Unfairly Accused
While some perceive the golf industry as water guzzlers, an unprecedented national survey will help determine where golf courses are being efficient and inefficient.
In one area of the country, a golf course superintendent uses computerized weather monitoring to generate peak water efficiency in the course’s irrigation practices. In another area, a superintendent’s ability to conserve water is impeded for lack of funds to upgrade an aging irrigation system.
Golf course industry representatives say that many times, the public and government entities perceive the industry as water guzzlers. “It is not uncommon for decisions to be made in times of drought that cut water to golf courses because decision-makers would consider it an inefficient use of water and that courses are rather lush and it’s a luxury consumption,” says Greg Lyman, director of environmental programs for the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America (GCSAA).
The results of an unprecedented national survey of United States golf courses’ water use will help determine where golf courses are being efficient and inefficient. “We know golf course superintendents are advanced in their technical capabilities and have a high level of knowledge of their craft and the agronomic elements as well as the environmental elements they face on golf properties,” says Lyman. “But this is the first time we have been able to catalog it in this manner.”
The Golf Course Environmental Profile project is an effort to determine the physical features found on golf courses as well as how the golf courses manage water use. The National Golf Foundation is conducting the surveys on behalf of the GCSAA among 16,000 member and non-member golf course superintendents nationwide. The survey is being financed by the Environmental Institute for Golf, a large part of which is funded through a grant from the Toro Foundation.
The study is part of a larger effort to collect information on golf courses with respect to environmental stewardship efforts, the natural resources available on golf course properties, and general golf course land use, says Lyman. While such information has been gathered in various states over the years, this first nationwide study affords the industry a detailed picture of what golf properties look like and a baseline for comparison.
The purpose of the survey is to dig deeper to understand “what else is available on a golf course property outside of the playing areas what are the natural areas—those could be forested, specialized plantings, specialized habitats,” he says.
“We also are looking at the water areas: how much water and what types of water, be it ponds, lakes, streams, or wetlands. The surveys also catalog the buildings’ footprints, including parking lots and other impervious surfaces such as car pads.”
The first part of the survey—addressing golf course profiles—took place in March 2006. It detailed what acreages are being utilized on golf properties for greens, tees, fairways, roughs, and bunkers and how much of that is manicured or maintained turf.
The first survey attracted nearly 3,000 responses, twice as many as the GCSAA targeted for a statistically acceptable response rate. Lyman expects the second survey—which was expected to be completed in late November 2006—will have generated an equally high response rate. To ensure that, the surveys have been conducted in paper form and online.
The second survey examines water use on golf courses, what types of conservation practices are currently being employed, available effluent, and how many golf course superintendents would be willing to use effluent if it was available. “It could be there’s no source available, because that is an important element for this industry,” Lyman says. “The golf industry is a very good use for reclaimed water. There are areas of the country, like in Florida, the Southwest, and California, where it’s routine for golf courses to be utilizing reclaimed water.”
The survey also identifies how golf course superintendents make their decisions, the age of the course’s irrigation delivery system, and the types of upgrades deployed over the years.
As the GCSAA was initiating the second part of the survey, officials were beginning to analyze the results of the first part. The first report—expected to be ready in early 2007—was slated to be submitted to a scientific journal for analysis and review. The second report is expected to be turned out by May 2007. Results will be used to provide baseline data for documenting future progress and setting priorities for education, research, member services, and other environmental programs.
Data also will be used to provide concrete information for public inquiries and government, especially as it relates to proposed regulatory issues impacting the golf industry. “What is not often known at those times when drought management decisions are taking place is the efficiency and the effect on the local economy and the effect on that business if it turns off the water and what it will cost to recover from that,” says Lyman.
Through survey results, “We can provide an accurate picture and states can get a better understanding of water use and make those decisions,” Lyman says. “When you are making water use decisions as part of a community and are not familiar with water use and any type of agriculture or manufacturing business, the sheer numbers are staggering.”
That underscores a decision that the entity using 1 million gallons of water per day doesn’t need that amount, Lyman points out. “The golf industry’s position needs to be that it is an efficient user of the water, because that provides the industry a seat at the table to be involved in policy decisions,” he says.
“The fact is there’s not enough water to go around to all uses at the end of the day,” Lyman adds. “You have to make reductions, but to be an efficient user gets you a seat at the table and allows you to communicate knowledge about the use of water and the economic impact of the use of that water through the game of golf.”
After the first multiyear survey cycle is completed, the GCSAA will document progress and environmental changes on golf courses by conducting a second multiyear survey cycle. Future surveys will not build upon the benchmark of information provided by the first respondents but will solicit responses from new participants. “The door is wide open for anyone to enter into this survey process at any point,” Lyman adds.
Future surveys also will include more information, such as use of nutrients, pesticides, energy use, waste management, and wildlife habitat. Lyman expects the process will last up to four years.
The data will be reported in aggregate or state, region, or other geographic summary form; individual course results will not be released.
Even before the survey, the GCSAA has been encouraging wise water use among its members. The organization points out long-term drought coupled with population growth severely impacts depleted water supplies, resulting in water use restriction.
With golf courses’ irrigation practices in full view, the GCSAA urges its members to monitor water conservation as well as quality irrespective of water restrictions. The GCSAA’s suggestions include the following:
- Replacing the rough with drought-tolerant plant materials and drafting landscape plans to cluster plantings around water needs
- Locating and quickly fixing irrigation system leaks and capping sprinkler heads in non-priority watering areas
- Monthly monitoring of water meters to compare usage from year to year against the backdrop of weather variances
- Checking for plumbing leaks and other problems and shutting down unnecessary flows
- Washing equipment with a hose equipped with a shutoff nozzle
Water conservation factors include soil type, species, and evapotranspiration (ET) rates—a process in which a plant cools itself and removes waste products from the plant tissue—as well as accurate timing methods to control the frequency and duration of water use. A low ET rate is the goal for optimal irrigation water use.
Regional variances dictate water usage. “There are periods of the year in certain places—the Midwest, Northeast, Southeast, and Northwest—where there is plenty of water available through precipitation,” Lyman says.
“Compare that with areas of the Southwest, West, and even the mountain states where it can be quite dry,” Lyman says, “and all areas experience years of drought. There is high variability, and that is a contributing factor.”
Another factor is water availability and whether the source is potable or recycled. An additional factor is the acreage irrigated on golf courses: Some courses irrigate fairways, and some even irrigate the roughs.
Irrigation systems’ age and technical capability affect water use and efficiency. “The golf course industry in general has technology in its favor in that irrigation systems available for golf courses are quite sophisticated,” Lyman says, pointing out the advances that have been made in irrigation delivery systems, irrigation heads, controllers, and pumps over the past two decades.
The delivery of irrigation to golf courses has changed the way the game has been played in the United States over the past 30 to 40 years, Lyman points out. “When you compare the ability to irrigate in the 1950s to now, it’s has changed the way golf is presented and played,” he says.
In the early days of irrigation, the only areas irrigated were the tees and greens because they were considered high-value areas, Lyman says. “As irrigation advanced, fairways were irrigated,” he adds. “In the early days, there was a single-row irrigation system with manual coupler heads that went down the middle of the fairway. Those heads irrigated in a complete circle.”
That resulted in some variability. “The circles didn’t intersect, perhaps due to wind or coverage. Some areas were not irrigated, and others were overirrigated,” Lyman says. “Compare that to today’s systems where there is double, triple, or even four-row systems that can irrigate high spots differently.
“Partial coverage heads allow you to irrigate the sides and have greater control over where you’re irrigating. You can account for wind and predict and sense solar moisture at a capability that is much different today than back then.”
Golf course water use influences game performance and thus raises golfers’ expectations, Lyman says. “They tend to expect even, consistent playing conditions throughout a course,” he says. “Certainly they do on the putting greens and now on the fairways and sometimes even the rough, where they expect a high level of control, a high level of consistency, and a high performance for the playing surface. All of that has to do with irrigation.”
The most difficult task in superintendents’ water management practices is determining irrigation amounts and intervals, according to the GCSAA. The organization points out past practices of deep and infrequent irrigation encouraged plant root development, but current research shows that “deficit irrigation”—the practice of frequent and light watering—produces better turf quality. An example of that is the semi-arid Western US.
Some superintendents address the irrigation challenge by using sophisticated computerized irrigation systems and onsite weather monitoring stations to ensure the course is not watered before it rains.
The GCSAA also recommends water-retaining agents such as polymers—sponge-like synthetic material granules that absorb large amounts of liquid—which contract, and then release stored water into the soil.
Polymers are expensive and can be difficult to inject into the soil but help reduce the amount of water lost through percolation and evaporation and reduce irrigation requirements, as well as dissolve nutrients and absorb herbicides and pesticides, according to the GCSAA.
Treated wastewater offers a nutrient benefit at a low cost and is easily adaptable to turf grass.
As golf course superintendents await the results of the survey, many are continuing to seek ways to increase water efficiency at their sites.
At the Atlanta Country Club in Marietta, GA, which hosted 30 years of televised games as a club built in 1964 for PGA tournaments, 100 of the 225 acres are managed turf and landscape.
The rest of the property is heavily forested and has an elevation change of more than 200 feet. There are two streams and 12 ponds on the property, none of which has surface water inflow except for a small one on the property watershed.
The club’s average water usage is about 26 million gallons per year. The course’s main water source is three underground wells, but only one produces significant water at 180 gallons per minute (gpm). The 1,500-gpm pump station has a variable frequency drive.
The irrigation system is a block system consisting of one brass valve and a set of two to six heads, with a total of 248 valves and more than 800 heads. There also are quick coupler valves every 100 yards and two at each green for hand watering. The golf course uses a Toro OSMAC radio control system with 12 satellites. “We water by scouting and utilizing weather station data such as the evapotranspiration rates,” says Mark Esoda, the golf course’s superintendent. “The object is to maintain proper moisture for plant growth and soil type for a healthy environment.”
Esoda says watering 1 inch per week on the clay soils is nearly impossible without runoff and ecosystem breakdown. “Therefore, we are constantly scouting and probing soil to make a determination of water needs,” he says. “Almost all watering is done at night when there is less evaporation.”
A 2005 drought affected the Atlanta Country Club operations. “Our 180-gallon-per-minute well simply could not keep up with our needs, and our reservoir continued to drop,” says Esoda. “Although most Georgia irrigation systems are set up for rain supplemental applications, it was more like the desert here. Therefore, we had to do more hose watering throughout the course to make sure the water was used only where it was needed.”
Some parts of the course were cut off from water. “As a general rule, we water with overhead sprinklers for the wettest part of the area covered by the sprinkler,” Esoda says. “The drier parts are brought up to proper moisture level with hoses and hand watering. On greens, we do this with watering cans as some of the ‘hot spots’ can be as small as a baseball.”
Esoda says his course has acted to increase water efficiency by upgrading pump station controls to the most sophisticated offered by Flowtronix. “We utilize drip and low-flow irrigation in all our new landscape installations,” he says. “Our best management practices for water conservation help us keep the course in playable shape using less water. Practices such as higher heights of cut, lower fertilizer rates, and slow release fertilizing, traffic controls, and other measures all help us protect the course under drought stress.”
The Sand Creek Country Club had been a heavy water user when Golf Course Superintendent Don Ewoldt of the Lake Erie Land Co. in Chesterton, IN, came on board 13 years ago. “In 1995, we applied for the Audubon program, took their recommendations, did an onsite assessment, and came up with a water conservation and a water-quality strategy,” says Ewoldt. “We did a streambank restoration project on about 3,500 linear feet of stream going through the golf course and noticed our sediment loads going into our irrigation pond were drastically reduced.”
Next, the golf course only used water where needed, Ewoldt says. “We started doing more hand-watering on greens, especially since the irrigation system was 16 years old at the time,” he says.
Now the system is 30 years old, and rather than invest money to update it, the golf course management adheres to its water conservation irrigation practices, continuing to water more efficiently on areas that don’t require as much water.
The golf course management looks to do more aerification, use a deeper root system, use more top dressing, and employ other measures to alleviate the need for higher water usage.
“We know in 10 years when we have comparable precipitation that our practices are reducing water use, so we feel we are succeeding in that effort,” says Ewoldt.
Water usage in Florida—particularly groundwater—is at a critical juncture, says Greg Plotner, vice president of operations for International Golf Maintenance, the agronomic arm of Meadowbrook Golf. The company does contractual golf course maintenance for many US golf courses.
Plotner oversees the Florida region, which comprises 33 18-hole courses. “The more efficient we can be in management of turf grass, the better it will be for Florida’s future,” he says.
His company conserves water through using best management practices established by the University of Florida. Plotner says many golf operations have become computerized in water use and predicts effluent graywater usage will dominate Florida golf courses. “That’s a good product in general for turf grass,” he says. “Some people are already trying to make it a commodity, trying to find out exactly what value it has, but the end user has already basically paid for water. That there would be a charge for it is something that really bothers me.”
Golf course superintendents throughout the US are addressing the challenge of aging irrigation systems and regional climates. “Our golf course is a ‘desert course,’” says Mark Clark, the golf course superintendent for Troon Golf & Country Club in Scottsdale, AZ. “We are irrigated wall-to-wall, but we only have 65 acres of turf. The course sits on 150 acres, but most of that is natural desert. Limited areas mean less water used.”
 |
Photo: GCSAA |
| The Golf Course Environmental Profile project wants to create specialized habitats at specific courses based on regional variances across the country. |
Troon’s 20-year-old irrigation system has upgraded nozzles, heads, and controllers with a resulting 20% water usage reduction. Troon also has upgraded its irrigation spacing to increase water efficiency. Additionally, hand-watering helps, Clark notes.
The golf course recently upgraded its pumping system by adding a new pump station with a more efficient strainer, giving the golf course a more consistent water profile, pressure, and cleaner water, “which reduces the number of stuck valves or valves that won’t go off due to particles in the water,” Clark says.
Water conservation practices are difficult because of his golf course’s situation, notes Michael “Mickey” Stachowski, golf course superintendent at the Golf Course of Concordia, a private 18-hole golf course in Robbinsville, NJ.
Stachowski also is on the New Jersey Water Supply Advisory Council.
The course has an aging irrigation system but not the funds to replace it, he notes. That means he’s only replaced parts of the system with newer parts when there’s a breakdown. The older system necessitates Stachowski running three heads at a time. “I don’t have individual controls, so it’s tough for me to conserve water,” he says. He tries increasing water efficiency through the use of wetting agents.
Esoda says information sharing such as the GCSAA survey assists him in his water efficiency measures. “I can learn what folks do in more arid parts of the country and apply those techniques to my irrigation practices,” he says. “Learning about water-quality issues might make a search for alternative sources of water more amenable to the club leadership.”
Esoda says he’s also looking forward to discovering how golf courses are utilizing new technologies and whether new drought-tolerant grasses are showing more promise in wetter areas of the country. “I think golf courses in general have clean water bodies on their properties and use less water than is perceived by the public,” says Esoda. “The survey can show this and help regulators understand that, if allowed to, a golf course superintendent can manage water more efficiently on the golf course than the regulator.
 |
| Research shows that "deficit irrigation," or frequent light watering's, produces better turf quality. |
“It is in the best business interest of the course to efficiently manage the resource. Golfers don’t play wet courses. ‘Wet’ kills grass. Overuse of water is bad for business.”
Esoda says he looks forward to the survey’s results helping him in all areas of course management—especially environmental management.
Stachowski believes survey results will help him have dialog with regulatory agencies, which he suspects have the misconception “that we just open the floodgates and let all the water go out until it runs off.”
That thinking intensifies during drought, he adds. “People just don’t realize we conserve water every day, and we keep the place dry because it’s the best for the golf course.”
Plotner believes that, as a group, golf course superintendents “are professional enough and recognize the need for conservation of a valuable commodity.
“However, what sometimes befalls them is a member or an owner/operator may not understand that ‘brown is beautiful.’ Golf courses can be extremely playable and not have to be green and lush, which equates to a lot of use of water.”
Advertisement
Lyman says survey results will enable the GCSAA to gauge existing water efficiencies and the level at which golf courses are operating. “It will allow us to target certain areas for improvement,” he says. “We know Georgia has a statewide drought management system, as does Delaware and a few other areas. “Responses from those states in drought management plans should be further advanced than in other areas. We would like to know that for sure.”
Lyman believes such information is vital to share throughout the country. “The time to negotiate drought management policies is not during the time you are in a drought,” he says. “Yet these policies are prompted on the backside of a drought cycle, because communities have to make decisions.”
March-April 2007
Unfairly Accused
While some perceive the golf industry as water guzzlers, an unprecedented national survey will help determine where golf courses are being efficient and inefficient.
In one area of the country, a golf course superintendent uses computerized weather monitoring to generate peak water efficiency in the course’s irrigation practices. In another area, a superintendent’s ability to conserve water is impeded for lack of funds to upgrade an aging irrigation system.
Golf course industry representatives say that many times, the public and government entities perceive the industry as water guzzlers. “It is not uncommon for decisions to be made in times of drought that cut water to golf courses because decision-makers would consider it an inefficient use of water and that courses are rather lush and it’s a luxury consumption,” says Greg Lyman, director of environmental programs for the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America (GCSAA).
The results of an unprecedented national survey of United States golf courses’ water use will help determine where golf courses are being efficient and inefficient. “We know golf course superintendents are advanced in their technical capabilities and have a high level of knowledge of their craft and the agronomic elements as well as the environmental elements they face on golf properties,” says Lyman. “But this is the first time we have been able to catalog it in this manner.”
The Golf Course Environmental Profile project is an effort to determine the physical features found on golf courses as well as how the golf courses manage water use. The National Golf Foundation is conducting the surveys on behalf of the GCSAA among 16,000 member and non-member golf course superintendents nationwide. The survey is being financed by the Environmental Institute for Golf, a large part of which is funded through a grant from the Toro Foundation.
The study is part of a larger effort to collect information on golf courses with respect to environmental stewardship efforts, the natural resources available on golf course properties, and general golf course land use, says Lyman. While such information has been gathered in various states over the years, this first nationwide study affords the industry a detailed picture of what golf properties look like and a baseline for comparison.
The purpose of the survey is to dig deeper to understand “what else is available on a golf course property outside of the playing areas what are the natural areas—those could be forested, specialized plantings, specialized habitats,” he says.
“We also are looking at the water areas: how much water and what types of water, be it ponds, lakes, streams, or wetlands. The surveys also catalog the buildings’ footprints, including parking lots and other impervious surfaces such as car pads.”
The first part of the survey—addressing golf course profiles—took place in March 2006. It detailed what acreages are being utilized on golf properties for greens, tees, fairways, roughs, and bunkers and how much of that is manicured or maintained turf.
The first survey attracted nearly 3,000 responses, twice as many as the GCSAA targeted for a statistically acceptable response rate. Lyman expects the second survey—which was expected to be completed in late November 2006—will have generated an equally high response rate. To ensure that, the surveys have been conducted in paper form and online.
The second survey examines water use on golf courses, what types of conservation practices are currently being employed, available effluent, and how many golf course superintendents would be willing to use effluent if it was available. “It could be there’s no source available, because that is an important element for this industry,” Lyman says. “The golf industry is a very good use for reclaimed water. There are areas of the country, like in Florida, the Southwest, and California, where it’s routine for golf courses to be utilizing reclaimed water.”
The survey also identifies how golf course superintendents make their decisions, the age of the course’s irrigation delivery system, and the types of upgrades deployed over the years.
As the GCSAA was initiating the second part of the survey, officials were beginning to analyze the results of the first part. The first report—expected to be ready in early 2007—was slated to be submitted to a scientific journal for analysis and review. The second report is expected to be turned out by May 2007. Results will be used to provide baseline data for documenting future progress and setting priorities for education, research, member services, and other environmental programs.
Data also will be used to provide concrete information for public inquiries and government, especially as it relates to proposed regulatory issues impacting the golf industry. “What is not often known at those times when drought management decisions are taking place is the efficiency and the effect on the local economy and the effect on that business if it turns off the water and what it will cost to recover from that,” says Lyman.
Through survey results, “We can provide an accurate picture and states can get a better understanding of water use and make those decisions,” Lyman says. “When you are making water use decisions as part of a community and are not familiar with water use and any type of agriculture or manufacturing business, the sheer numbers are staggering.”
That underscores a decision that the entity using 1 million gallons of water per day doesn’t need that amount, Lyman points out. “The golf industry’s position needs to be that it is an efficient user of the water, because that provides the industry a seat at the table to be involved in policy decisions,” he says.
“The fact is there’s not enough water to go around to all uses at the end of the day,” Lyman adds. “You have to make reductions, but to be an efficient user gets you a seat at the table and allows you to communicate knowledge about the use of water and the economic impact of the use of that water through the game of golf.”
After the first multiyear survey cycle is completed, the GCSAA will document progress and environmental changes on golf courses by conducting a second multiyear survey cycle. Future surveys will not build upon the benchmark of information provided by the first respondents but will solicit responses from new participants. “The door is wide open for anyone to enter into this survey process at any point,” Lyman adds.
Future surveys also will include more information, such as use of nutrients, pesticides, energy use, waste management, and wildlife habitat. Lyman expects the process will last up to four years.
The data will be reported in aggregate or state, region, or other geographic summary form; individual course results will not be released.
Even before the survey, the GCSAA has been encouraging wise water use among its members. The organization points out long-term drought coupled with population growth severely impacts depleted water supplies, resulting in water use restriction.
With golf courses’ irrigation practices in full view, the GCSAA urges its members to monitor water conservation as well as quality irrespective of water restrictions. The GCSAA’s suggestions include the following:
- Replacing the rough with drought-tolerant plant materials and drafting landscape plans to cluster plantings around water needs
- Locating and quickly fixing irrigation system leaks and capping sprinkler heads in non-priority watering areas
- Monthly monitoring of water meters to compare usage from year to year against the backdrop of weather variances
- Checking for plumbing leaks and other problems and shutting down unnecessary flows
- Washing equipment with a hose equipped with a shutoff nozzle
Water conservation factors include soil type, species, and evapotranspiration (ET) rates—a process in which a plant cools itself and removes waste products from the plant tissue—as well as accurate timing methods to control the frequency and duration of water use. A low ET rate is the goal for optimal irrigation water use.
Regional variances dictate water usage. “There are periods of the year in certain places—the Midwest, Northeast, Southeast, and Northwest—where there is plenty of water available through precipitation,” Lyman says.
“Compare that with areas of the Southwest, West, and even the mountain states where it can be quite dry,” Lyman says, “and all areas experience years of drought. There is high variability, and that is a contributing factor.”
Another factor is water availability and whether the source is potable or recycled. An additional factor is the acreage irrigated on golf courses: Some courses irrigate fairways, and some even irrigate the roughs.
Irrigation systems’ age and technical capability affect water use and efficiency. “The golf course industry in general has technology in its favor in that irrigation systems available for golf courses are quite sophisticated,” Lyman says, pointing out the advances that have been made in irrigation delivery systems, irrigation heads, controllers, and pumps over the past two decades.
The delivery of irrigation to golf courses has changed the way the game has been played in the United States over the past 30 to 40 years, Lyman points out. “When you compare the ability to irrigate in the 1950s to now, it’s has changed the way golf is presented and played,” he says.
In the early days of irrigation, the only areas irrigated were the tees and greens because they were considered high-value areas, Lyman says. “As irrigation advanced, fairways were irrigated,” he adds. “In the early days, there was a single-row irrigation system with manual coupler heads that went down the middle of the fairway. Those heads irrigated in a complete circle.”
That resulted in some variability. “The circles didn’t intersect, perhaps due to wind or coverage. Some areas were not irrigated, and others were overirrigated,” Lyman says. “Compare that to today’s systems where there is double, triple, or even four-row systems that can irrigate high spots differently.
“Partial coverage heads allow you to irrigate the sides and have greater control over where you’re irrigating. You can account for wind and predict and sense solar moisture at a capability that is much different today than back then.”
Golf course water use influences game performance and thus raises golfers’ expectations, Lyman says. “They tend to expect even, consistent playing conditions throughout a course,” he says. “Certainly they do on the putting greens and now on the fairways and sometimes even the rough, where they expect a high level of control, a high level of consistency, and a high performance for the playing surface. All of that has to do with irrigation.”
The most difficult task in superintendents’ water management practices is determining irrigation amounts and intervals, according to the GCSAA. The organization points out past practices of deep and infrequent irrigation encouraged plant root development, but current research shows that “deficit irrigation”—the practice of frequent and light watering—produces better turf quality. An example of that is the semi-arid Western US.
Some superintendents address the irrigation challenge by using sophisticated computerized irrigation systems and onsite weather monitoring stations to ensure the course is not watered before it rains.
The GCSAA also recommends water-retaining agents such as polymers—sponge-like synthetic material granules that absorb large amounts of liquid—which contract, and then release stored water into the soil.
Polymers are expensive and can be difficult to inject into the soil but help reduce the amount of water lost through percolation and evaporation and reduce irrigation requirements, as well as dissolve nutrients and absorb herbicides and pesticides, according to the GCSAA.
Treated wastewater offers a nutrient benefit at a low cost and is easily adaptable to turf grass.
As golf course superintendents await the results of the survey, many are continuing to seek ways to increase water efficiency at their sites.
At the Atlanta Country Club in Marietta, GA, which hosted 30 years of televised games as a club built in 1964 for PGA tournaments, 100 of the 225 acres are managed turf and landscape.
The rest of the property is heavily forested and has an elevation change of more than 200 feet. There are two streams and 12 ponds on the property, none of which has surface water inflow except for a small one on the property watershed.
The club’s average water usage is about 26 million gallons per year. The course’s main water source is three underground wells, but only one produces significant water at 180 gallons per minute (gpm). The 1,500-gpm pump station has a variable frequency drive.
The irrigation system is a block system consisting of one brass valve and a set of two to six heads, with a total of 248 valves and more than 800 heads. There also are quick coupler valves every 100 yards and two at each green for hand watering. The golf course uses a Toro OSMAC radio control system with 12 satellites. “We water by scouting and utilizing weather station data such as the evapotranspiration rates,” says Mark Esoda, the golf course’s superintendent. “The object is to maintain proper moisture for plant growth and soil type for a healthy environment.”
Esoda says watering 1 inch per week on the clay soils is nearly impossible without runoff and ecosystem breakdown. “Therefore, we are constantly scouting and probing soil to make a determination of water needs,” he says. “Almost all watering is done at night when there is less evaporation.”
A 2005 drought affected the Atlanta Country Club operations. “Our 180-gallon-per-minute well simply could not keep up with our needs, and our reservoir continued to drop,” says Esoda. “Although most Georgia irrigation systems are set up for rain supplemental applications, it was more like the desert here. Therefore, we had to do more hose watering throughout the course to make sure the water was used only where it was needed.”
Some parts of the course were cut off from water. “As a general rule, we water with overhead sprinklers for the wettest part of the area covered by the sprinkler,” Esoda says. “The drier parts are brought up to proper moisture level with hoses and hand watering. On greens, we do this with watering cans as some of the ‘hot spots’ can be as small as a baseball.”
Esoda says his course has acted to increase water efficiency by upgrading pump station controls to the most sophisticated offered by Flowtronix. “We utilize drip and low-flow irrigation in all our new landscape installations,” he says. “Our best management practices for water conservation help us keep the course in playable shape using less water. Practices such as higher heights of cut, lower fertilizer rates, and slow release fertilizing, traffic controls, and other measures all help us protect the course under drought stress.”
The Sand Creek Country Club had been a heavy water user when Golf Course Superintendent Don Ewoldt of the Lake Erie Land Co. in Chesterton, IN, came on board 13 years ago. “In 1995, we applied for the Audubon program, took their recommendations, did an onsite assessment, and came up with a water conservation and a water-quality strategy,” says Ewoldt. “We did a streambank restoration project on about 3,500 linear feet of stream going through the golf course and noticed our sediment loads going into our irrigation pond were drastically reduced.”
Next, the golf course only used water where needed, Ewoldt says. “We started doing more hand-watering on greens, especially since the irrigation system was 16 years old at the time,” he says.
Now the system is 30 years old, and rather than invest money to update it, the golf course management adheres to its water conservation irrigation practices, continuing to water more efficiently on areas that don’t require as much water.
The golf course management looks to do more aerification, use a deeper root system, use more top dressing, and employ other measures to alleviate the need for higher water usage.
“We know in 10 years when we have comparable precipitation that our practices are reducing water use, so we feel we are succeeding in that effort,” says Ewoldt.
Water usage in Florida—particularly groundwater—is at a critical juncture, says Greg Plotner, vice president of operations for International Golf Maintenance, the agronomic arm of Meadowbrook Golf. The company does contractual golf course maintenance for many US golf courses.
Plotner oversees the Florida region, which comprises 33 18-hole courses. “The more efficient we can be in management of turf grass, the better it will be for Florida’s future,” he says.
His company conserves water through using best management practices established by the University of Florida. Plotner says many golf operations have become computerized in water use and predicts effluent graywater usage will dominate Florida golf courses. “That’s a good product in general for turf grass,” he says. “Some people are already trying to make it a commodity, trying to find out exactly what value it has, but the end user has already basically paid for water. That there would be a charge for it is something that really bothers me.”
Golf course superintendents throughout the US are addressing the challenge of aging irrigation systems and regional climates. “Our golf course is a ‘desert course,’” says Mark Clark, the golf course superintendent for Troon Golf & Country Club in Scottsdale, AZ. “We are irrigated wall-to-wall, but we only have 65 acres of turf. The course sits on 150 acres, but most of that is natural desert. Limited areas mean less water used.”
|
Photo: GCSAA |
| The Golf Course Environmental Profile project wants to create specialized habitats at specific courses based on regional variances across the country. |
Troon’s 20-year-old irrigation system has upgraded nozzles, heads, and controllers with a resulting 20% water usage reduction. Troon also has upgraded its irrigation spacing to increase water efficiency. Additionally, hand-watering helps, Clark notes.
The golf course recently upgraded its pumping system by adding a new pump station with a more efficient strainer, giving the golf course a more consistent water profile, pressure, and cleaner water, “which reduces the number of stuck valves or valves that won’t go off due to particles in the water,” Clark says.
Water conservation practices are difficult because of his golf course’s situation, notes Michael “Mickey” Stachowski, golf course superintendent at the Golf Course of Concordia, a private 18-hole golf course in Robbinsville, NJ.
Stachowski also is on the New Jersey Water Supply Advisory Council.
The course has an aging irrigation system but not the funds to replace it, he notes. That means he’s only replaced parts of the system with newer parts when there’s a breakdown. The older system necessitates Stachowski running three heads at a time. “I don’t have individual controls, so it’s tough for me to conserve water,” he says. He tries increasing water efficiency through the use of wetting agents.
Esoda says information sharing such as the GCSAA survey assists him in his water efficiency measures. “I can learn what folks do in more arid parts of the country and apply those techniques to my irrigation practices,” he says. “Learning about water-quality issues might make a search for alternative sources of water more amenable to the club leadership.”
Esoda says he’s also looking forward to discovering how golf courses are utilizing new technologies and whether new drought-tolerant grasses are showing more promise in wetter areas of the country. “I think golf courses in general have clean water bodies on their properties and use less water than is perceived by the public,” says Esoda. “The survey can show this and help regulators understand that, if allowed to, a golf course superintendent can manage water more efficiently on the golf course than the regulator.
|
| Research shows that "deficit irrigation," or frequent light watering's, produces better turf quality. |
“It is in the best business interest of the course to efficiently manage the resource. Golfers don’t play wet courses. ‘Wet’ kills grass. Overuse of water is bad for business.”
Esoda says he looks forward to the survey’s results helping him in all areas of course management—especially environmental management.
Stachowski believes survey results will help him have dialog with regulatory agencies, which he suspects have the misconception “that we just open the floodgates and let all the water go out until it runs off.”
That thinking intensifies during drought, he adds. “People just don’t realize we conserve water every day, and we keep the place dry because it’s the best for the golf course.”
Plotner believes that, as a group, golf course superintendents “are professional enough and recognize the need for conservation of a valuable commodity.
“However, what sometimes befalls them is a member or an owner/operator may not understand that ‘brown is beautiful.’ Golf courses can be extremely playable and not have to be green and lush, which equates to a lot of use of water.”
Lyman says survey results will enable the GCSAA to gauge existing water efficiencies and the level at which golf courses are operating. “It will allow us to target certain areas for improvement,” he says. “We know Georgia has a statewide drought management system, as does Delaware and a few other areas. “Responses from those states in drought management plans should be further advanced than in other areas. We would like to know that for sure.”
Lyman believes such information is vital to share throughout the country. “The time to negotiate drought management policies is not during the time you are in a drought,” he says. “Yet these policies are prompted on the backside of a drought cycle, because communities have to make decisions.”