintendents, sports turf managers, property owners and sod producers increasingly value drought-tolerant turfgrass. Selected for its superior drought and wear tolerance, TiFTUF™ has been rigorously developed and tested for more than two decades by a team of researchers led by Dr. Wayne Hanna and Dr. Brian Schwartz at UGA’s Tifton Campus. TiFTUF™ was bred in 1992, as one of 27,700 experimental bermudagrass genotypes. in 1999, ninety of the most promising genotypes were planted under a rainout shelter and evaluated through 2001 under deficit irrigation. Under this drought stress, TiFTUF™ (tested as experimental name DT-1) maintained its quality and green color the longest. in 2011 continuing drought study testing established that TiFTUF™ requires 38% less water than Tifway. Since then, TiFTUF™ has been further tested in 19 drought-stress trials, 2 sports field wear tolerance trials and 4 irrigated, non-stress trials at The University of Georgia, The University of Florida, North Carolina State University, Oklahoma State University and Texas A&M University as part of the Federal Specialty Crop research initiative (SCri) grant. it has now been determined that TiFTUF™ will become the University research standard by which all drought tolerance will be determined. in 2013, TiFTUF™ was entered into the National Turfgrass evaluation Program (NTeP) bermudagrass trials where it is being evaluated in 20 locations across the United States until 2017. NTeP results from 2014 reveal that TiFTUF™ scored the highest quality ratings in the following test locations: North Carolina, Florida, Mississippi, Tennessee, Texas, Oklahoma and California. TiFTUF™ also ranked in the highest statistical group for quality in Alabama, Georgia, indiana, Kansas, Kentucky and Missouri. Fine textured and dense, TiFTUF™ exhibits several additional stellar qualities, including superior wear tolerance, early spring greenup, excellent fall color retention and extremely rapid grow-in. if you’re seeking a truly superior turfgrass for performance, aesthetics and sustainability, you’ve just found it.
“ With its combination of drought tolerance, aggressive growth and superior fall color, it has a great place in the industry.” Grady Miller, Ph.D., North Carolina State University “ it also survives winters in Kansas. With 94% survival, it is no different than Latitude 36 TM, Yukon, Patriot TM and Riviera.” Jared Hoyle, Ph.D., Kansas State University “ TifTuf TM performed very well on our large-scale Linear Gradient irrigation System at the university of florida. it maintained good quality with signif- icantly less water compared to the other commer- cially produced cultivars.” J. Bryan Unruh, Ph.D., University of Florida “ We found evidence that TifTuf TM used less water than Tifway 419 and TifSport. it’s just a very tough and drought-tolerant grass. As soon as it quits raining, TifTuf TM is still performing well, unlike others that can start to fail.” Brian Schwartz, Ph.D., University of Georgia “ With today’s extreme environmental conditions, there has never been a greater need for a superior drought- and wear-tolerant grass like TifTuf TM. its aggressive grow-in under cold and drought conditions makes TifTuf TM the environmentally and financially successful turfgrass choice. This rigorously tested grass that maintains its color and quality will create the most sustainable, environmentally friendly lawns, sports fields and golf courses around the world.” Ken Morrow, Co-Founder of The Turfgrass Group
USDA drought-tolerance trial (left to right): TiFTUF™, Latitude 36™ and Celebration™. Engineering Better Turfgrass One Blade At A Time
For more information on licensing opportunities, please contact: The Turfgrass Group, Inc. (770) 207-1500 or (770) 710-8139 www.THeTUrFGrASSGrOUP.com
GOAL: Happy Customers
SOLUTION: Use Super-Sod Grasses
TifTuf Bermuda, Drought Tolerance Just Got a New Standard
Zeon Zoysia
h The most drought tolerant turf. h TifTuf uses 38% less water than Tifway and will pay for itself in reduced water bills.
h Dark green and medium-fine textured; it’s easier to maintain than other fine-textured types.
h Maintains acceptable turf quality and aesthetics under drought stress.
h Shade tolerant; a turfgrass that’s widely adaptable to full sun or moderate shade.
h Super-Sod now grows Zeon Zoysia.
h Makes a lawn with a lush, dense growth habit.
We’ve Got You Covered h Pick up sod from more locations than anyone h Full truck loads and small quantities delivered
h Request a Free Quote on supersod.com
1-888-360-1125 Cary 1900 NC Hwy. 55 Cary, NC 27519 919-836-0492
Charlotte 12600 Downs Circle Pineville, NC 28134 704-525-8873
Hendersonville 583 Jeffress Rd. Mills River, NC 28759 828-681-5000
Mooresville 1060 River Highway Mooresville, NC, 28117 980-444-2347
Raleigh 1225 Farmers Market Drive, Box 19 Raleigh, NC 27603 919-836-0492
18
10 26 table of contents July/August 2019
More Features:
10 Cover Story
2 019 Sod Producers Report
18 G reen Light
4
North Carolina Turfg r a s s
n
on Herbicides
A Roundup on Glyphosate
w w w . n c t u r f g r a s s . o rg
n
July/August 2019
Bioengineered 26 Living Shorelines, The Newest Erosion Control Solution From the President Calendar of Events TCNC Deluxe Members Welcome, New Members NC State Turf Team Index of Advertisers
6 7 8 9 25 25
h Trenc e d i ” W a 2.5 0-13” h t p Digs e D table Adjus
www.eztrench.com
843.756.6444
Can also trench 2” W x 7” D
Model BE400
From the President
Giving Back In
my many years in the turfgrass and green industry, I have had the privilege of learning from some of the most knowledgeable people in our industry. My mentor, Bill Hildebolt, emphasized the importance of giving back to others. Through his guidance I learned the joy of sharing my skills with others and giving back to the community and those in need.
Over the years we have completed many projects to improve green spaces, schools and athletic fields. I want to share with you an organization I have worked with on many of these projects, Project Evergreen. Project Evergreen is a national non-profit organization committed to helping people like you work together to create healthy green spaces. Working with Project Evergreen I have participated in a program called Green Care for Troops. Through this program we have taken care of properties of soldiers that have been deployed from our area. This is one of the most rewarding projects my staff and I have ever completed. While these men and women are overseas protecting our freedom, they do not have to worry about their property. This is the least we can do while they put themselves in harm’s way for us. I encourage you to get involved in any way you can and share your talents with the community and our military. It will be a very rewarding experience. If you are interested in working with Project Evergreen, please visit:
www.projectevergreen.org I would also like to thank everyone in the green industry for making our world a better place.
Anna Brooks Whichard, CAE IMI Association Executives annabrooks@imiae.com 919-459-2070 Published by: Leading Edge Communications, LLC 206 Bridge Street Franklin, TN 37064 615-790-3718 fax 615-794-4524 info@leadingedge communications.com
2019 TCNC Officers President
Gene Queen Nature’s Select Premium Turf Services Winston-Salem, NC 336-768-7999
Past President Damon Dean Keith Hills Country Club West End, NC 910-893-1372
Treasurer Kevin Herrmann Fairway Green, Inc. Raleigh, NC 919-818-9640
H. Dean Baker Kinston, NC
Gene Queen
TCNC President
Jonathan Richardson, NCCTP Green Resource Dunn, NC
The TCNC membership year ended on June 30. If you haven’t renewed, be sure to do so today so you continue to receive your membership benefits, including North Carolina Turfgrass !
North Carolina Turfg r a s s
Executive Director
2019 Directors
Best Regards,
6
North Carolina Turfgrass is the official publication of the Turfgrass Council of North Carolina 110 Horizon Drive Suite 210 Raleigh, NC 27615 919-459-2070 fax 919-459-2075 www.ncturfgrass.org
n
w w w . n c t u r f g r a s s . o rg
n
July/August 2019
Wilson Sutton Falling Creek Golf Club Kinston, NC Andrew Wampler Southern Ag Hendersonville, NC
Calendar of Events
July 13 – 16, 2019 Cultivate ‘19
Greater Columbus Convention Center Columbus, OH
July 23 – 25, 2019
TPI Summer Convention & Field Day Hyatt Regency Bloomington-Minneapolis Bloomington, MN
August 14, 2019
NC State Turfgrass Field Day Lake Wheeler Turfgrass Field Lab Raleigh, NC
The Turfgrass Council of North Carolina (TCNC) serves its members in the industry through education, promotion and representation. The statements and opinions expressed herein are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the association, its staff, or its board of directors, North Carolina Turfgrass, or its editors. Likewise, the appearance of advertisers, or TCNC members, does not constitute an endorsement of the products or services featured in this, past or subsequent issues of this bimonthly publication. Copyright © 2019 by the Turfgrass Council of North Carolina. North Carolina Turfgrass is published bi-monthly. Subscriptions are complimentary to members of TCNC. Presorted standard postage is paid at Jefferson City, MO. Printed in the U.S.A. Reprints and Submissions: North Carolina Turfgrass allows reprinting of material published here. Permission requests should be directed to TCNC. We are not responsible for unsolicited freelance manuscripts and photographs. Contact the managing editor for contribution information. Advertising: For display and classified advertising rates and insertions, please contact Leading Edge Communications, LLC, 206 Bridge Street, Franklin, TN 37064, 615-790-3718, Fax 615-794-4524.
A P u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e T u r f g r a s s C o u n c i l o f North Carolina 7
TCNC Deluxe Members Companies wishing to support TCNC with multiple members can join as Deluxe Members. New for the 2018–2019 membership year, Deluxe Memberships can be purchased in one of three tiers: 1–5 employees; 6–10 employees; or 11+ employees. If you'd like to learn more about the Deluxe Membership, please contact the TCNC office at (919) 459-2070 or info@ncturfgrass.org.
Thank You to Our Deluxe Member Organizations
The Biltmore Company
Givens Estates
Revels Turf & Tractor
Green Resource
SiteOne Landscape Supply
Barefoot & Associates Inc.
JRM Inc.
BASF Corporation
Keith Hills Country Club
Buy Sod Inc Carolina Farm Credit Carolina Green Corp.
Kinston Country Club Leap Frog Landcare Inc.
Sod Solutions Inc. Southern Ag Southern Seeds Inc
City of Raleigh Parks & Recreation
McConnell Golf LLC
Town of Cary Public Works
The Club at Longview
Nature's Select Premium Turf Services
Triangle Chemical Company
Country Boy Landscaping Inc
NCSU Landscape Construction Services
Turf Mountain Sod Inc
Duke University
North Carolina A&T State University
UNCG
Fairway Green Fayetteville Technical Community College
Pennington Seed – ProTurf Division Quality Turf
8
Smith Turf & Irrigation
North Carolina Turfg r a s s
n
w w w . n c t u r f g r a s s . o rg
n
July/August 2019
Vereens Turf Products Wake Forest University
New Members
Welcome, New TCNC Members!
Lori Annas Maple Valley Farms LLC Hudson, NC
Chris Pearson FMC Clayton, NC
Aaron Hershberger Barefoot & Associates Inc. Smithfield, NC
Eugene Foushee Barefoot & Associates Inc. Smithfield, NC
Congratulations, New NCCTP!
Southern Specialty Equipment, Inc. New, Used & Refurbished • Ease of Operation • Low Operating Costs • Single Axle Truck Use
Solid & Dependable Rotary Finishing Mowers
Wide Range of Solutions
Jim Brewster Office Phone:
(877) 366-5399 Mobile Phone:
(352) 284-8029 jim@ssequip.net www.ssequip.net
Alexa Wright Bayer CropScience Clayton, NC
For more information on the NCCTP Program, turn to page 28.
A P u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e T u r f g r a s s C o u n c i l o f North Carolina 9
Cover Story
2019
Sod Producers’ Report for North Carolina
By Grady Miller, Professor, Crop and Soil Sciences • AG-809 Publication date: April 2019
10
North Carolina Tur f g r a s s
n
www.ncturfgrass.org
n
July/August 2019
In
March 2019, North Carolina State University conducted the fifth annual survey to examine inventory and pricing of North Carolina sod.
Overview •S upply of bermudagrass sod is similar to 2018, with most suppliers saying they have adequate supplies for their expected demand in 2019. There still may be some shortages. •S upply of zoysiagrass and St. Augustinegrass are expected to be better in 2019 compared to 2018. •S hortages for tall fescue and Kentucky bluegrass sod were predicted for 2019. •T his was the second consecutive year that producers predicted they could have shortages of centipedegrass sod. •T here are expected price increases for all the turfgrass species in 2019. Of the actual prices reported for early 2019, St. Augustinegrass, zoysiagrass, and centipedegrass had the greatest increases. •T here was a 10% increase in growers reporting that they grew certified sod. • Production acreage has slightly increased over 2018. •T he primary markets for North Carolina sod producers are landscape contractors. • There was an uptick in sales to the sports/athletic field sector of consumers in compared to previous years.
Pricing information included the farm price as well as the price for truckload orders delivered to the closest urban market or within 100 miles of the farms. All costs were reported as price per square foot of sod. Bermudagrass is being grown by 19 (90%) of the surveyed producers. Fifty-two percent of these producers rated their inventory as adequate this year; 21% indicated their inventory was excellent. For 2019, 26% of all bermudagrass producers projected having less than adequate supplies. Projected inventory levels of bermudagrass have improved over the last 5 years (Figure 1) after significant shortfalls were predicted for 2015. Zoysiagrass is being grown by 14 (70%) of the surveyed producers. Seventy-one percent of these producers rated their inventory as adequate this year and 14% indicated it was excellent. For 2019, 14% of all zoysiagrass producers projected shortages. Of the producers surveyed, 15 (71%) are growing centipedegrass. Seventy-three percent of these growers reported they had adequate to excellent inventory. Twenty-seven percent of all centipedegrass growers anticipate a shortage during 2019. Six (28%) of the surveyed producers are growing St. Augustinegrass. Eighty-three percent of these growers reported they had adequate to excellent inventory, and 17% anticipated a shortage during 2019. Of the producers surveyed, four (19%) are growing tall fescue by itself. Seventy-five percent estimated they would have adequate inventory and 25% anticipated a shortage for 2019. Over the last five years, most producers (>60%) have indicated their tall fescue sod supply was adequate to meet the demand (Figure 1). Figure 1: Percentage of bermudagrass and tall fescue producers projecting adequate to excellent supply for the past five years.
Survey Details
Twenty-two producers representing the following farm sizes completed the anonymous online survey: • less than 200 acres (10 participants) • 201 to 500 acres (five participants) • 501 to 800 acres (four participants) • more than 800 acres (three participants)
North Carolina Sod Producers Association (NCSPA) records suggest the number of completed surveys represents about 55% of the sod farms in North Carolina.
Inventories
We obtained inventory estimates for bermudagrass, zoysiagrass, centipedegrass, St. Augustinegrass, tall fescue, and Kentucky bluegrass as well as a tall fescue/Kentucky bluegrass mix. This was based on estimated sales and the availability of sod as being excellent (more than 10% of demand), adequate (equal to demand), or poor (more than 10% shortage).
A mixture of tall fescue and Kentucky bluegrass is being grown by (38%) of the surveyed producers. Fifty percent of these producers rated their inventory as adequate to excellent this year, and 50% anticipate a shortage during 2019. Two producers surveyed (9%) reported growing Kentucky bluegrass by itself. Of the group that responded to this survey, 50% anticipated adequate supply during 2018, and 50% anticipate a shortage during 2019. A P u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e T u r f g r a s s C o u n c i l o f N orth Carolina 11
Cover Story | continued
Pricing
Table 1 provides a sod price perspective for all grass species in 2019. Table 1: Sod price averages. Turfgrass (No. of growers responding)
2019 Average (price/sq. ft.) On-the-farm
Delivered*
Bermudagrass (19)
$0.28
$0.33
Zoysiagrass (14)
$0.44
$0.50
Centipedegrass (15)
$0.27
$0.29
St. Augustinegrass (6)
$0.45
$0.48
Tall Fescue (4)
$0.33
$0.36
Tall fescue + Kentucky bluegrass (8)
$0.33
$0.35
Kentucky bluegrass (2)
$0.34
$0.36
* Delivered to either closest urban market or within 100 miles of the farm
The average price per square foot for a truckload of bermudagrass sod at the farm was $0.28 and delivered to the closest urban market or within 100 miles of the farm averaged $0.33. The farm price ranged from $0.21 to $0.38, whereas delivered prices ranged from $0.21 to $0.50. The average on-farm price of bermudagrass was the same in 2018. Zoysiagrass prices were among the highest of all turfgrasses. The average price on the farm was $0.44 per square foot (only
St. Augustinegrass was greater at $0.45) and ranged from $0.35 to $0.59. The average price delivered to an urban market or within 100 miles of the farm was $0.50 and ranged from $0.37 to $0.64. The average on-farm price of zoysiagrass increased by nearly 8% from 2018. Centipedegrass prices in 2019 ranged from $0.19 to $0.36 per square foot and averaged $0.27. The price, when delivered, ranged from $0.18 to $0.38 and averaged $0.29. The average onfarm prices for centipedegrass increased about 12% compared to 2018. St. Augustinegrass prices in 2019 ranged from $0.36 to $0.55 per square foot and averaged $0.45. The price, when delivered, ranged from $0.38 to $0.59 and averaged $0.48. St. Augustine on-farm prices were 36% higher than last year’s. Tall fescue prices in 2019 ranged from $0.26 to $0.40 per square foot and averaged $0.33. The price, when delivered, ranged from $0.31 to $0.39 and averaged $0.36. The average on-farm price of tall fescue was the same as last year. The mix of tall fescue and Kentucky bluegrass sod prices in 2019 ranged from $0.26 to $0.37 per square foot and averaged $0.33. The price, when delivered, ranged from $0.31 to $0.39 and averaged $0.35. The on-farm prices increased by 14% compared to 2018. Kentucky bluegrass sod price in 2019 ranged from $0.32 to $0.35 per square foot and averaged $0.34. The price, when delivered ranged from 0.35 to $0.38 and averaged $0.36. This is an 8% decrease in the on-farm price compared to 2018. Figure 2 provides a five-year perspective of sod prices showing fluctuations of particular species since 2015. Except for St. Augustinegrass sod prices, there have been no major fluctuations over this period of time.
Figure 2: Historical perspective of sod prices in North Carolina, 2015 to 2019.
12
North Carolina Tur f g r a s s
n
www.ncturfgrass.org
n
July/August 2019
Real Versatility
13 interchangeable attachments
REAL MULTITASKING IS maintaining a perfect landscape WITH JUST ONE TOOL. No more running back to the truck or shop for another tool. With the right attachment, the convenient STIHL KMA 130 R KombiSystem can take on almost any task you throw at it. Long run times are made possible with a range of battery options. Save time on the job, space in your shop and money on the bottom line with the STIHL KMA 130 R KombiSystem.
BLOW
TRIM
CLEAR
EDGE
EDGE
PRUNE
CULTIVATE
HEDGE
HEDGE
CUT
CLEAN
NEW KMA 130 R KOMBIMOTOR
SWEEP
DEFINE
FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT:
STIHLdealers.COM At participating dealers. ©2019 STIHL/MAS MA19TURF03-12-141913-5
Cover Story | continued
Projected Price Increases
All the surveyed growers forecasted sod price to remain steady or increase in 2019. The majority of sod producers predict that sod prices will remain steady in 2019. A few producers predict price increases for particular grasses. The percentages of producers with expectations for price change in each grass is as follows: • Bermudagrass — 24% expect increases, 76% remain steady, none expect prices to decrease
Fuel Surcharge
No producers indicated that they add a fuel charge. In the previous year, 8% of surveyed producers indicated that they add a fuel surcharge. It appears that fuel prices may be rising, so a mid-year rise in fuel costs could result in significant increases in production and delivery expenses.
8%
• Zoysiagrass — expect increases, 92% remain steady, none expect prices to decrease • Centipedegrass — 7% expect increases, 93% remain steady, none expect prices to decrease
Price Changes
When asked how often producers adjust their sale prices, 53% indicated they adjust their prices yearly whereas 47% make adjustments when needed. No respondents indicated that they adjust prices monthly or quarterly.
• St. Augustinegrass — 13% expect increases, 87% remain steady, none expect prices to decrease • Tall fescue — 33% expects price increases, 66% remain steady, none expect prices to decrease
Credit Card Convenience Fee
A survey question related to credit card sales was added after some respondents had already completed their survey. Of the nine producers who responded after this question was added, none reported that they charge a credit card convenience fee.
• Tall fescue + Kentucky bluegrass — 36% expects price increases, 63% remain steady, none expect prices to decrease • Kentucky bluegrass — 29% expects price increases, 71% predict prices to remain steady, none expect prices to decrease.
Sales by Industry Segments
Proprietary Grass
In 2019, 47% of the surveyed growers reported that they grew some proprietary grasses on their farm. This is similar to the response recorded in previous years. The average percentage of their grasses that were proprietary was 30% with a reported range from 0 to 70%. In 2019, 68% of the growers surveyed grew some certified sod. The average amount of certified grass reported by these farmers was 55% of their total sod acreage. Fifty-six percent of these producers charged more for certified grass—$0.02 to $0.10 more per square foot.
Freight
Delivery charges are based on a flat rate for 37% of respondents and a per mile basis for 63%. Freight rates per mile shipped to the closest urban market ranged from $2.00 to $4.40 per mile and averaged $3.58 per mile. Six sod farms reported flat freight rates of $100 to $300 per shipment (mean of $208), though these rates could vary depending on other factors. Thirty-two percent of the respondents indicated that freight prices are included in price quotes to customers whereas 68% invoiced freight separately.
North Carolina Tur f g r a s s
Table 2 provides an indication of the industry segments where sod is sold. Surveyed producers estimated that landscape contractors (64.7%) constituted the largest segment. The next highest group was sports/athletics with nearly 15%, followed by homeowners at 10.3%. Golf courses were just under 5% with brokers at 3.7% and retail garden centers at less than 2%. The largest changes compared to previous years are the increase in sports/athletic turf sales. Table 2: Ranking of Industry Segments for Sale of Turfgrass.
Certified Grass
14
Ninety-four percent of respondents indicated they did not charge an unloading fee. One sod producer charged a $75 unloading fee. Ninety percent of respondents indicated they make additional drops on loads. The low-end charge for additional drops on a load was $30 and the high-end charge was $175. Two respondents reported $50 and two reported $100. Several reported that the charge was dependent on the distance between drops and that charges may be divided between buyers. Some also added a minimum drop fee (e.g., $35) plus a mileage rate (e.g., $4.00/mile). The average cost for additional drops was $87.
n
www.ncturfgrass.org
n
2019 Industry Segment
Rank
Average* (%)
Landscape contractors
1
64.7
Sports/athletics
2
14.6
Homeowners
3
10.3
Golf courses
4
4.8
Brokers
5
3.7
Retail garden centers
6
1.7
*Average percent of total sales
July/August 2019
— OVER 20 YEARS OF TRUSTED SERVICE —
From highest quality products, impeccable service and 75 years of combined turfgrass knowledge and experience, Vandemark Farms has the solution to any landscape situation. Located in Nash County, North Carolina, Vandemark Farms offers a wide assortment of sod varieties that will work with all landscape designs, including:
Tall Fescue
TifTuf Bermuda
Common Centipede
CALL VANDEMARK FOR YOUR NEXT SOD JOB!! 252-437-1501 9390 NC 33 • Whitakers, NC 27891
Farm Fresh Locally Grown Sod • Quality Products • GO GREEN BUY LOCAL
SC Growers of the Highest Quality Turf
Palisades Zoysia, Royal Zoysia, Chisholm Zoysia, Bermuda Tifway 419 Diamond Zoysia, Carolina Blue II Fescue, Cen�pede, Palme�o St. Augus�ne and TamStar St. Augus�ne • • • •
Aiken
Turf Maintenance Support and Supplies Mulches and Other Bulk Materials Natural Stone Pavers and Wall Systems
Charleston Duncan Summerville Anderson Columbia Rock Hill A P u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e T u r f g r a s s C o u n c i l o f N orth Carolina 15
Cover Story | continued
Acreage in Production
Of the survey respondents, 16% indicated that they reduced sod production acreage during 2018. The average decrease was 11%. No respondent indicated that they would have a reduction in 2019. Seventyfour percent indicated that they had increased acres during the last three years. The average percentage increase was 17%. Several questions related to employee numbers and sod sales were added to this year’s survey for the second year. These data were collected as a requirement for the
North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services grant that was awarded to NCSPA.
Employees
The average number of full-time employees at these sod production operations was 13 employees. Of the 18 operations that responded, the number of full-time employees ranged from one to 62. The average number of seasonal employees ranged from zero to 18, with an average of four.
Total Sod Sales
Total sod sales for the 15 operations that reported data ranged from $75,000 to $6 million. The average sod sales were $1.76 million (a 27% increase from 2018 mean sales). The mean value was influenced by a few larger operations. There were three operations with sales greater than $3 million and four with annual sales less than $600,000. Twenty-six percent of the producers indicated their sales increased in 2018, whereas 26% had a decrease and 47% reported sales stayed the same. Several respondents commented that damage from tropical storms significantly decreased fall sales.
Summary
With five years of data, this year provided an opportunity to look at price trends for each of the turfgrass species. Following several years of reducing acreage due to poor sod sales (largely due to minimum new construction), the last five years have been years for good growth in production, which has allowed some increases in sod prices. Annual weather events also can impact regions, such as the heavy rainfall that occurred over parts of North Carolina following tropical events in 2018. A few producers commented that their sales time was cut short due to fall storms and resulting damage to their turfgrasses. Annual data provides some indication of sod supply and price in the near future. The total acreage of sod seems steady with a small amount of growth. Most grasses seem to be in good supply for 2019; however, there are potential shortages of some grasses. The bulk of sod sales (>64%) are to landscape contractors. It may be important to provide sod supply and relative pricing information to this group, especially in years when supply is limited or prices are expected to increase. G 16
North Carolina Tur f g r a s s
n
www.ncturfgrass.org
n
July/August 2019
Green Light on Herbicides
A Roundup on
Glyphosate
History, Use, Issues, and Alternatives By Jeffrey Derr, Ph.D., Professor of Weed Science, Virginia Tech
G
lyphosate has been in the news quite a bit recently. You probably have seen the ads on television concerning glyphosate and human health. In this article I discuss some background infor- mation on this herbicide as well as scientific reports on toxicity of the chemical.
A. What is glyphosate? The glyphosate molecule (Figure 1) is similar to the amino acid glycine. The chemical name is N-(phosphonomethyl) glycine, a relatively small molecule compared to newer herbicides. It is the active ingredient in products such as Roundup PROMAX,
as well as in generic products sold under a variety of trade names. Since the chemical is off patent (patent expired around 2000), other companies besides Monsanto/Bayer can sell this herbicide under their own trade name. Some examples of other trade names for products that contain glyphosate include Accord, Gly Star Pro, Glyphomate 41, Razor, Rodeo and Touchdown, among others.
B. Formulation The initial formation of this herbicide was an isopropylamine salt of glyphosate, which is still widely used, although other salt formulations are available now, such as the potassium salt and
Figure 1: glyphosate isopropylamine salt
18
North Carolina Tur f g r a s s
n
www.ncturfgrass.org
n
July/August 2019
Harmon Turf Services Serving the Turfgrass Industry for Over 30 Years
Versi-Seeder Seeding on Large Areas
Pro-Seed Inter-Seeding on Greens and Tees
Slit Drainage
Graden Contour Sand Injection
Fairway and Bulk Top Dress Spreading
Topdressing Spreading on Greens and Tees
Graden Dethatching/ Verti-Cutting
Dethatching/ Verti-Cutting with Vacuum
Core Collection and Removal
Drill/Backfill Aeration
Shallow Aeration for Greens & Fine Turf Areas
Shallow-Core Fairway Aeration
Deep-Tine Aeration
Deep-Core Aeration
BLECovator Renovation and Ground Preparation
Contact us to discuss your project! 276-733-9532 or harmonturf@comcast.net www.harmonturfservices.com
Green Light on Herbicides | continued
the dimethylamine salt. This becomes important when comparing products. We need to look at the amount of glyphosate acid in products, not the amount of active ingredient, since the different salt formulations differ in their molecular weight. For example, Roundup PROMAX contains 5.5 pounds per gallon of the potassium salt of glyphosate (ai) or 4.5 lbs/gallon glyphosate acid (ae). Roundup Pro contained 4.0 lbs/gallon of the isopropylamine salt of glyphosate (ai) or 3.0 lbs/gallon glyphosate acid (ae). So Roundup PROMAX contains 50% more glyphosate acid than Roundup Pro and applications rates in terms of fluid ounces of product per acre are lower than for Roundup Pro. Besides glyphosate, there are other chemicals in commercial formulations, usually water and a surfactant. As an example of a formulation, Roundup PROMAX contains the potassium salt of glyphosate at 48.7% by weight, surfactant(s) approximately 9%, and water plus minor ingredients at approximately 42%. Surfactants can aid in the absorption of herbicides by weeds. One example would be POEA (polyoxyethylene tallow amine). Concerns have been raised about the toxicity of this surfactant to aquatic organisms such as tadpoles, salamanders, and frogs. Aquatic formulations of glyphosate either do not contain a surfactant or contain a surfactant that has not shown to be an issue. That is why certain formulations of glyphosate are not labeled for aquatic use – not due to the toxicity of glyphosate but due to toxicity concerns about the surfactant to amphibians and other aquatic organisms. For glyphosate products that do not contain a surfactant, one generally needs to add an approved one for optimum weed control.
C. History Glyphosate was found to control weeds by a Monsanto scientist in 1970. The herbicide was patented in 1971 and was introduced commercially as Roundup in 1974. Glyphosate use has increased over time, especially when Roundup-Ready crops were introduced, starting with Roundup Ready soybeans in 1996. These soybean lines, and later corn, cotton, and other crop cultivars, were developed to be resistant to glyphosate through biotechnology. For these genetically-modified crops, glyphosate could be applied overtop for selective weed control.
D. Mode of action Glyphosate inhibits the enzyme enolpyruvyl shikimate-3-phosphate (EPSP) synthase, needed for synthesis of the aromatic amino acids tryptophan, tyrosine, and phenylalanine in plants. Animals, including people, do not make these amino acids, so they need to get these chemicals in their diet. Plants have to make these amino acids, which are the building blocks of proteins. So glyphosate inhibits a process that occurs in plants but not in animals, resulting in a chemical that controls plants with low acute toxicity to animals, including people.
E. Acute toxicity of glyphosate A measure of toxicity is the LD50 value, the dose required to kill 50% of the test animal, usually rats. The higher the LD50, the lower the toxicity. The acute oral LD50 for glyphosate in rats is greater than 5,000 mg/kg – practically non-toxic.
20
North Carolina Tur f g r a s s
n
www.ncturfgrass.org
n
The acute dermal LD50 rat is greater than 5,000 mg/kg – practically non-toxic. (taken from SDS sheet for Roundup PROMAX, http://www.cdms.net/ldat/mp8NJ004.pdf). For comparison the acute oral LD50 rat for caffeine is 192 mg/kg (https:// psychonautwiki.org/wiki/Caffeine) so caffeine is a much more toxic chemical than glyphosate. The acute oral LD50 rat for aspirin is 950 mg/kg (aspirin SDS, https://www.caymanchem. com/msdss/70260m.pdf), also more toxic on an acute basis than glyphosate. Another point to keep in mind is that risk associated with a given pesticide is based on the toxicity of the chemical along with the exposure level.
F. Use Glyphosate is a nonselective postemergence herbicide, meaning that it controls essentially all weeds. The recent development of glyphosate-resistant weeds has pushed researchers and growers to find alternative means to control these weed species. However, most weed species are still susceptible to glyphosate. Glyphosate is systemic, so it moves into and controls underground portions of weeds (roots, rhizomes, tubers, etc.), making it the preferred product for perennial weed control in many situations. This chemical binds to soil particles and has essentially no soil activity, so crops can be planted a week after application. Glyphosate is used for preplant weed control/site preparation, lawn renovation, spot treatment of weeds in landscape beds, as a directed spray application in fruit and nursery production, and for noncrop weed management, such as guard rails, railroad lines, and parking lots, among other uses. It controls grasses, sedges, and broadleaf weeds, making it a broad spectrum herbicide.
G. Recent issues about glyphosate It has been suggested that glyphosate causes non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), a type of cancer, and other diseases. In one epidemiological report, associations between pesticides and NHL subtypes were reported, including B cell lymphoma and glyphosate (Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014 Apr 23;11(4):4449527. doi: 10.3390/ijerph110404449). The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the World Health organization, listed glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen (Group 2A) in 2015 (https://monographs.iarc.fr/wp-content/ uploads/2018/06/mono112-10.pdf), along with burning of wood, eating red meat, high-temperature frying, late-night work shifts, being a hairdresser or barber, spraying insecticides, and making art glass, among others (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ List_of_IARC_Group_2A_carcinogens). In August 2018, a jury in San Francisco ordered Roundup’s manufacturer, Monsanto, to pay $289 million in damages to a school groundskeeper (Dewayne Lee Johnson) who argued that the glyphosate-based herbicide caused his cancer. A judge later upheld that decision but reduced Monsanto’s payout to $78 million. Recently, another jury in San Francisco ruled against Monsanto, with the jury concluding that glyphosate was a substantial factor in causing non-Hodgkin lymphoma in Edwin Hardeman, a 70-year-old Sonoma County man. Bayer, which bought Monsanto, responded by saying that there is over four decades of extensive science on glyphosate and the conclusions of regulators worldwide support the safety of their glyphosatebased herbicides and that they are not carcinogenic (https:// www.bayer.us/en/newsroom/press-releases/article/?id=123290).
July/August 2019
Enhancing the Quality of Life in North Carolina,
ONE LawN at a timE. NCsOd.Org
A P u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e T u r f g r a s s C o u n c i l o f N orth Carolina 21
Green Light on Herbicides | continued
Harrells has decided not to sell glyphosate products (https://www.lawnandlandscape.com/article/ll-031219-harrellsdiscontinues-glyphosate/). Although the company feels that the weight of scientific evidence strongly supports its safety when used properly, their insurance provider would not cover any claims related to glyphosate. With apparently over 11,000 lawsuits filed against Monsanto, there is a financial risk from the insurance standpoint related to glyphosate. Another issue that has been mentioned is that glyphosate may affect bacteria in the gut microbiome. Low levels of glyphosate have been reported in certain crops, generally in the parts per billion range, although the EPA has determined that the low levels do not pose a significant health risk to humans. Low levels of labeled pesticides can sometimes be detected in food crops, but the EPA compares these levels to the toxicity data for that pesticide to determine a no effects level and to set residue levels allowed before approving a pesticide. Certain bacteria can be adversely affected by exposure to glyphosate. A recent issue that has been reported is an impact on the gut bacteria in honey bees, resulting in adverse effects (Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2018 Oct 9; 115(41): 10305–10310).
H. What does the scientific literature say about glyphosate and cancer? As of 2016, there were 23 epidemiological studies, 15 animal carcinogenicity studies and over 90 genotoxicity studies for glyphosate. Reviews have been written summarizing the conducted studies. A review in 2012 found no consistent pattern of causation between glyphosate exposure and cancer (Mink et al. Reg. Toxicology & Pharmacology 63:440-452). Some conclusions of glyphosate effects are not supported by available evidence (Frontiers in Public Health 2017 Vol 5 Article 316). There was no association between glyphosate and any solid tumor, including. non-Hodgkin lymphoma (Andreotti et al. 2018 J. National Cancer Institute 110 (5): 509-516). The U.S. EPA concluded in a 2013 report that glyphosate does not pose a cancer risk to humans (2013 Federal Register Notice (FR 25396, Vol. 78, No. 84, May 1, 2013). In 2016, EPA’s office of Pesticide Programs released a report (https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-09/documents/ glyphosate_issue_paper_evaluation_of_carcincogenic_potential .pdf). In it, EPA states that “In epidemiological studies, there was no evidence of an association between glyphosate exposure and numerous cancer outcomes; however, due to conflicting results and various limitations identified in studies investigating NHL, a conclusion regarding the association between glyphosate exposure and risk of NHL cannot be determined based on the available data.” “Increases in tumor incidence were not considered treatment-related in any of the animal carcinogenicity studies.” “The overall weight of evidence indicates that there is no convincing evidence that glyphosate induces mutations in vivo via the oral route.” EPA’s overall conclusion was that glyphosate was “’not likely to be carcinogenic to humans’ at doses relevant to human health risk assessment.” In 2017, the EPA issued a draft assessment, which also concluded that glyphosate is not a likely carcinogen to humans
22
North Carolina Tur f g r a s s
n
www.ncturfgrass.org
n
(Released Draft Risk Assessments for Glyphosate, https:// www.epa.gov/pesticides/epa-releases-draft-risk-assessmentsglyphosate). The European Food Safety Authority and the EU member states concluded in 2015 that glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic hazard to humans and the evidence does not support classification with regard to its carcinogenic potential (EFSA Journal 2015;13(11):4302). The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in a 2016 summary report concluded that “in view of the absence of carcinogenic potential in rodents at humanrelevant doses and the absence of genotoxicity by the oral route in mammals, and considering the epidemiological evidence from occupational exposures, the Meeting concluded that glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans from exposure through the diet” (https://www.who.int/foodsafety/ jmprsummary2016.pdf). Why did the ARC reach a different conclusion than EPA and the EFSA and the FAO? The IARC only looked at publiclyavailable reports while EPA evaluated all data, including those submitted by the registrant and those not published. The IARC did not consider dose in their analysis while the EPA considered dose to be relevant to the interpretation of data. EPA did a systemic evaluation of the quality for the studies conducted with glyphosate while the IARC did less of a quality evaluation. There can be differing opinions on the interpretation of laboratory testing of pesticides. One cannot test chemicals on people, so scientists use a test animal such as rats. Labs will use only a limited number of test animals and may increase the dose to levels much higher than typical exposure levels of the chemical to try to force responses that may occur at low frequency or at low dosages. If cancer develops in the test animal only at doses much higher than a typical exposure would be, what do you conclude? Did the dose cause the response or did the chemical cause the effect? Can you extrapolate the data to lower doses? These are questions that arise when interpreting results from lab studies.
I. Alternatives to glyphosate We do not have a ready alternative to glyphosate that provides the same level of weed control and use. The closest in my opinion is glufosinate (Finale, Cheetah Pro), another non-selective postemergence herbicide that is inactivated upon contact with soil. It works faster on weeds than glyphosate but it is not as systemic as glyphosate. So glyphosate generally provides greater control of perennial weeds, especially perennial grasses, compared to glufosinate. There are nonselective postemergence contact herbicides, such as diquat (Reward), pelargonic acid (Scythe), and acetic acid (WeedPharm). These contact herbicides will not affect the underground portions of perennial weeds so they are more effective overall on annual weeds.
J. Decision making Read the literature cited in this article and determine for yourself the benefits and risks to use of glyphosate. Be careful about articles you read on the internet, in newspapers, and in other media. Sometimes claims are made about chemicals that are not supported by scientific research. Ask to see data from published, peer-reviewed articles in scientific journals.
July/August 2019
Not a one-trick pony. • #1 in Turf Quality (NTEP)
• Uses 18% less water than TifTuf*
• #1 in Cold Tolerance (NTEP)
• Very dense with 1/8” HOC possible
• #1 in Spring Green-Up (NTEP)
• Beautiful & Extremely wear tolerant
*Study sponsored by USGA & USDA, conducted by researchers at Oklahoma State University, Evapotranspiration Rates of Turf Bermudagrasses under Nonlimiting Soil Moisture Conditions in Oklahoma, published in Crop Science, March 2018.
Developed by the turfgrass experts at Oklahoma State University
Contact Us Today to Find a Grower Near You! Sod Production Services 18161 Sandy Point Road, Charles City, VA 23030 757.345.1120 | Tahoma31Bermudagrass.com
@Tahoma31 @Tahoma31Bermudagrass @Tahoma31Bermudagrass
Green Light on Herbicides | continued
If you plan to continue using glyphosate, as we plan to do here at the research station, follow information listed on the label. For example, the Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for Roundup PROMAX is a long sleeve shirt, long pants, shoes, and socks (http://www.cdms.net/ldat/ld8NJ010.pdf). Read and follow all label directions. Make sure the product you use has a label for the site to be treated.
Acknowledgement – I would like to thank Dr. Timothy Pastoor, of Pastoor Science Communications for sharing his PowerPoint “Glyphosate – Get the Facts” with me. Some of the information listed above was taken from this PowerPoint. G
Digital Marketplace
Download your favorite QR reader to your phone, and scan the code to learn more about this company.
Andy Rushing arushing@cgcfields.com Phone: (704) 634-9799 Toll Free – Office: (866) 753-1707
www.cgcfields.com
24
North Carolina Tur f g r a s s
n
www.ncturfgrass.org
n
July/August 2019
NC State Turf Team
Index of Advertisers Buy Sod, Inc................ Inside Back Cover www.buysod.com
Crop and Soil Sciences Dr. Dan Bowman Professor, Crop Science (919) 515-2805 dan_bowman@ncsu.edu Dr. Rich Cooper Professor, Crop Science (919) 515-7600 rich_cooper@ncsu.edu Emily Erickson Crop Science Lecturer (919) 513-2034 emily_erickson@ncsu.edu Dr. Travis Gannon Assistant Professor (919) 515-2647 (Office) travis_gannon@ncsu.edu Matt Martin Extension Associate – Turfgrass, NCSU Crop Science Dept (910) 675-2314 (Office) matthew_martin@ncsu.edu
Dr. Susana Milla-Lewis Associate Professor, Turfgrass Breeding and Genetics (919) 515-3196 susana_milla-lewis@ ncsu.edu Dr. Grady Miller Professor (919) 515-5656 grady_miller@ncsu.edu Dr. Charles Peacock Professor and Extension Turfgrass Specialist (919) 515-7615 charles_peacock@ncsu.edu Dr. Ron Qu Professor, Crop Science (919) 515-7616 rongda_qu@ncsu.edu
Entomology and Plant Pathology Dr. Terri Billeisen Extension Associate (919) 515-7464 tlhoctor@ncsu.edu Dr. Rick Brandenburg Extension Specialist (Peanuts & Turf) & Department Extension Leader (919) 515-8876 rick_brandenburg@ncsu.edu Lee Butler Extension Coordinator (919) 513-3878 elbutler@ncsu.edu Dr. Jim Kerns Associate Professor and Extension Specialist (Turfgrass Pathology) (919) 515-2730 (Office) jpkerns@ncsu.edu
Dr. Robert Richardson Professor and Extension Specialist (919) 515-5653 rob_richardson@ncsu.edu Dr. Tom Rufty Professor (919) 515-3660 tom_rufty@ncsu.edu Dr. Wei Shi Professor, Crop Science (919) 515-2647 (Office) wei_shi@ncsu.edu Dr. Fred Yelverton Extension Specialist (Turfgrass / Forage Crop Weed Mgt) (919) 515-5639 fred_yelverton@ncsu.edu
Carolina Fresh Farms............................15 www.carolinafreshfarms.com Carolina Green Corp.............................24 www.cgcfields.com Carolina Turf Farms, Inc.........................7 www.carolinaturffarms.com CoverSports USA..................................21 www.coversports.com Divots, Inc.............................................24 www.divotssand.com E - Z Trench, Inc......................................5 www.eztrench.com Green Resource..................... Back Cover www.green-resource.com Harmon Turf Services, Inc....................19 www.harmonturfservices.com Leading Edge Communications............24 www.LeadingEdgeCommunications.com Mid-Atlantic STIHL................................13 www.stihldealers.com
Biological and Agricultural Engineering Dr. Garry Grabow Extension Specialist and Professor (919) 513-7348 garry_grabow@ncsu.edu
NC Sod Producers Assn.......................21 www.ncsod.org PBI Gordon Corporation......................17 www.pbigordon.com Progressive Turf Equipment Inc...........27 www.progressiveturfequip.com
Horticulture Science Dr. Danesha Seth Carley Director, SIPMC & NC IPM Coordinator (919) 513-8189 danesha_carley@ncsu.edu
Morgan Sand Company........................16
Smith Seed Services................................7 www.smithseed.com Sod Production Services.......................23 www.sodproductionservices.com Southern Seeds, Inc................................9 southernseedsinc.com Southern Specialty Equipment...............9 www.ssequip.net Super-Sod................................................3 www.supersod.com The Turfgrass Group... Inside Front Cover www.theturfgrassgroup.com Turf Mountain Sod, Inc...........................9 www.turfmountain.com Vandemark Farms.................................15 www.vandemarkfarms.com
A P u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e T u r f g r a s s C o u n c i l o f N orth Carolina 25
Bioengineered Living Shorelines
Feature Story
the Newest Erosion Control Solution By J. Wesley Allen, Environmental Scientist and Regional Manager at SOLitude Lake Management
Before
During
After 26
North Carolina Tur f g r a s s
n
www.ncturfgrass.org
n
W
hen development companies design golf courses and landscaped communities with lakes and stormwater ponds, they envision them as beautiful aquatic resources to attract visitors, connect with nature and enhance the surrounding prop- erty. Without proper management, however, these water- bodies can quickly become eye-sores that produce harm- ful algae and bad odors, lead to damaged and eroded shorelines, and result in displeased members.
Most aquatic management professionals will tell you that when a property manager or golf course superintendent calls about an issue at their waterbody, it’s often past the point of a quick fix. This is regularly the case when we arrive onsite to look at an erosion issue on a lake or pond embankment. Rather than finding a few problematic patches of rock or soil, we discover steep, unstable banks, deep washouts and extensive bottom muck caused by years of sedimentation. Erosion is a natural process caused by wind, rainfall, poor design, cultural impacts like mowing and recreation, or simply an aging aquatic ecosystem. These erosion issues are all exacerbated by human disturbance. Unfortunately, erosion can also negatively affect your lake, stormwater pond, canal or coastline by causing loss of habitat and property value, nutrient loading, reduced storage volume and waterbody depth, and excess runoff. When topsoil is displaced, stormwater pipes and structures can be exposed and damaged. Over time, erosion can lead to the formation of trenches and gullies that pose a serious danger to the public. There are many ways to correct erosion with rip-rap, bulkheads, and other hard armoring systems; in certain situations, they may be the preferred option. In my experience, however, reestablishing the embankment utilizing vegetation, whether turfgrass for recreation or native vegetation for habitat, has always been an excellent way to halt erosion and enhance community waterbodies. There are several best management practices that can help stop erosion and establish vegetation, but a lot of them have a shorter life-span or planting restrictions. Fortunately, there is a new solution available for both the immediate and long-term stabilization of shorelines and hillsides. Bioengineered living shorelines are the latest technology in erosion control. These patented woven systems offer an innovative, environmentally-friendly solution to immediately stop shoreline and embankment erosion and create a natural foundation for vegetation. The most effective systems available are designed using a combination of ecofriendly, biodegradable burlap sock-like fabric and heavy-duty knitted mesh. The socks can be filled with local pond muck and sediment, which is why
July/August 2019
many property managers choose to pair this solution with proactive hydro-raking projects. After the woven mesh systems are filled, they are then secured to the embankment and can be immediately sodded, planted with native beneficial buffer plants, or seeded through the mesh and fabric layers. As an Environmental Scientist, I’ve utilized several different shoreline restoration techniques over the years, but this innovative system is certainly creating some excitement! It provides immediate stabilization while effectively filtering and buffering run-off water, removing harmful contaminants and benefiting waterways and water quality, all the while providing a seamless planting platform and long-lasting erosion control. Restored banks and hillsides can be walked on within just a few days, making bioengineered shorelines a fast, aesthetically-pleasing and long-lasting solution for most properties. Depending on your waterbody and specific erosion issues, goals and budget, your lake management professional may recommend other natural restoration tools. Lakes and ponds that experience heavy water movement may be suitable candidates for erosion control using logs comprised of coconut fibers. Installed in areas with direct water flow, these biodegradable logs can help redirect water movement while reducing erosion along delicate banks. Coconut “coir” logs are biodegradable, compact and excellent solutions for properties in need of a truly custom erosion control approach. Whether you decide to move forward with a complete shoreline restoration or are several years away, it’s imperative to properly budget and integrate proactive management strategies that protect your banks and hillsides, while preserving the water quality of your aquatic resource. Cultivating a beneficial vegetative
buffer with flowering native vegetation will help stabilize soil during rainstorms. Deep-rooted flowering plants can also help pull excess nutrients from stormwater runoff, preventing the growth of nuisance weeds and algae in the water resource. Undesirable nutrients can be further combated with the professional application of naturally-occurring nutrient remediation products, which permanently “lock up” and prevent nutrients from fueling aquatic weeds or algae. Just like turfgrass management, lake and stormwater pond management is an ongoing commitment that requires different approaches throughout the year. While no two waterbodies are the same, each and every aquatic ecosystem is susceptible to shoreline erosion and can benefit from custom management plans that integrate buffer management and nutrient remediation, as well as other sustainable tools like hydro-raking, aeration, biological augmentation, and regular water quality testing. Whether your waterbody is in its prime or has seen better days, contact your lake management professional to restore and prolong your water resources—starting with the shoreline. G
J. Wesley Allen is an Environmental Scientist and Regional Manager at SOLitude Lake Management, an industry-leading environmental firm. He has nearly two decades of experience leading high-profile shoreline stabilization and wetland restoration projects. This article is the second in a series featuring new break-through technologies that will revolutionize the management of lakes, stormwater ponds, wetlands and fisheries in 2019. Learn more at www.solitudelakemanagement.com/knowledge
A P u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e T u r f g r a s s C o u n c i l o f N orth Carolina 27
NCCTP Program
Fast Facts about the NCCTP Enrollment Requirements:
Become a NC Certified Turfgrass Professional!
The
North Carolina Certified Turfgrass Professional (NCCTP) program is a comprehensive program devel- oped to enhance the technical competency of turf- grass professionals, while elevating their professional image, that of your business and of the turfgrass management industry. Administered by the Turfgrass Council of North Carolina, the NCCTP designation confirms your expertise in turfgrass management to prospective customers and your peers.
Reasons to Begin Earning Your NCCTP Designation Today he NCCTP program increases and enhances your turfT grass industry knowledge, career, and business development through a course of study of in-depth coverage of the science of turfgrass management. The NCCTP designation offers immediate confidence and credibility of turfgrass management practices to customers and prospective employers. Promote and market yourself as a North Carolina Certified Turfgrass Professional. • Use the NCCTP logo on your business materials. • Use NCCTP pins, uniform patches, and vehicle decals. • Your TCNC Member Directory listing is distinguished with the NCCTP logo.
We Are Partnered With The NC State Turfgrass Professional Short Course he NC State Turfgrass Professional Short Course, a comT prehensive turfgrass education program, is offered at select NC State Extension offices and at NC State University. This Short Course offers a full curriculum of the science of turfgrass management as well as Continuing Education Credits for NCDACS Pesticide and NCLCLB Landscape Contractors’ license holders, and it will help you prepare for the NCCTP exam. This Short Course is recommended but not required to take the NCCTP exam.
28
North Carolina Tur f g r a s s
n
www.ncturfgrass.org
n
old a current TCNC membership. If not currently H a member, go to www.ncturfgrass.org and click ‘JOIN NOW’ to join online or download an application. Have a minimum of one full year of work experience in the turfgrass industry. Agree to the Certified Turfgrass Professional Code of Ethics as detailed on the application form. Submit: • A current and valid NC Pesticide Applicators license • A completed NCCTP application (current TCNC members may apply online). • NCCTP Program Application: $150 • Self-Study Materials: $50 • Exam Fee: $50
Curriculum and Exam: urriculum covers nine core areas: Turfgrass CharacterisC tics; Establishing Turfgrass; Soils & Nutrient Management; Cultural Practices; Pests & Integrated Pest Management; Pesticides & Plant Growth Regulators; Landscape Safety & Pesticide Use; Calculations & Calibration; Turfgrass Business & Economics. Candidates have six months from the date of their enrollment acceptance to complete the NCCTP exam. Candidates have six hours to complete the exam and must score 80% or more on each section to receive the NCCTP designation. Exams can be taken at the TCNC office in Raleigh during normal business hours, or arrangements can be made at your local NC State Extension location. Exams will not be graded if any application information is missing or if TCNC membership status cannot be confirmed. Please allow two to three weeks for exam grading and reports. Upon successful completion of the exam, candidates will receive communication with their results and either next step options or their graduation packet.
Maintenance Requirements: aintain a current TCNC membership as a means of M demonstrating ongoing support for the industry. Submit an annual $50 renewal fee, which supports the NCCTP program and related promotional activities. Designation year is the same as the TCNC membership year, from July 1st to June 30th. Hold a current NC Pesticide Applicator’s License. Subscribe to, actively support and uphold the TCNC Certification Code of Ethics. The NC Certified Turfgrass Professional designation (NCCTP), the NCCTP logo and related programs materials are the trademarked property of the Turfgrass Council of North Carolina and cannot be used without TCNC’s written permission. For additional information, contact TCNC at (919) 459-2070.
July/August 2019
NCCTP Certification Program
Enrollment Application Name___________________________________________________________________ Phone_____________________________________________________ Address_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ City_____________________________________________________________________ State____________ Zip_ ____________________________________ E-Mail_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TCNC Membership #*_ ___________________________________________________ Pesticide Applicator License #_______________________________
Qualifications / Requirements Please read the items below and check each one that is true for you.
Membership: I am now, or I am applying here to be, a member in good standing of the Turfgrass Council of North Carolina. esticide License: I hold a current North Carolina Pesticide Ground Applicator License with subclass L, turf, and ornamental P (or equivalent from another state). Experience: I have completed a minimum of one full year of turfgrass industry professional work experience. Exam: Upon acceptance into the program, I plan to complete my study and take the required exam within six months. uty: I have initialed the following page of this application to show that I strongly support and willingly subscribe to the D Certified Turfgrass Professional Code of Ethics, and I pledge to uphold the credibility and integrity of the program. ontinuing Education: I agree to successfully complete additional future curriculum materials or sections that may be C required as a result of new technology or regulation. Company________________________________________________________________ Title_ _____________________________________________________ Supervisor_______________________________________________________________ Supervisor’s Phone_________________________________________ Supervisor’s E-Mail___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Company’s Address_ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ City_____________________________________________________________________ State____________ Zip_ ____________________________________ Work Experience_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Describe your turfgrass industry professional work experience; one full year is required to apply.
NCCTP Application Fee: $150, Study Materials: $50, Exam Fee: $50, TCNC Dues (call for amount, based on date) Total $____________________
Check Number__________________ (payable to TCNC) Credit Card:
AMEX
Visa
MC
Discover
Billing Zip Code____________________
Credit Card #____________________________________________________________ Exp. Date______________________ Sec Code____________ Name on Card___________________________________________________________ Signature______________________________________________ By signing this application, I verify that all the information is true and correct, I acknowledge and assume full responsibility for the charges on this application, and I agree to honor and abide by the terms of this non-refundable payment.
Signature__________________________________________________________________________________ Date____________________________________
A P u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e T u r f g r a s s C o u n c i l o f N orth Carolina 29
NCCTP Program | continued
Certified Turfgrass Professional
Code of Ethics Please read and initial each section below that you support and commit to uphold.
Duty to the Public Conduct service first and foremost with regards to the safety, health, and welfare of the general public. Provide service, recommendations, and information based upon honest experience, and scientifically accurate and factual knowledge.
I Agree
Duty to the Environment Operate in such a manner to protect and preserve our environment. Use and monitor all equipment, products, and materials in a manner consistent with the label and safe for the environment.
I Agree
Duty to the Laws of Our Land Abide by all laws and regulations affecting the turf industry and support the enforcement of these laws.
I Agree
Duty to Our Fellow Professionals Refrain from the use of false, misleading, or deceptive marketing and advertising practices. Practice and insist upon sound business management practices. Maintain the highest standard of personal conduct to reflect credit and add stature to the turf industry. Recognize the importance of strong relationships within the industry. Abstain from untruthful debasement, or encroachment upon, the professional reputation or practice of another turfgrass professional.
I Agree
Duty to the Association Participate in association activities and events to help further the profession. Abstain from any unfair exploitation of my association, industry, or profession.
I Agree
By signing this Code of Ethics, I agree to follow the duties and intentions outlined above, and I commit to supporting and upholding these ethics with consistency and integrity.
Printed Name________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Signature__________________________________________________________________________________ Date____________________________________ Please Return Entire NCCTP Application To TCNC Via: email: info@ncturfgrass.org fax: (919) 459-2075 or mail: TCNC, 110 Horizon Dr. Ste 210, Raleigh, NC 27615 30
North Carolina Tur f g r a s s
n
www.ncturfgrass.org
n
July/August 2019
Give water a break tiftuf bermudagrass is the new drought-tolerance superstar. The newest edition in the “Tif” (Tifton) series of bermudagrasses to originate from the renowned University of Georgia turfgrass breeding program, TifTuf promises to be a true game-changer in stellar yet environmentally friendly performance. Providing unbeatable drought tolerance, it uses 38% less water than Tifway 419, and it is significantly more drought resistant than all other bermudagrasses. In addition to its incredible drought tolerance, TifTuf is more aggressive than Tifway and provides superior wear and traffic tolerance (even better than Celebration), excellent cold tolerance (equal to Latitude 36 at Kansas State University), fast spring green-up and excellent fall color retention. In the 2015 NTEP trials, TifTuf was the highest-ranked cultivar in North Carolina, Alabama and Mississippi, and across all 17 locations overall, it was the highest-ranked, commercially available cultivar. TifTuf will not only pay for itself in water savings, but more importantly, it will create more-sustainable athletic fields for the future. In fact, it will soon become the ultimate must-have grass for sports turf managers who want to take a break from water use.
www.buysod.com | 866-428-9763 World Class Service On Demand
Buy Sod VarietieS: Golf Putting Greens: Bentgrass and Champion Dwarf bermudagrass
Bermudagrass: TifTuf, TifGrand, Celebration, Patriot, TifSport, Tifway and T10 St. Augustine: Raleigh • Zoysiagrass: Zeon and El Toro • Paspalum: SeaStar Centipedegrass: TifBlair and Common • Bluegrass: Tournament • Fescue/Bluegrass Mixtures
