Pennsylvania Turfgrass - Spring 2023

New Insecticides for Turfgrass Insect

Pest Management

Dr. McNitt Looks Back on 30 Years in Turf Science

Pennsylvania Turfgrass Council P.O. Box 99

Boalsburg, PA 16827-0550

Phone: (814) 237-0767

Fax: (814) 414-3303 info@paturf.org www.paturf.org

Publisher: Leading Edge Communications, LLC 206 Bridge Street, Suite 200 Franklin, TN 37064

Phone: (615) 790-3718

Fax: (615) 794-4524 info@leadingedgecommunications.com

Pennsylvania Turfgrass Editor

Max Schlossberg, Ph.D. Penn State University • mjs38@psu.edu

President Rick Catalogna Harrell’s Inc Territory Manager (412) 897-0480

Secretary-Treasurer

Shawn Kister Longwood Gardens, Inc. –Kennett Square, PA (484) 883-9275

Past President

Tom Fisher Wildwood Golf Club – Allison Park, PA (412) 518-8384

Director of Operations

Tom Bettle

Penn State University

Assistant Director of Operations

Nicole Kline

Pennsylvania Turfgrass Association

Directors

Steve Craig Centre Hills Country Club

Tanner Delvalle

Penn State Extension

Elliott Dowling USGA

Andy Moran

University of Pittsburgh

Tim Wilk

Scotch Valley Country Club

Matt Wolf

Penn State University

DAWN OF A NEW SEASON

Hello all, I am Rick Catalogna, and I have the honor of being the new president of the Pennsylvania Turfgrass Council. I know that most of you received the letter I sent out asking you to join this great organization of turf professionals and Penn State Alumni once again. Hopefully you read it and signed up to support this great cause and make us strong again. I want to send a quick thank you to our membership for your continued support. It’s not where it was or needs to be, and I plan to change that. But a sincere thank you to everyone who attended one of our conferences this past season or supported us with a booth or sponsorship! We could not have done it without your support.

Another ‘thank you’ goes to Pete Ramsey for his dedicated years of service to our board. He really helped groom me for this position and got the Board through some challenging times. I also want to thank another friend, Thomas Fisher, our now Past President. He was President during a difficult time and came out on the other side and brought us as an organization with him! I can’t thank either of these fine gentlemen enough for what they have done for the PTC. I couldn’t move forward as the President without the people in the past that made it all possible.

Now to the season we are about to embark on. The business that we love to a fault is a cyclical one. We go from a hard season into winterization mode, then late Fall conferences, then into the holidays, then into the Winter Conference season, and the next season is upon us just like that. We all get a sense of cabin fever and are ready to get the year rolling, making Springtime my favorite part of the cycle. A fresh start for the superintendent, landscape contractor, field manager or even a new member joining the maintenance crew. With this new beginning comes many questions: Have I put in place a staff that will work together and accomplish the goals set forth? Have I ordered an inventory of products that will make my life easier? What does Mother Nature have in store for us this year? All these questions lead to optimism for a successful year. All we can do is be ready to tackle it all head on with a new love and refreshed spirit!

I sincerely hope that all of you have a wonderful year–

Rick Catalogna

PTC President

Jeffrey A. Borger

Senior Instructor in Turfgrass Weed Management 814-865-3005 • jborger@psu.edu

Michael A. Fidanza, Ph.D. Professor of Plant & Soil Science 610-396-6330 • maf100@psu.edu

David R. Huff, Ph.D. Professor of Turfgrass Genetics 814-863-9805 • drh15@psu.edu

Brad Jakubowski Instructor of Plant Science 814-865-7118 • brj8@psu.edu

John E. Kaminski, Ph.D. Professor of Turfgrass Science 814-865-3007 • jek156@psu.edu

Peter J. Landschoot, Ph.D. Professor of Turfgrass Science 814-863-1017 • pjl1@psu.edu

Ben McGraw, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Turfgrass Entomology 814-865-1138 • bam53@psu.edu

Andrew S. McNitt, Ph.D. Professor of Soil Science 814-863-1368 • asm4@psu.edu

Max Schlossberg, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Turfgrass Nutrition / Soil Fertility 814-863-1015 • mjs38@psu.edu

The Pennsylvania Turfgrass Council (PTC) 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, Pennsylvania Turfgrass, or its editors. Likewise, the appearance of advertisers, or PTC members, does not constitute an endorsement of the products or services featured in this, past or subsequent issues of this publication.

Council.

allows

requests should be directed to the PTC. 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, Suite 200, Franklin, TN 37064, (615) 790-3718, Fax (615) 794-4524.

Al J. Turgeon, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Turfgrass Management aturgeon@psu.edu

Wakar Uddin, Ph.D. Professor of Plant Pathology 814-863-4498 • wxu2@psu.edu

SiteSpecific Plans & PA Act 83 Compliance

By Maxim J. Schlossberg, Ph.D.

Email responses I receive from PTC members are the most rewarding part of contributing to Pennsylvania Turfgrass Magazine. Which shouldn’t come as a surprise given the above-average mean aptitude of Pennsylvania Turfgrass magazine’s readership. Well above average. These enlightening interactions support and facilitate direction to my ongoing efforts (so please keep them coming).

Resultantly, I’ve prepared the following for Pennsylvania turfgrass managers seeking further interpretation of PA Fertilizer Law specifics and/or assistance developing their Site-specific Plan(s). Of course, the official guidance on all practical aspects of the Responsible Fertilizer Use act will be finalized by the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture (PDA). The official guidelines are pending issue within the PDA website: ( https://www.agriculture.pa.gov/Plants_Land_ Water/Fertilizer/Pages/default.aspx).

But in the meantime, having read the PA Responsible Fertilizer Use Law (Act 83 of 2022) several times, I offer my best-educated answers to recent questions from motivated pragmatists.

Must I develop a Site-specific Plan for my golf course or recreational / athletic facility?

Well, it depends. If at some point in the future you would like to lawfully make any single granular fertilizer application to turf at a rate supplying >0.7 lbs readily-available N per 1000 ft2, then the answer is yes. Likewise, if you imagine yourself legally treating mature turfgrass with a phosphorus fertilizer of your choice at a rate exceeding 0.25 lbs P (0.57 lbs P2O5) per 1000 ft2 per application, or cumulatively exceeding 0.5 lbs P (1.14 lbs P2O5) per 1000 ft2 annually; then yes, your development and maintenance of a Site-specific Plan is advised.

However, fertilizer N and P application rates applied to a turfgrass system described in a Site-specific Plan and exceeding the maximum(s) described above must still not exceed ‘recommendations by The Pennsylvania State University or other institution of higher education in this Commonwealth approved by the department.’ These recommendations are provided within informational components #2 and #3 of the following.

What information is required of a valid Site-specific Plan?

While subject to change, Site-specific plans pursuant to PA Act 83 currently require:

1. Characterization of soil properties, plant species, climate, use, topography or other appropriate management factors; and,

2. Soil test results from a sample collected from the specific turfgrass system site in accordance with procedures recommended by The Pennsylvania State University no more than 3 years previous; and,

3. Nutrient delivery rates recommended by The Pennsylvania State University or other institution of higher education in this Commonwealth approved by the department.

Does possession of a valid Site-specific Plan exempt me from the 0.5 lbs total N per 1000 ft2 cumulative application limit between December 15 and March 1?

No, this maximum cumulative N application applies to all turfgrass in the Commonwealth. The dates and N rate limit is also subject to revision by the PDA, so affected parties should stay apprised.

Will a unique Site-specific Plan be required for each putting green or fairway of my golf course?

Based on my interpretation of Act 83, probably not. Particularly if all 20 putting greens reside on similarly constructed rootzones or topdressed native soils and feature common turfgrass species monostands or mixtures. The same will likely apply to multiple athletic fields maintained within a single recreational facility. A comprehensive Site-specific Plan for all putting green or athletic field acreage seems appropriate considering similar usage and the likelihood of similar fertilizer programs.

Turf Grass Production Mowers

Contour / Rough Finishing Mowers

Sports field, Park and Estate

However, starkly different underlying soil, turfgrass species, and/or usage across managed systems on the property may warrant development and maintenance of unique site-specific plans; e.g., golf course tees/approaches, fairway, and rough acreage. Let’s all stay tuned for PDA’s upcoming guidance issue.

Do I need a valid Site-specific Plan to foliarly apply low rates of soluble P2O5 to mature turfgrass systems?

Probably not under the following circumstance: the P fertilizer used qualifies as enhanced-efficiency, is natural organic or organic-based, or is labelled and applied for the purpose of repairing a turfgrass area. If none of the above; e.g., because the fertilizer is derived from a salt form of P or phosphoric acid, the committed method of making light and foliar applications (<0.05 lbs P2O5 per 1000 ft2) may be interpreted by the PDA as an efficiency-enhancement. But if the cumulative annual P fertilization exceeds 0.5 lbs, or 1.14 lbs P2O5, per 1000 ft2, a sitespecific plan will be required regardless. Given the Commonwealth’s fertilizer grade standard, phosphite treatments will likely not have to be counted against the annual P maximum. But again, the PDA guidance issue will comprise the final word on these topics.

I run a private lawn care operation. Am I required to develop and maintain Site-specific Plans for every client property I fertilize?

This is a poignant question, for which I believe the answer is probably not. During our College’s deliberations over the PA SB 915 bill language in 2021, I emphasized the extent to which environmental and economic sustainability of professional turfgrass management relies on operational efficiency. Hence, pending regulations had to consider recent technological advances supporting extended nutrient availability and cost benefit realized by turfgrass professionals already using them to make sizable annual to semiannual N applications.

I’ll refrain from rehashing specific justifications for, and consequences of not,

FIGURE 3

FIGURE 1

FIGURE 2

utilizing the latest-generation, granular, controlled-release, N-fertilizers here. But google ‘Fertilizer Schlossberg’ for details articulated in open-access papers originating from our lab between 2018 and 2022.

Of greater importance is that the PA Responsible Fertilizer Use Law affords provisional exceedance of the stated N application rate limits for dependable controlled-release fertilizer technologies. However, such applications will require employ of pre-approved fertilizers at rates not exceeding pre-approved maximums.

A comprehensive list of these options will be published by PDA in its Bulletin, and this list will be updated annually. Lawful application of any other N fertilizer that supplies >0.7 lbs readily-available N per 1000 ft2 can only be made to a turfgrass system having a valid Site-specific Plan in place. Hopefully the PDA’s official issue will articulate whether two or more discrete, yet identically-fertilized, properties may be included in a single, valid, Site-specific Plan.

How should turfgrass managers go about developing their Site-specific Plans?

If your facility is in the US, then a great way to start is by exporting high-quality aerial photos from the USDA Web Soil Survey (WSS) at https://websoilsurvey. sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm . Zoom into your local region and select either your entire facility or a sector of it (Figure 1). This selection comprises the area of interest (AOI) and can be further enlarged to optimize inference. The user can then click on the ‘Soil Map’ tab to see the overlayed soil survey map units, descriptions, and respective percent occupancy of the AOI (Figure 2).

The AOI can then be divided into management units. For the AOI on the Penn State Golf Courses aerial shown, this would logically include putting greens, tees/collars, fairways, and rough management units. It is also recommended to identify the 15-foot-wide ‘No-fertilizer broadcast zone’ to be maintained around each of the two surface water features.

If GPS-referenced square footages of these areas within the AOI are known, then the aerial and soil map unit overlay can be exported, saved as a .jpg file, and

pasted into a MS Excel Worksheet. Otherwise, you can clear the AOI and zoom in further to outline individual management units using the polygon selection tool. By including MS Excel on the split-screen, you can populate spreadsheet cells with Web Soil Survey generated square footages of each management unit (or its components), like for 15 Green on the Blue Course (Figure 3).

Regardless of the soil survey data provided by the Web Soil Survey, routine soil fertility data derived from laboratory analysis of recent composite samples must also be included in each Site-specific Plan. Specification of the turfgrass species predominating the management unit will be required for submission of soil samples.

Once results are received, they should be recorded in the appropriate worksheet. Likewise, the annual N and/or P fertilizer recommendations should be transcribed from the soil report into the Site-specific

Plan worksheet, as these comprise each cumulative upper limit for seasonal fertilizer N or P application. Additional data from soil chemical or physical analysis of collected samples, by management unit(s), should also be included in your Site-specific Plan(s). Other management factors should be determined and reported; including topography, microclimate, pest incidence, significant cultural inputs, and usage.

Summary

Hopefully the good-faith information provided in this article answered one or more of your questions regarding compliance with the PA Responsible Fertilizer Use Act. Likewise, I hope it facilitates orderly initiation and development of your Site-specific Plans. As always, please do not hesitate to contact me with questions, comments, and/or topics for future articles at mjs38@psu.edu

New Insecticides for Turfgrass Insect

Pest Management

By Ben McGraw, Ph.D.

Three new insecticides were registered for control of turfgrass insect pests in Pennsylvania in 2022. These new products represent active ingredients from different insecticide classes, including an anthranilic diamide (tetraniliprole Tetrino®, Bayer), a combination product (Alucion®, BASF) and an insect growth regulator (Suprado™, QualiPro). Given that these actives are diverse in their chemical structures and modes of action, they differ in the pest activity and how/ when they should be applied. Our laboratory has spent the last three to five years testing these products on various pests including ants, caterpillars, white grubs, weevils, and leatherjackets. In this article I will highlight the strengths of each and where I can see these products being useful as rotational partners in integrated pest management programs.

Alucion (BASF):

Active ingredients: Alpha-cypermethrin (Insecticide Resistance Action Committee (IRAC) class = 3A) + dinotefuran (IRAC class = 4A)

Labelled pests: Annual bluegrass weevil (ABW), Ants, Caterpillars, Billbugs, Chinch bugs, Leatherjackets, Mole crickets

CHARACTERISTICS:

Alucion is marketed as being the only non-restricted use pyrethroid labeled for golf courses, though it may be used in athletic fields, residential and commercial lawns, parks, and athletic fields. This product is a combination of a pyrethroid and neonicotinoid, two of the more commonly used insecticides worldwide. However, this is where the similarity in classes ends. Pyrethroids are relatively broad-spectrum and have little mobility (bind tightly with organic matter) and have short residual activity. These attributes limit pyrethroids to being used primarily as contact insecticide for surfaceactive insects. Conversely, neonicotinoids are small molecular weight compounds that are highly soluble, have low binding potential, and lengthy residual activity. These attributes allow for systemic uptake and expression within the plant. Combining these classes allows for matching strengths of each class and thus expanding the spectrum of pests controlled. In theory, quick action of the pyrethroid combined with the residual activity of the neonicotinoid make combination products a good fit for pests that have susceptible and tolerant stages (e.g. eggs, pupae) present at the same time (e.g. ABW, billbugs, chinch bugs, turfgrass ants) and thus require curative control and prevention of future stages at the same time.

STRENGTHS:

Alucion has performed well in our field trials against insects that would either be sensitive to or targeted with pyrethroids including caterpillars (e.g. black cutworm, fall armyworm), leatherjackets, and ABW. With ABW, I would have suspected that Alucion would work best as an adulticide, given that we generally do not see much ABW activity with neonicotinoids. The label states that Alucion provides suppression, which is appropriate for most ABW products, though doesn’t diminish the value of the insecticide. Multiple trials against susceptible and moderately pyrethroid-resistant ABW have shown that our greatest levels of control were when Alucion was applied when larvae were between 1st and 3rd instars……a time when they are located in the plant and largely protected from most chemistries. It is unlikely that alpha-cypermethrin persists long enough to control larvae

when they emerge in the soil, and thus it is likely that dinotefuran is providing some relief through translaminar activity. The timing of this application (1st generation early-instars) is likely to provide some control of turfgrass ants at the same time. Turfgrass ant trials conducted in 2022 would suggest that Alucion is similar to a pyrethroid alone when the application is delayed until mounding is well underway (early June). Combination products are the current recommendation for turfgrass ant control, and they usually work best when applied at sight of first mounding (~ late April – early May in PA). Future trials need to address earlier timings to reduce mounding.

Suprado (QualiPro):

Active ingredient: Novaluron (IRAC class = 15)

Labelled pests: ABW, billbugs, caterpillars, white grubs, chinch bugs

CHARACTERISTICS:

Novaluron is a benzyl urea insect growth regulator (IGR). Unlike traditional chemistries, IGRs disrupt the insect’s endocrine system rather than targeting the nervous system. Because of this, IGRs are generally regarded as having less potential for issues with mammals (e.g. non-target wildlife and applicators). Suprado is the first IGR to be registered for use in turfgrass since Mach II (halofenozide) was released in the late 1990s. Much like the two active ingredients in Alucion, halofezonide and novaluron could not be more different. Halofenozide mimics an insect hormone (ecdysone) and causes premature molting and eventual death of immature insects. Novaluron disrupts chitin synthesis when the new exoskeleton is being formed, leading to death shortly after the insect molts. We can therefore deduce that Suprado should 1) be used to control immature stages (larvae, nymphs) and 2) it will take some time after application for the insect to die since the insect must advance to their next instar to have its exoskeleton weakened. White grubs are listed on the Suprado label, though based on binding characteristics (i.e. soil adsorption values) it is unlikely that the active ingredient will be able to reach the rootzone. Additionally, the half-life of novaluron would suggest minimal residual activity in the soil, making it primarily a contact insecticide that needs to be delivered to where the pest resides.

STRENGTHS:

Our lab has only evaluated Suprado for ABW control. Data from multiple trials conducted between 2019 and 2021 suggest that the product will be an important rotational partner in management programs. We hypothesized that Suprado would work best when applied to larvae exiting the plant (3rd-4th instars) when they would be more likely to be exposed to the IGR. High levels of control (>90%) were seen when single applications of labeled rates (1 gal/ac) were applied at this time, but surprising much earlier as well (e.g. adult and early-instar peaks). Slightly lower control was observed when lower rates were applied when mature larvae (5th instar) were the dominant stage.

Laboratory studies were conducted to explain how a larvicide with minimal persistence could provide such high levels of control when applied when only adults were present. No adult mortality was observed when treated topically. However, we observed > 90% reduction in eggs, indicating a negative impact on egg development. Furthermore, when adults were allowed to oviposit on turf, removed, and then the turf was treated, upwards of 85% reductions in larvae were observed, suggesting that the product has ovicidal effects as well. These effects have been seen with novaluron and other benzyl urea IGRs in agricultural systems.

Taken together, Suprado application timing appears quite flexible, though I would caution against making applications too early (i.e. during adult migration) or too late (i.e. when mature larvae and pupae are present). Given the activity against multiple ABW stages, Suprado is a nice choice for a summer generation application when stages are asynchronous. Also, pyrethroid resistance status has not been shown to impact control, making it an important tool in resistance management programs.

Tetrino (Envu):

Active ingredients: (IRAC class = 28),

Labelled pests: ABW, billbugs, caterpillars, white grubs, chinch bugs

CHARACTERISTICS:

Tetraniliprole is the third active ingredient from the anthranilic diamide class to be registered in turfgrass. In general, the diamides have many positive attributes such as systemic uptake, lengthy residual activity, low impact on beneficial insects, and are virtually non-toxic to mammals. Solubility and binding of tetraniliprole appear to be like that of the other diamides (chlorantraniliprole (Acelepryn), cyantraniliprole (Ference)), though residual activity (half-life in soil) is less than Acelepryn and more similar to Ference. The product should persist long enough to provide preventive control of insects like white grubs and caterpillars.

STRENGTHS:

Multiple trials conducted since 2016 have shown a broad range of activity against many of our pests in the northeast. White grub control has been shown to be best when Tetrino is applied closer to egg hatch or during similar timeframes as neonicotinoids (e.g. late Juneearly July) rather than in spring as with Acelepryn applications (e.g. late AprilJune). Tetrino is also an effective rotational partner in ABW programs, with best results being achieved when applications are made either slightly before larvae exit the stem or when larvae are beginning to emerge in the soil (i.e. rhododendron full bloom). Chinch bug trials conducted in 2022 show that Tetrino is similar to other diamides and that only minimal (<20%) control can be expected.

Probably some of our most surprising trial results have been observed when we apply Tetrino as a curative or rescue treatment. The strengths of neonicotinoids and diamides are in their residual activity, which allows for flexible application timing and preventive control. Very little curative activity is seen with these actives. We have observed that Tetrino is unique to the diamides in that it provides moderate curative control of ABW and white grubs as well. Control of late-instar ABW with Tetrino exceeded that of trichlorfon (Dylox) and other diamides. Curative control of white grubs has also exceeded that of industry standards, though best results have been observed when grubs are still small (prior to September/late 2nd instar).

CONCLUSION:

It is no small miracle to see three new insecticides registered for turfgrass in one calendar year. Each of these new products are likely to have major impacts on pest management programs. It is important to recognize that none are a one-size-fits-all solution for every pest need. It is important to read and follow directions and safety precautions on labels…and consult an extension agent if you have questions regarding the proper use of these products.

PSU Student Teams Place in SFMA Competition

Congratulations to ALL PSU Student Competition teams, for recognition earned at the 2023 Sports Field Management Association’s Conference in Salt Lake City!

A WINNING COMBINATION FOR SPRING

CHARGE UP YOUR FERTILITY PROGRAM

County Fertilizer Company is well-known for biostimulants. Our unmatched cost-to-performance values extend beyond these products with N-Charge™ 28% sustained release nitrogen and GreeneCharge™ 26% with minors. These powerful nitrogen formulas standing alone or blended with our biostimulants will charge up your fertility program.

High Performance Plant Nutrients

Fertilizers ▪ Specialty Products

Soil Amendments ▪ Custom Blends

Our bio-based fertilizers & specialty fertility products are blended to feed plants, improve soil fertility and build topsoil.

1st Place Winning Team, 2-year Program Division

to

2nd Place Winning Team (lost tie-breaker), 4-year Program Division

From left

right; Nicholas Risso, Garrett Taylor, Jacob Irvin, Matthew Hamel.

From left to right; Hunter Shaw, Nate Moore, Bill Hilderhoff, Zack Newsome.

Dr. McNitt Looks Back on 30 Years in Turf Science

Looking back over a 30-year career in Turf Science at Penn State University, Dr. Andrew McNitt says that he has lived by one watchword: “There are no missteps. Stay open to opportunity!” As the Director of Penn State’s Center for Sports Surface Research, Dr. McNitt conducts research on athletic field surfaces and golf green construction and maintenance. He is also Program Coordinator for the fouryear turfgrass science major, administering the Certificate, Associate, Bachelor’s, and Master’s Programs offered through Penn State’s World Campus Online Learning. He was inducted into Penn State University’s College of Agricultural Sciences Academy of Teaching Excellence in 2010. Dr. McNitt is also co-owner of a soil testing service and is currently the technical adviser to the NFL Groundskeepers Organization.

No Missteps

True to his own motto, Andrew McNitt’s career path in Turf Science was a roundabout one. His first interest in small fruit horticulture led him to work on a strawberry farm, hoping to gain experience he could use in building his own fruit farm. However, a severe hailstorm at the beginning of his first season destroyed the crop and diverted his path to Cooperative Extension. Later, a job offer from Philadelphia County Extension took him out of his rural comfort zone and into a world of city politics and composting sewage sludge to improve urban athletic fields. An MA and a PhD later, he was doing research at Penn State with mentors Dr. Waddington and Dr. Landschoot and was deeply involved in the academic side of Turf Science.

At the same time as he was building his academic career, Dr. McNitt was able to fulfill a lifelong goal: to work with the NFL. Soil testing work in Cleveland had led to requests for sod and drainage advice from Philadelphia, Heinz Field, and PNC Park. In 2006, Tony Leonard in Philadelphia formed the NFL

Groundskeepers Organization and invited Dr. McNitt to serve as a technical advisor. In that role, he has also been instrumental in developing the standards for the NFL Field Certification program using a roster of independent inspectors.

When asked what has given him the most satisfaction in his career, his answer was immediate: “Watching my students succeed.” He said that as he became established in his own career over the years, he became more and more aware of Penn State’s unique culture of care for students’ success, even long after graduation. It helped him when he was finding his way as a recent graduate and new Extension Agent and he, in turn, has done his best to make sure his students benefit from the same kind of attention and support. “KAFMO is a great outreach tool for that purpose,” he notes. “It gives students the opportunity to interact with turf professionals from all over the country and it allows for a strong connection between the academic side and the hands-on side of the profession.”

KAFMO’s Role

Dr. McNitt and KAFMO grew up together professionally, so to speak. He watched Don Fowler, his son Jeff, and Dan Douglas take the idea of a professional support organization and build it into what he calls the best SFMA chapter in the country. When he was developing new projects, he was often able to turn to KAFMO to provide the initial seed funding which attracted matching funds for research. And he says that some of his best research ideas have come from KAFMO practitioners’ questions. A frequent speaker at KAFMO events, he values the friendships he has made over the years.

In answer to the question what he thinks KAFMO should focus on in the near future, he is emphatic: “The next generation!” Other goals, like honing efficiency, documenting best practices, and developing showcase fields to attract

support and funds are worthy, but they take second place to cultivating the next generation of Turf Science professionals. Succession planning is important not just for leadership roles but for the health of the whole organization. He recalls other successful organizations which lost their strong foundations and had to be rebuilt when all the founders retired at the same time – and some of KAFMO’s strongest founders are approaching retirement, he points out. Luckily, the Penn State tradition of involving students and graduates early and often helps and KAFMO is proactively working to raise awareness and interest in turf science as early as at the high school level.

Dream Job

Dr. McNitt also offers his perspective to young people entering the field. “While you are young, try as many different things as you can,” he advises. “Don’t be afraid to relocate. Your first job is probably not going to be your dream job, but if you don’t leave your comfort zone, you’ll never know what your dream job could turn out to be!” So many young people try to map out a whole career before they even start, he says. But there will always be bumps in the road – and he remembers that his first disappointing job on the strawberry farm is what led him down a new and rewarding path. “There are no missteps if you stay open to opportunity.”

Jeff Fowler sums it up when he says, “Dr. McNitt has had an incredible impact on KAFMO and on the turf industry in general. His knowledge, research, and very practical teaching approach will be missed in the industry.” Dr. McNitt will be retiring from Penn State at the end of August 2023, but the industry has not yet seen the last of him, he says. His other proudest accomplishment and dream role, his connection with the NFL, will continue. He laughs when he talks about his wife’s advice on the matter: “Stay on at Penn State and retire from the NFL!” He agrees that if he wanted a peaceful and stress-free retirement, that would be the way to go. Clearly, he is not yet ready for that!

DIGITAL MARKETPLACE: Scan the QR Code to learn more about this company.

V. Halyard – Storylounge Photo