Skip to main content

Questioning Wetting Agents

Last year I changed the way I watered my greens. Instead of watering them last thing each night, I watered them first. The theory was that it would give the stressed out grass water sooner and allow the plant to recover all night long. Although I have no way of proving if this theory was what actually happened, I had the easiest year ever keeping my greens healthy and well watered despite the record drought we experienced. I also did not require any pesticide applications other than phosphite during the periods I required irrigation to keep the grass green proving to me that the period of leaf wetness overnight has little impact on the diseases I face in my climate.

Slight moisture stress on the aprons means it's time to start hand watering for the season.
Last year I also decided to use cheap wetting agents (Dispatch) on my greens that are designed for fairways. Again, I had the easiest summer ever keeping the grass green. Either these cheaper products are better than we think or maybe they simply aren't needed anymore. This observation has me thinking, do we really need wetting agents on greens anymore? You are probably thinking, YES, of course we do!

There is no question that wetting agents work, we have all seen the studies that show plots where wetting agents have been applied vs plots where they have not been applied. The differences are shocking. Back when I first started in the industry in 2001 we didn't use wetting agents on our greens. We would have to spend a ton of time with hoses hand watering. We would wait until we saw stressed out grass and would apply water to the brown spots. Along came wetting agents and all of a sudden we had a lot less LDS areas on our greens. Wetting agents were a game changer back in the early 2000's for our course. The thing about these studies is that they aren't real life. They aren't rolling, spiking, hand watering or doing anything else. They simply are one step better than doing absolutely nothing.

Yeah, so what has changed? Why the hell would you decide to not use wetting agents on greens?

Soil moisture meters for one. Just like wetting agents were a game changer back then, soil moisture meters were an even bigger game changer. All of a sudden we could manage our soil moisture levels with precision. We didn't have to guess. We could see moisture issues arise before we could visually see the issues. We could be proactive instead of reactive to moisture stress issues. All of a sudden we need less of a buffer effect that wetting agents provide.


Wetting agents to a point allow you to be less precise with irrigation practices. This is why I still plan on using them on tees and fairways. I don't have the time or capability to test soil moisture on tees and fairways and wetting agents allow me to achieve a better level of uniformity on these surfaces that I would not otherwise be able to achieve. But on greens, I test the moisture levels daily in 10-20 spots per green, hand water dry areas, and rarely see turf turn brown unless I intentionally dry things down.

We regularly needle tine our greens. This is a new practice for us in the past 4 or 5 years and it has really made a huge difference. By using non-disruptive aeration practices we are able to increase surface infiltration rates and the amount of air in the soil while also decreasing compaction. No wetting agent is going to do what needle tine aeration can do for your greens.

We roll like crazy. Lightweight rolling has been found to increase the amount of moisture in the soils. We only roll our greens but have noticed that on areas that we roll, we require less water. Chris Tritabaugh shared this pic with me during the Masters tourney. Guess where the roller enters the green in the following pic?

I'm also not worried about disease on tees or fairways to the extent that I am on greens. The only part of the course that we require pesticides are the greens, so moisture management is key in these areas. So you're thinking, why wouldn't you use wetting agents on greens then if you are so worried about soil moisture on them? In my experience wetting agents don't prevent over-watering which is the problem with fungal diseases. I'm a lot less concerned with under-watering on my greens. I often wonder if wetting agents promote over-watering to some extent. On my tees I can apply more water than I would on my greens because I'm not worried about firmness, ball roll, or disease. Wetting agents allow me to use less water on my tees than I would use without them, but still more than I would use if I was hand watering, rolling, and needle tine aerating my tees regularly.

I also found that with the expensive revolutionary wetting agents (not naming any names ;) ) that it was often too difficult to dry down my greens. They were always wet. This created issues with disease such as cyanobacteria (algae), moss, and brown patch in the summer.
Cyanobacteria in 2014. We had none in 2015.
I went from spending upwards of $400/acre a month in 2014 to $80/acre in 2015 and in 2016 I hope to spend $0/acre/month on wetting agents for my greens. Either way, I have introduced enough new practices that also improve my water situation that I fell it's time to re-evaluate wetting agents on my greens.

Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

Turfgrass speedo is still my most important tool for managing turf growth after 4 years.

It wasn't the easiest year for growing grass , but the conditions were still pretty good. Almost 4 years ago exactly, I came up with the idea of comparing actual clipping yields to the "ideal" clipping yield or the clipping yield adjusted using the Growth Potential Model . Since then, it has proved to be a much more useful tool to manage growth than I originally thought .  It has been almost a decade since I started making observations on plant health and playability and how it relates to the clipping yield. I have been constantly searching for ways to get the growth rate right as often as I can and this tool seems to be the best way I have seen so far, and might ultimately, be the best way going forward. To prove this point I will discuss in a future post, the success I've had with pest control in the past few years (for the most part (Not withstanding the times where I think my greens are dead but they actually aren't...thanks T)). Never needed less There are
Read more

Do you have enough?

I recently discussed how we can use fertilizer ratios to simplify how much fertilizer we apply to help us keep above the MLSN guidelines . When we get a soil test done it is a static amount of nutrients found in the soil. Even if you are above the MLSN guidelines at the time of testing, it doesn't guarantee that you will remain at or above the guidelines as the grass grows and consumes nutrients. There is math that you can use to determine exactly how much nutrient you need to apply to ensure that you remain at or above the MLSN guidelines. For many, this is much too complicated. For that reason I made a quick cheat sheet to help you determine how much of each nutrient you can expect to use each year based off a few different annual nitrogen rates. Nutrient use is based primarily on nitrogen use so the left 2 columns are a few different nitrogen rates. The columns for each nutrient are in PPM and are designed to help you look at your current soil test PPM (mehlich 3) and determin
Read more

How to quantify nutrient content in liquid fertilizer

In a recent post, I discussed how it was actually cheaper to spray soluble vs granular fertilizer. What about if we use pre-mixed liquid fertilizer? How do we even figure out how much nutrient we are applying with pre-mixed liquid fertilizer?  Before I learned that you could simply dissolve soluble fertilizer in water and apply it in a sprayer, I was a big user of pre-mixed liquid fertilizers. One of the issues I initially had was figuring out exactly how much of each nutrient I was applying. The math wasn't as straightforward is it was with granular fertilizers. It turns out, it's actually not that difficult but requires an extra step.  First, we need to convert the liquid volume into a mass. Many products will have the product density displayed on the label or you can look in the Safety Data Sheet (SDS) for that information as well. No SDS? Should you be using products without an SDS? Even if this information isn't included on the label it is very easy to figure out. All
Read more