Virginia Turfgrass Journal - January / February 2011

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:52 PM

Page 1

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:53 PM

Page 2

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:53 PM

Page 3

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:53 PM

Page 4

Journal of the Virginia Turfgrass Council | January/February 2011

16

12 12 Cover Story

The Chesapeake Bay Protection and Restoration Initiative (Part 1) 16 Feature Story

24 DEPARTMENTS 6 Director’s Corner from Tom Tracy, Ph.D.

8 Editor’s Perspective from Mark Vaughn, CGCS

10 VTF Report from Betty Parker

Now’s the Time to “Spring” into Athletic-Field Management

28 Industry News

24 Applied Research

30 Turfgrass Calendar

March Madness: It’s the Best of Times and the Worst of Times on Golf Courses

4 | VIRGINIA TURFGRASS JOURNAL January/February 2011 www.vaturf.org

30 Index of Advertisers

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:53 PM

Page 5

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:53 PM

Page 6

Director’s Corner

Yes, One Person Can Make a Real Difference for All of Us Tom Tracy, Ph.D. VTC Executive Director

P

eriodically, I devote this column to individuals who make the VTC possible.

Because of space limits, I am able to highlight only one or two persons at a time. If space were not an issue, a journal of 70 pages would not be enough to discuss volunteers who tirelessly work behind the scenes. In this issue, I will highlight a member of our board of directors who has made great strides in educating decisionmakers about the value of our industry.

Leaders of other trade associations in Virginia and in other states are amazed at the services the VTC is able to provide for our members. Their amazement heightens when they realize that the bulk of our accomplishments is done by volunteers. A dedicated board of directors and selfless committee members who donate countless hours enable the VTC to establish itself as a strong voice for the industry. We conduct recertification programs, we educate elected officials about the value of turfgrass, we work with state agencies that enact policies affecting our industry, we produce the annual conference and tradeshow, we work closely with Virginia Tech to produce educational programs, we produce a research golf tournament that nets significant dollars for turfgrass research, and the list of our services for the industry continues. I am even getting appeals from major newspapers to give them facts about turfgrass (okay, I received only two requests for information — but that is two more than we had last year).

Gil Grattan of Virginia Green Lawn Care joined the VTC board last January. He hit the ground running and has made a tremendous contribution to the VTC’s endeavor to educate decision-makers about the value of turfgrass. Here are just five of the many outreaches that have happened under his helm in just two months (October and November).

1. We worked with a printer and marketing person in Williamsburg to develop a top-notch information piece. This document shows the economics of turf in Virginia, the makeup of our profession, the size of our industry and the environmental benefits of turfgrass.

2. We produced five-pound bags of grass seed (fescue). These bags are labeled with the VTC logo and contain seeding instructions on the back panel. On February 10, 2011, with the help of the Agribusiness Council, we will distribute these bags to all the legislators on Capitol Hill.

3. Cutler Robinson, Rick Viancour, Gil Grattan, John Crain and I ate dinner with Senator Marsden in Virginia Beach. The next day, Frank Flannagan, Jeremy Beech and the Senator played golf at Bayville.

4. Sam Coggin, Gil Grattan and I went to Montross and met with Senator Stuart.

5. David Smith, Ron Barley and Gil Grattan met with Delegate Bobby Orrock at his office in Fredericksburg.

The future of the industry and the VTC is very bright because of Gil’s tireless endeavors. We are all honored to have him on the board of directors. c

6 | VIRGINIA TURFGRASS JOURNAL January/February 2011 www.vaturf.org

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:53 PM

Page 7

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:53 PM

Page 8

Editor’s Perspective

Did You Know This about F’Burg?

Mark Vaughn, CGCS Virginia Turfgrass Journal Editor

Well,

well, well. As the leaves floateth gently down from the trees, the bermudagrass doth turn that lovely shade of cream and my blood pressure returneth to 120/80, one doth sense the corners of one’s mouth turning heavenward rather than toward the pit below us. Yes, the year of our Lord 2010 was quite the load of old pants, now wasn’t it? One can’t think of a better way to tell it “sod off!” than to head to that lovely hamlet of old England, located in the State/Commonwealth named for the Virgin Queen of England (Elizabeth I), just off the old plank road.

Of course, I speak of jolly old Fredericksburg. Yes, yes, I hear there may be a conference of some type taking place during the days of January 17–20, with much pontification and gnashing of teeth regarding grass types, climate change, water conservation, fertility rates and the like. Not unlike the pages that normally follow in this publication.

How sad would it be, though, to travel to a destination and not explore the nuances that make it more than a red raindrop on Google maps? Would you blindly travel to Minnesota and feel the sting of regret forever by not making it to Darwin for the big ball of twine? Could you forgive yourself for going to D.C. and not checking out the lobbyists panhandling on K Street? Not to worry… allow this page to be your own little Frommer’s guide to F’burg. For example…

Did you know that people cannot figure out if F’burg is a red or a white flag? Is it in NOVA? Just on the outside of NOVA? You tell me. And oh, by the way, can you tell me where the front of the green stops and the middle of the green starts?

Precisely why I don’t use colored flags.

You probably know that many of the streets in the beautiful old downtown area are named for British royalty. But, did you know the famous ice-cream joint in town is also named for Carl, the 8th Duke of Devonshire?

The Washington family had its hands all up in F’burg history. Ol’ GW’s family lived just across the Rappahannock, and his mother eventually moved into town and had a university named for her. But, did you know that his sister was quite the tinkerer and responsible for starting the appliance line at Sears? Don’t believe me? Make sure you visit her home, KENMORE, during your visit.

Another visionary, who would sketch out the plans for the new arena at UVA before his death, also called F’burg home. I speak, of course, of that great naval hero… John Paul Jones.

One of the anthems of the 1960s was written by the Animals after a drunken night of carousing in F’burg. Oh sure, the song makes reference to New Orleans, but writers always “lay it between the lines” to throw “the man” off. Besides, who wants to be overrun by tourists? Make sure you check out the Rising Sun Tavern while you’re in town.

Did you realize that even the hysterically commercial district that houses the conference center and every possible retail chain in America is historical in nature?

That’s right… LONG before Frederick Law Olmstead sketched out the bucolic one in NYC, the visionary had plans for a thriving mega shopping area (just off a yet-to-be-built major highway) that he would christen “Central Park.”

And finally, for Cutler Robinson and all you other guitar heroes out there, the power chord of modern guitar was developed in F’burg in 1958 by Link Wray during his first improvisation of the instrumental piece “Rumble.”

All of the above factoids can be confirmed on that wonderful reference site “Wikipedia.” See you in Fredericksburg! c

8 | VIRGINIA TURFGRASS JOURNAL January/February 2011 www.vaturf.org

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:53 PM

Virginia Turfgrass Journal is the official publication of The Virginia Turfgrass Council P.O. Box 5989 Virginia Beach, VA 23471 Office: (757) 464-1004 Fax: (757) 282-2693 vaturf@verizon.net PUBLISHED BY Leading Edge Communications, LLC 206 Bridge Street Franklin, Tennessee 37064 (615) 790-3718 Fax: (615) 794-4524 Email: info@leadingedgecommunications.com EDITOR Mark Vaughn, CGCS VTC OFFICERS President Melissa Reynolds Dura Turf Service Corp.

(804) 233-4972 Vice President Frank Flannagan Belmont Golf Course (804) 501-5993 Treasurer Brian Vincel, CGCS Spring Creek Golf Club (434) 566-2580 Past President Rick Viancour, CGCS Golden Horseshoe Golf Club (757) 220-7489 VTC DIRECTORS Patrick Connelly Gil Grattan Vince Henderson Jeff Holliday, CGCS Rick Owens, CGCS Steve Slominski Steve Smith VTC ADVISORY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD Mike Goatley, Ph.D. (Chair) Shawn Askew, Ph.D. Jeffrey Derr, Ph.D. Erik Ervin, Ph.D. Rajandra Waghray, Ph.D. Rod Youngman, Ph.D. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/ DIRECTOR OF PROGRAMS Tom Tracy, Ph.D. (757) 681-6065 VIRGINIA TURFGRASS FOUNDATION Betty Parker (757) 574-9061

Page 9

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:53 PM

Page 10

VTF Report

What We Do with

Your Money

Betty Parker VTF Manager

you ever wondered what the Virginia Turfgrass Foundation does with all the money we raise from industry supporters like you? This year, the VTF endorsed $72,741 in turf research for Virginia. Come and check it out at this year’s annual turfgrass conference in Fredericksburg, January 17–20. Look for our VTF-sponsored signs at the sessions below (visit www.turfconference.org for a complete listing of educational sessions and activities), and please take one of our brochures and learn more about us. c

Have

TUESDAY, JANUARY 18, 2011 Session One 8:15 a.m. – 9:00 a.m.

Organic Matter Dilution: Project at Independence Erik Ervin, Ph.D., Virginia Tech Everyday Tips to Manage Lawn Diseases David McCall, Virginia Tech

Session Three 10:15 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.

Overseeding Bermudagrass Jeff Derr, Ph.D., and Adam Nichols, Virginia Tech Capitalizing on the Strengths of Bermudagrass Mike Goatley Jr., Ph.D., Virginia Tech

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 19, 2011

Session Two 9:15 a.m. – 10:00 a.m. a. Killing the Last 10%: New Techniques for Poa Control on Putting Greens b. A Taste of the Orient: New Herbicides on the Way For Putting Greens c. Dealing with Moss on Greens Shawn Askew, Ph.D., Virginia Tech Masked Chafer Research and Annual Bluegrass Weevil Update Rod Youngman, Ph.D., Virginia Tech

CONCURRENT EDUCATIONAL TRACKS 2:30 p.m. – 5:15 p.m.

Yellow Nutsedge Management in Lawns and Ornamental Beds Jeff Derr, Ph.D., Virginia Tech Impact of Mowing and Fertilization on Brown Patch and Weed Encroachment in Tall Fescue Matt Cutulle, Virginia Tech Sports Track MSMA Update Shawn Askew, Ph.D., Virginia Tech Sod Track MSMA Update Shawn Askew, Ph.D., Virginia Tech Impact of Mowing and Fertilization on Brown Patch and Weed Encroachment in Tall Fescue Matt Cutulle, Virginia Tech

10 | VIRGINIA TURFGRASS JOURNAL January/February 2011 www.vaturf.org

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:53 PM

Page 11

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:53 PM

Page 12

Cover Story

12 | VIRGINIA TURFGRASS JOURNAL January/February 2011 www.vaturf.org

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:53 PM

Page 13

Cover Stor y continued

By Thomas R. Turner, Ph.D., The University of Maryland

May 12, 2009, President Barack Obama signed the executive order 13508 regarding “Chesapeake Bay Protection and Restoration.” In the preamble to this document, the problem is stated as follows: “Despite significant efforts by Federal, State, and local governments and other interested parties, water pollution in the Chesapeake Bay prevents the attainment of existing State water-quality standards and the “fishable and swimmable” goals of the Clean Water Act. At the current level and scope of pollution control within the Chesapeake Bay’s watershed, restoration of the Chesapeake Bay is not expected for many years. The pollutants that are largely responsible for pollution of the Chesapeake Bay are nutrients, in the form of nitrogen and phosphorus, and sediment. These pollutants come from many sources, including sewagetreatment plants, city streets, development sites, agricultural operations, and deposition from the air onto the waters of the Chesapeake Bay and the lands of the watershed.”

As required by the executive order, the Environmental Protection Agency produced a guidelines document (released March 15, 2010) for the implementation of this executive order, entitled “Chesapeake Bay Executive Order Section 502 Guidance,” which was available for public review. Within this document, Chapter 3 controlling urban runoff within the watershed was specifically addressed. Within this chapter, approximately 27 pages (Section 5, pages 125–152) were devoted to turf management. This chapter provides guidance on recommended turfgrass-management practices that can be used to reduce the impacts of developed and developing areas on water quality. While the turfgrass industry has always commended and supported efforts to restore the health of the Bay, the devil is in the details.

Those of us directly involved in turfgrass management have believed, based on extensive research, that our industry is part of the solution to the return of the Chesapeake Bay’s health. The authors of this document made it clear, however, that they believe that turfgrass is an important contributor to the Bay’s problems, while admitting in a subsequent document that “the EPA has not yet conducted the modeling necessary to estimate (as EPA has done with respect to some other source categories such as agriculture)

On

Journal of the Virginia Turfgrass Council

| 13

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:54 PM

Page 14

Cover Stor y continued

the amount of N applied to turf that actually reaches the Chesapeake Bay through runoff or groundwater.”

Furthermore, the authors based their positions on: • articles or quotations that are, in effect, opinion pieces, not documented science or referenced publications • publications that are of highly questionable methods and/or conclusions, or in fact may be misinterpretations of existing research • extrapolation of numbers obtained in other parts of the country that do not bear any relation to practices actually used in the Chesapeake Bay region or large parts of the region At the same time, the authors ignore and fail to acknowledge the numerous refereed scientific publications that show the minimal effects or positive influences of properly managed turfgrass on the primary environmental concerns regarding the Bay — nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) pollution. For example, a major study in this region, the “Baltimore Ecosystem Study” (BES), was initiated with the assumption that lawns were a major source on N movement into streams that are part of the Chesapeake Bay watershed. This large study investigates and monitors inputs and hydrologic outputs of nutrients and influences on water quality in this region, including lawns.

Interestingly, and importantly, the 2010 “BES LongTerm Stream and Watershed Study Update – Overview” stated the following: 1. Urban and suburban watersheds consistently have nitrate concentrations that are higher than forested watersheds, but lower than agricultural watersheds (my note: lawns are not implicated as the source of nitrates from these urban and suburban areas).

2. Suburban watershed input/output budgets for N have shown surprisingly high retention, which has led to detailed analysis of sources and sinks in these watersheds: • Home lawns, thought to be major sources of N in suburban watersheds, have more complex coupled carbon and N dynamics than previously thought and are likely the site of much N retention.

• Riparian zones, thought to be an important sink for N in many watersheds, have turned out to be N sources in urban watersheds due to hydrologic changes that disconnect streams from their surrounding landscape.

• In-stream retention, thought to be an important sink for N in forested watersheds, is reduced by structural degradation caused by urban runoff.

3. Urban and suburban streams are strongly affected by road-salting activities, leading to high levels of chloride in streams.

4. Improvements to sanitary sewer infrastructure appear to result in major improvements in water quality.

In reviewing this BES research overview, it appears that many problems associated with urban and suburban areas, such as runoff from impervious surfaces and nonturf areas, and problems with the sewer infrastructure are major problems regarding the health of the Bay, but lawns are not. It would appear that the authors of the Guidelines publication were either unaware of this information or other such research projects or have ignored them in this publication.

The authors of this document have also taken it upon themselves to go beyond the long-acknowledged problems with the health of the Bay. Pesticide applications, energy use, air quality and carbon dioxide issues regarding turfgrass are discussed, with the implication that these are of major importance to the health of the Bay. However, since the mid 1990s, concerns from most parties interested in the Bay have been almost entirely focused on the movement of N and P into the Bay and the subsequent detrimental effects these nutrients cause.

Efforts to clean up the Bay are directed at major reductions in the N and P concentrations. Agricultural, soil erosion, septic systems, leakage from urban and suburban sewage systems, sewage treatment and runoff from impervious surfaces have all been implicated as the major sources of N and P pollution of the Bay. Runoff or leaching of these nutrients from turfgrass areas have not been shown to be a major contributor to the problems of the Bay, nor have pesticide applications or energy use been implicated. Turfgrass systems have been shown to be a net sink for carbon, not a net producer of carbon dioxide.

After a period of public review and responses from individuals and groups such as the National Turfgrass Federation that detailed some of the problems with the original guidelines document, revisions were made, and a final publication titled “Guidance for Federal Land Management in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed” was made available on May 10, 2010.

Turfgrass management is addressed directly in Chapter 3, Section 5, pages 145–208 (link www.epa. gov/nps/chesbay502/). This publication is much improved over the initial guidelines publication, although there are still some problems, which I will address in a future article.

In some respects, it appears that the turfgrass industry has become a victim of its own success. The acreage of lawns in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed by any estimation is large and is listed in this publication as approximately 3.8 million acres. The authors of this document have a difficult job. They must address all potential sources of N and P pollution of the Bay. However, the authors have seemingly still taken the following line of reasoning in addressing turfgrass: 1. There is a large acreage of turf in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed.

2. Turfgrass has management inputs.

14 | VIRGINIA TURFGRASS JOURNAL January/February 2011 www.vaturf.org

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:54 PM

Page 15

Cover Stor y continued

3. Management inputs have a negative influence on water quality or the environment in general.

4. Thus, turfgrass should receive reduced inputs in most situations or be converted to other plant systems unless turfgrass is absolutely necessary for the intended use of the site.

However, there is no published, peer-reviewed research in the scientific journals that would support the notion that water quality in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed will be improved by reducing turfgrass acreage, by changing management practices from what is currently recommended by the state turfgrass Extension specialists or by conversion of turf to other vegetative systems.

Much research is currently ongoing at the University of Maryland Paint Branch Turfgrass Research Facility, evaluating species and cultivars requiring fewer inputs and investigating management programs that require reduced inputs while maintaining good turfgrass quality. These studies are performed with the intent of reducing the costs of maintenance and to simplify management for the homeowner while maintaining the environmental benefits of healthy turf.

Finally, the publication “Guidance for Federal Land Management in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed” is

now ostensibly directed primarily at management of turfgrass on federal properties. However, it is clear that its guidance is intended for all lawn turf in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. Indeed, the final implementation measure (U-28) in the turfgrass section is to: “Develop and implement ongoing public education and outreach programs for Bay-friendly lawn, landscape, and turf management. Programs should target behavior change and promote the adoption of water quality-friendly practices by increasing awareness, promoting appropriate behaviors and actions, providing training and incentives. Impact and effectiveness evaluation should be incorporated into such outreach and education programs.”

It is going to be imperative that the turfgrass industry, turfgrass specialists and turfgrass researchers continue to provide constructive input in this implementation process.

In subsequent articles, I will address in more detail the management and implementation recommendations outlined in the “Guidance for Federal Land Management in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed” publication, and how they relate to current research and to current University of Maryland recommendations. c

Journal of the Virginia Turfgrass Council

| 15

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:54 PM

Page 16

Feature Story

16 | VIRGINIA TURFGRASS JOURNAL January/February 2011 www.vaturf.org

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:54 PM

Page 17

Feature Stor y continued

By Mike Goatley, Ph.D., Extension Turfgrass Specialist, Virginia Tech

N

umerous winter-specific management tips designed to optimize field quality and safety were presented in the November/December 2010 issue of the Virginia Turfgrass Journal.

As a follow-up to that article, here are some springspecific tips to employ as traffic returns to game fields.

Spring fertility For both cool- and warm-season fields, the prime consideration in nitrogen (N) fertilization rate and timing is to promote balanced growth between shoot and root systems. Excessive N most often results in a tremendous surge of shoot growth at the expense of the root system, and it is the root system that will serve as the foundation for ensuring your turf performs as desired later in the season.

On cool-season fields (bluegrass, ryegrass or fescue) or ryegrass-overseeded bermudagrass fields, a good rule of thumb is to initiate the spring N fertility program after mowing the grass for the first time of the year.

Having to mow is a good indication that temperatures for sustained growth have arrived and that fertilizer use will be optimized.

For non-overseeded bermudagrass fields, wait until the turf has almost completely greened before initiating N fertilization. One of the worst things that can happen to a bermudagrass field is to encourage early spring growth with supplemental N and then receive a late freeze that blights the recently emerged leaves. This scenario results in a plant that has expended most of its stored food reserves for spring greening, and it sometimes does not have enough food reserves to initiate sufficient growth for a second time. Whenever possible, protect bermudagrass fields that have or are almost completely greened with a winter blanket during these late cold snaps.

Limit N application levels to no more than 1 pound of water-soluble N per 1,000 square feet every 4 weeks as the turf resumes growth. If possible, splitting the N treatment into 2 or 3 applications across the 4-week period will further improve N use efficiency. Coolseason fields will likely need only 1 to 1.5 lbs. N/1,000 ft2 total during the spring; remember that fall is the preferred time to aggressively fertilize cool-season turf.

Bermudagrass N fertilization continues on a regular basis for the remainder of the spring and summer months, using a level of 1 pound of N/1,000 ft2 every 4 weeks as a standard application guideline. This level and frequency are essential to maintain desirable turf density when the fields are heavily trafficked, but if the turf receives only limited use over the summer months, then the frequency and rate can be reduced in order to reduce bermudagrass mowing requirement.

Cultural programs Mowing Are you satisfied with the results of your mowing program over the past few years? There is nothing more basic to turf success than proper mowing. There is also likely nothing that is mismanaged any more than mowing.

Be sure to sharpen and properly adjust the mower blades before you enter the spring cutting season, and choose a reasonable cutting height that considers (a) the grass being grown, (b) the intensity of use on the field and (c) the ability to maintain the “1/3rd rule” in mowing (that is, never remove more than one-third of the leaf blade at any cutting event). Start out cool-season fields in spring by mowing on the lower side of their recommended cutting range; this will help improve turf density, as it encourages more lateral growth. Remember, though, as a rule of thumb, most fields will wear better long term if the turf is mowed on the higher side of its recommended range. It is especially important to raise coolseason cutting heights before summer stress arrives.

Similar to the strategy on cool-season fields, for bermudagrass I subscribe to a “build it from the ground up” philosophy in mowing as well. After spring greening is complete, mow bermudagrass at the lower end of your acceptable cutting-height range in order to increase density, but then gradually raise the height during the late spring and summer months to improve their wear tolerance. It’s really not possible to provide a one-sizefits-all recommendation on just what these cutting heights should be because the heights vary for the situation.

You can never go wrong, though, making slight inseason adjustments to cutting heights that improve the turf’s ability to withstand traffic AND survive environmental extremes.

Photo 1. Periodic core aeration of athletic fields is essential to relieve the physical compaction of heavily trafficked soils. (Photo courtesy of Ben Ewing) Journal of the Virginia Turfgrass Council

| 17

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:54 PM

Page 18

Feature Stor y continued

Photo 2. Late-winter rolling of an athletic field is often the only way to ensure a smooth, safe playing surface. (Photo courtesy of Jason Bowers)

Aerating Spring aeration is another necessary maintenance strategy that is often difficult to schedule as field use increases (Photo 1). However, its importance cannot be overstated as a component of a seasonal management plan intent on delivering quality, safe athletic fields.

Work with your administrators, coaches and players on designating a time for the required aeration events.

For some field-use situations, the only acceptable aeration approach is with minimally disruptive tools such as the use of solid tines on a traditional pistonaction coring machine or an “aeravator,� etc. Both tools provide beneficial results, but it is still important to build any seasonal aeration program around a hollowtine coring or drilling event that provides the most improvement in soil physical properties possible. With the flush of spring growth anticipated on cool-season fields, an early to mid-spring aeration event is often barely noticed by field users simply because the grass is growing so fast. For bermudagrass fields, wait until the turf has completely greened and is actively growing (late spring for most of this area) to initiate an aggressive aeration program. When timed properly, field recovery from spring aeration events can be further accelerated with appropriate N fertilization programs.

Avoid either saturated or powder-dry soils when aerating; core your field when the soil is slightly moist. On soils high in clay content, it is ideal to remove the cores, although this is often either cost- or labor-prohibitive for most native-soil field managers.

The cores can still be put to work on the field by allowing them to dry and then dragging them back into the soil with a drag-mat.

application extends the effectiveness of core-aeration holes and slowly changes rootzone soil texture to one that provides better drainage and resistance to compaction.

(The improvements from sand topdressing will not be quickly realized, but they will become evident over 3 to 4 years.) Dragging the topdressing and/or cores across the field will also help level the playing surface and fill divots.

If managing a native-soil field, don’t forget the benefits available from an application of compost made in conjunction with an aeration event. As little as 0.25" depth of compost applied once a year can make a huge difference in improving the physical and chemical properties of native soils.

Rolling There is one more practice in sports-turf maintenance that sounds contrary to the importance just given to aerating the turf: rolling (Photo 2). Many times, field playability and safety are compromised by the frost heave of the soil due to the constant wetting, freezing and drying of the soil over the winter months. Most heavy-textured native soils have a significant amount of frost heave over the winter, and the many elevated pockets of soil on the field result in poor playability and a potential safety hazard for footing or ball bounce for any spring sport. A roller is often one of the best tools available to smooth the soil surface and provide a safe and true playing surface.

Avoid using a roller on saturated soils as it can do more harm than good; try to roll when the soil is slightly moist to dry. Of course, the surface compaction from rolling should be addressed later by the previously detailed hollow-tine core aeration strategies.

Topdressing

Spring seeding

Another great management tool is topdressing with sand, even on native-soil fields. On sand-based fields, apply a similar size and composition sand to the existing field. On heavier-textured native-soil fields, the rule of thumb is to apply soil particles larger than the existing soil particles.

Topdressing applications of 0.25" to 0.38" depth of medium to coarse sand topdressing are standard. This

On cool-season fields, fall-established turfgrasses are generally much stronger than those established in the spring, as they have a much more mature root and shoot system prior to the first serious encounters with summer pests and environmental-stress conditions. However, under heavy traffic conditions, it is often necessary to continue to seed these fields even during periods of use.

18 | VIRGINIA TURFGRASS JOURNAL January/February 2011 www.vaturf.org

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:54 PM

Page 19

The strategy being implemented with significant success on heavily trafficked cool-season fields is termed “seed banking,” where seed is applied throughout the playing season regardless of time of year. The approach works for rapidly germinating grasses such as tall fescue and perennial ryegrass, but it does not work well with slow-establishing grasses like Kentucky bluegrass. In premise, it should also work with seeded bermudagrass, but since bermudagrass has the ability to rapidly creep from either rhizomes or stolons, it is not as important of a management strategy.

The concept in “seed banking” with fescues and ryegrasses is that some seed will germinate and will be destroyed by foot traffic, some will germinate and persist, and some seed will lay dormant and germinate at a later date (i.e., the seed in the “bank”). Grass seed is applied only to the heaviest-trafficked areas, and it is planted on a 1- to 2week interval at rates of 5 to 10 pounds per 1,000 ft2 throughout the playing season. The higher seeding rates are used to offset the loss of turfgrass seedlings from heavy foot traffic. Many managers apply the seed just before events to allow the cleats to work the seed into the soil.

Remember, this approach is intended to be applied only to the highest traffic areas, and it is no guarantee of high playing quality for the long term. However the “seed bank” approach provides the potential to maintain some green cover during the use season, and it provides the potential for turf recovery over an extended time period.

One way to put seeded bermudagrasses to work for you in a nontraditional manner is by dormant seeding.

University of Arkansas researchers have reported that dormant seeding of bermudagrass can accelerate spring bermudagrass establishment by six to nine weeks. Seed applied as early as mid-February to mid-March (rather than at standard seeding dates of mid-May) resulted in almost complete coverage by mid-June; at this time, the standard May-seeded turf had just started to complete germination and spread.

Journal of the Virginia Turfgrass Council

| 19

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:54 PM

Page 20

Feature Stor y continued

used for crabgrass control will also kill germinating turfgrass seedlings. Be sure to consider the ramifications of spring weed-control programs when you’re also attempting to improve field quality through springseeding events. In some cases, the only way to restore desirable turf density is to install sod in these herbicidetreated soils.

Getting the most use out of fields

Photo 3. Multiple field-marking lines make this artificial turf a truly multi-use surface. (Photo courtesy of Nick McKenna)

This technique has great potential to work well on low-traffic bermudagrass fields in the spring, but much of the young seedlings will likely be removed by heavy traffic before they have time to mature. Still, this strategy is worth exploring on the most heavily trafficked areas of bermudagrass fields, and it is certainly beneficial if the field receives no to little traffic during the later spring to early summer months.

One final point regarding spring seeding concerns the strategy you choose for summer weed control.

Almost all standard preemergent herbicides that are

Managing athletic fields requires a great deal of coordination between administrators, coaches and field managers. The first step in controlling traffic on an athletic field is to educate the users of the facility as to the advantages of spreading the wear, especially during periods when turf growth is limited. Even when employing the strategies detailed here, the ideal management program for maintaining and/or restoring desirable field playing conditions is to control traffic so as to keep acceptable turf density.

Keep off wet fields Restrict field use when soils are excessively wet. That certainly sounds easy, but this requires buy-in by all parties. There is no quicker way to destroy a season’s worth of efforts in developing a high-quality playing surface than to play on the turf when the soil is too

20 | VIRGINIA TURFGRASS JOURNAL January/February 2011 www.vaturf.org

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:54 PM

Page 21

Feature Stor y continued

wet. About the only tool a sports turf manager has at his disposal (other than a locked gate!) is a camera with which to document the damage from using a wet field. This will always be an ongoing educational process.

Game fields vs. practice fields Spatial and budgetary constraints often do not allow for both game and practice fields. However, if you factor in how often a natural-grass athletic field is occupied for multi-sport uses, varsity, junior varsity, and grade school teams (both practices and games), physical education classes, band practice and other events, it is easy to understand why many facilities have opted to install artificial fields as an alternative sportsfield system.

For those fortunate to have practice fields, it is important to use rotations.

Coaches must make a conscious effort to regularly rotate drills around both game and practice fields in order to maintain desirable turf density for playability and safety. Field safety should never be compromised on practice fields simply because the games are not played there.

One technique to optimize field-use potential — and can be used on both natural grass and artificial fields — is to distribute play by the use of differentcolored marking paints to distinguish the boundaries of various sports (Photo 3). This strategy can also be applied on fields that support both practice and game events; simply use differentcolored marking paints to differentiate between practice and game fields.

Another useful strategy for spreading wear patterns is to periodically rotate the field orientation for practice. Rather than marking a single traditional “game field” that runs north to south, try marking two “short field” practice layouts that run from east to west on the same field area. While this method may require portable goals/goal posts and the cooperation of coaches, it is well worth the effort to prevent excessive wear on high-traffic areas of the field. This strategy can further be improved by rotating among different practice areas and allowing for “rest periods” of two to four weeks (or whatever you can achieve!) for turf recovery. Use the off-season to meet with coaches and administrators to discuss field-usage characteristics and strategies, and educate them on the advantages of rotating field-use patterns.

Summary None of the strategies presented are foolproof, but with careful planning, attention to detail and a little extra effort during the off-season, your job will be that much easier next season. Remember, the ultimate goal of a truly successful sports-turf manager should be more than delivering a greatlooking field. A quality, safe playing surface that meets the needs of both the sport and the athletes is always the most important consideration. c

Journal of the Virginia Turfgrass Council

| 21

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:54 PM

Page 22

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:54 PM

Page 23

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:54 PM

Page 24

Applied Research

By Chris Hartwiger and Patrick O’Brien, USGA Green Section

March

Madness will soon be upon us. Football season is long gone. The NCAA “Big Dance” will be underway. And it will not be long before the world’s best players are taking dead aim at an island green and, a few weeks later, then trying to win the year’s first major championship. These rites of passage cause even the most casual golfer to dust off the clubs, clean the grips and pop a fresh set of spikes (or, in today’s world, spikeless alternatives) into their golf shoes and head to the golf course.

For golf course superintendents, March Madness can be the best of times or the worst of times. And the funny thing about March Madness in the transition zone is that one superintendent can be mired in the worst of times, while his neighbor is enjoying the best of times. This is not a cruel twist of fate. Instead, it is expected, and it occurs for a reason.

In this article, we will examine several maintenance strategies that dramatically influence golfer attitudes during March Madness. We will also make an attempt to offer guidance for when these issues arise.

Fairway overseeding: Beauty or the Beast?

Our office receives many questions about overseeding. Are these questions asked in June, August,

or October? No. Are they asked during March Madness? Absolutely, and there is a simple reason why it occurs every year. There is no doubt that compared to thriving, gorgeous perennial ryegrass, a non-overseeded bermudagrass fairway, tee or rough looks like the homeliest, sickest nag anyone has ever seen. Triple the despair if winter annual or grassy weeds are thriving.

The solution is simple then, isn’t it? Overseed next year, and enjoy the best of times. Before making that leap, be sure to read the next paragraph.

To sort through the confusion of the overseeding/no-overseeding dilemma, let us start with an understanding of why golf courses overseed or do not overseed. The majority of golf courses that overseed do so because they place more of a

24 | VIRGINIA TURFGRASS JOURNAL January/February 2011 www.vaturf.org

premium on what the golf course looks like with mature overseeding and less on how the golf course plays.

A quality overseeding program does not happen accidentally, and overseeding has direct and indirect costs. Overseeding requirements such as seed, labor, fertilizer, water, different herbicides, equipment wear and tear, etc., are direct costs.

These are easy to calculate.

Indirect costs are more difficult to estimate. For example, if green grass attracts golfers in the spring, what is the cost in revenue if the golf course experiences turf decline during a bad transition in the summer? What is the cost in extra sod, fertilizer, water and labor to grow in weak bermudagrass turf after a bad transition? What is the cost in terms of dollars and enjoyment when the overseeding establishment ruins the best time of year, the fall, for bermudagrass fairways?

What is the cost when, not if, Poa annua becomes a larger issue in the putting greens? These indirect costs are hard to estimate, but make no mistake — they are real costs.

The majority of golf courses in the Southeast region do not overseed bermudagrass areas, and they do so for a specific set of reasons: • Playability throughout the entire year is valued more than course appearance in

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:55 PM

Page 25

Applied Research continued

Despite many protests to the contrary, core aeration is performed every spring on virtually all bentgrass putting greens in the Southeast.

late winter or early spring.

Dormant bermudagrass is a fine playing surface. It can be kept at a high level of quality all winter if cart traffic is restricted to cart paths.

• A no-overseeding program allows the golf course superintendent to set up his entire maintenance program around the needs of the bermudagrass.

Every day that temperatures are warm enough to grow bermudagrass, the bermudagrass is growing free from competition.

• No overseeding is more environmentally friendly because it uses fewer resources: less water, fertilizer and pesticides.

• No overseeding is less expensive in both direct and indirect costs. Lower costs keep the game more affordable for more people.

The key to determining if an overseeding program is appropriate for a golf course is to focus on both the intended and unintended consequences of overseeding. Review the factors above. Calculate expected direct costs, and estimate indirect costs. Review expectations for turfgrass quality during each season of the year on non-overseeded and overseeded golf course. Most importantly, remember that with either system, turfgrass quality will

not be optimal every week of the year. Once a decision is made, stick with it, and when experiencing the worst of times, remind everyone why the decision was made in the first place.

Core aeration: “They don’t do this at other courses.”

Another one of the rites of passage in spring is core aeration.

Although a few brave souls have tried no aeration during the spring, in the end, they have paid for this decision dearly with deterioration of the putting surfaces over the long term, particularly in the summer.

Unfotunately, we are sad to report that we receive many calls and questions similar to this one — “What can we do about this practice of aeration? Other courses don’t do this, and those that do, use smaller tines that heal more quickly.” In order to get to the bottom of this question, we must separate the myths from the facts.

Myth: Other courses do not aerate.

Fact: Core aeration is recommended highly in the spring. Core aeration followed by filling the holes with sand topdressing and surface topdressing applications are two key components in an organic matter

dilution program. Virtually all courses in the Southeast with bentgrass putting greens core aerate in the spring.

Myth: Aerating twice as often with 1/4" tines impacts as much surface area as one aeration with 1/2" tines, assuming the spacing is the same.

Fact: It would require four aerations with 1/4" hollow tines to equal one aeration with 1/2" tines, assuming the spacing is the same. Also, larger tines create bigger holes, which are much easier to fill with sand.

Myth: Aeration ruins the greens for six weeks.

Fact: The aeration date plays a major role in the healing time of the aeration holes. Aeration performed early spring will have a much longer healing time than aeration performed in late spring, assuming all other factors such as fertility are the same. The reasons are warmer soil temperatures and longer days.

One of our standard recommendations to help make March the best of times on bentgrass putting greens is to schedule the aeration at a time when healing time is kept to a minimum. In other words, the golf course should schedule aeration when it will disrupt as few days of golf as possible. Some clubs in the transition

Journal of the Virginia Turfgrass Council

| 25

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:55 PM

Page 26

Applied Research continued

zone have decided to move aeration into late spring for these reasons.

To further minimize aeration disruption, private clubs can work together on scheduling aeration dates, and create a reciprocal agreement with a nearby course for play during aerationrecovery periods. Aeration always will be the worst of times for putting quality, but it is a necessary evil, and it can be managed to keep the pain and suffering to a minimum.

Conclusion We have reviewed a few reasons why March is indeed so maddening. It is a time of year when the best of times and the worst of times are on a collision course like two ships converging in the open ocean. Unfortunately, there is no early warning system to avoid this.

The crash is predictable, and it happens every year. Anticipate it. Get ready for it.

And most of all, remember that March Madness only lasts for a month. And then April Anxiety arrives, but that’s another story. c

26 | VIRGINIA TURFGRASS JOURNAL January/February 2011 www.vaturf.org

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:55 PM

Page 27

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:55 PM

Page 28

Industry News

Fairfax County Park Authority Wins Gold Medal Award Fairfax County Park Authority was selected as the 2010 Winner of the Class I Population Gold Medal Award, during the NRPA Congress & Exposition in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

The Gold Medal Award honors communities throughout the United States that demonstrate excellence in long-range planning, resource management, volunteerism, environmental stewardship, program development, professional development and agency recognition. Each agency is judged on its ability to address the needs of those it serves through the collective energies of citizens, staff and elected officials.

A panel of five parks and recreation professionals reviews and judges all application materials. Judges are chosen for their considerable experience and knowledge in parks and recreation on both local and national levels.

Also, the City of Fairfax Parks and Recreation Department was selected as a finalist in the Gold Medal Award Class V population category.

Congratulations to the Fairfax County Park Authority and the City of Fairfax! c

The

28 | VIRGINIA TURFGRASS JOURNAL January/February 2011 www.vaturf.org

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:55 PM

Page 29

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:55 PM

Page 30

Index of Advertisers

Calendar of Events

Turf Industry Events January 11–15

January 26–29

February 10–11

STMA Annual Conference (Sports Turf Managers Assn.)

Austin, TX

ANLA Management Clinic (Amer. Nursery & Landscape Assn.)

Louisville, KY

Chesapeake Green 2011 — A Horticulture Symposium MD Institute of Technology Linthicum, MD

January 31 – February 4

February 15

January 17–20 VTC 51st Annual Turf & Landscape Conference and Trade Show Fredericksburg Expo & Conference Center Fredericksburg, VA

January 25 Virginia Irrigation Association Dinner Meeting “Unity and Team Building” Virginia Beach, VA

TPI Midwinter Conference (Turfgrass Producers International) Orlando, FL

February 7–11 Golf Industry Show Orlando, Florida

Pesticide Recertification Training Virginia Beach, VA

February 28 – March 1 VRPS Management Conference (VA Recreation & Park Society) Hilton Garden Inn Suffolk, VA

BASF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 www.basf.com Bayer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 www.bayerprocentral.com Camp Chemical Corp. . . . . . 28 Collins Wharf Sod Farm . . . . 26 www.collinswharfsod.com E & S Soil and Peat . . . . . . . . 30 www.eandssoil.com East Coast Sod & Seed . . . . . . 9 www.eastcoastsod.com Egypt Farms, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 www.egyptfarms.com Ernst Conservation Seeds . . . . .28 www.ernstseed.com Harrell’s Custom Fertilizer . . . . . . . . . . . . Back Cover www.harrells.com Herod Seeds, Inc. . . . . Inside Front Cover www.herodseeds.com Kesmac/Brouwer Inc. . . . . . . . . 29 www.kesmac.com Luck Stone Specialty Products . . . . . . . . . . 9 www.luckstone.com Mid-Atlantic Sports Turf . . . . 21 Modern Turf, Inc. . . . . . . . . . 19 www.modernturf.com Oakwood Sod Farm, Inc. . . . 10 www.oakwoodsod.com Quali-Pro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 www.quali-pro.com Smith Turf & Irrigation . . . . . . Inside Back Cover www.smithturf.com Southern States Cooperative . . 15 www.southernstates.com Texas Sod Leasing . . . . . . . . . 20 www.texassod.com The Turfgrass Group . . . . . 7, 23 www.theturfgrassgroup.com United Turf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 www.unitedturfinc.com Winfield Solutions, LLC . . . . . . 26 Wood Bay Turf Technologies . . 26 www.woodbayturftech.com Woodward Turf Farm Inc. . . 3, 21 www.woodturf.com

Virginia Turfgrass Council (VTC) 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, Virginia Turfgrass Journal, or its editors. Likewise, the appearance of advertisers, or VTC members, does not constitute an endorsement of the products or services featured in this, past or subsequent issues of this bimonthly publication. Copyright ©2011 by the Virginia Turfgrass Council. Virginia Turfgrass Journal is published bimonthly. Subscriptions are complimentary to members of VTC. POSTMASTER: Send change of address notification to VTC, P.O. Box 5989, Virginia Beach, VA 23471. Postage guaranteed. Third-class postage is paid at Nashville, TN. Printed in the U.S.A. Reprints and Submissions: Virginia Turfgrass Journal allows reprinting of material published here. Permission requests should be directed to VTC. 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 37068-0142, (615) 790-3718, Fax (615) 794-4524. Deadlines are the first of the month prior to the following month’s publication. (Example: August 1 for the September issue.)

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:55 PM

Page 31

VTC110-JanFeb2011

12/17/10

2:55 PM

Page 32