Fusariummy

Here's a quick update on how I use the growth ratio tool. You can see all of this data live here . It's my first day of the work week and always like to look at my maintenance dashboard after getting my set up for the day. Today I noticed that the growth ratio is almost exactly at 1. Essentially we have cut exactly the amount of grass that the model suggests we cut. My old "speedo" chart above shows us growing the grass exactly the way we want it as during the winter I like to switch into a recovery growth ratio which is a ratio at or above 1. This allows our very slowly growing grass to tolerate winter traffic and disease stresses.  Note that my current growth model differs slightly from what I have described on this blog in the past. I have a modifier that makes the minimum growth potential yield set to 0.3 ml/m^2/day. This is because the grass here continues to grow despite very cool temperatures and it does not go dormant in the winter. The growth potential model ...

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 ...

Smokey skies and high growth rates go hand in hand for some reason. I've experimented with how to best visualize growth rate data in a way that helps me make informed decisions about how much fertilizer I should apply so that the grass grows at the right rate without growing too fast or too slow because both of these circumstances can lead to less than ideal conditions on the golf course. A few years ago I came us with the turfgrass speedo . (NSFW link haha).This helped me compare actual growth to ideal growth but that was it. I couldn't see how any of the tools I had to manipulate growth were impacting that growth. A few months back Jon Merchant  shared how he visualized his #clipvol data combined with the turfgrass genki . To me this was a game changer. It instantly allows you to compare your growth rate and fertilizer rates compared to the "standard amount." The standard amount is something that you can determine as a turfgrass manager based on your experience and ...

We don’t have as much control as we think we do. — Sean Reehoorn (@spartangrass) October 17, 2018 It's totally true. This year I had big plans to control growth on my greens and boy did I fail. Despite having an intimate understanding of how fast each and every one of my greens was growing as well as how much fertilizer I had applied and how much growth I could expect from those applications, the growth rate this past May and August went completely off the rails. You'll also notice that the previous two years I was able to achieve relatively consistent growth, then it all fell apart. WTF! As you can see, the growth this past May and August was significantly higher than in previous years. This despite never applying less fertilizer to the greens. The total cost this year for those that are wondering came out to $275 for 1 acre of greens or about $0.07 per square meter. Dude! Like Sean says, "we don't have as much control as we think we do."  Although growth this su...

I get it. I talk a lot about turf disease and fertilizer but it is only because I think that the two things are closely related. More specifically, I think the amount and types of diseases on our grass are closely related to how fast the grass is growing. Not too shabby From what I have seen over the past few years of intense growth rate monitoring and reduction in fungicide use is that if we can grow that grass at the right rate, we can reduce the amount of disease significantly. The trouble is that it isn't that easy to figure out what is the right speed. Further complicating matters is that if you add too much fertilizer, you cannot take it back and are stuck with grass that is either growing too fast which can lead to all sorts of issues at certain times of the year. I have used the Growth Potential mathematical model to predict nitrogen needs, clipping volume and many other things to try and help me get it right and each year that I further refine my fertilizer timing and rate...

It would probably read, "All signs point to fertilizing more!" Why? Despite my lack of a magic 8 ball I do have the next best thing. A HUD (Heads Up Display)  which shows all my course data. This is supposed to help me make better decisions by automatically analyzing the data I collect and presenting it in a single place for my observation. When I combine what the HUD is showing me with my disease observations it becomes clear what I should do and what I should do is fertilize my greens more. You might be thinking what's the big deal, just apply the fertilizer already you asshole! You are probably right but the reason I am so hesitant to apply fertilizer is that once you apply it, you can't take it back. As fertilizer has such a big impact on turf conditions and the costs associated with maintaining the golf course I need to be absolutely certain that the fertilizer is needed. So far this year we have mowed less than ever before. This has big impacts on fuel use, mowe...

It has now been just over 2 weeks since I started measuring clipping yields on individual greens. Firstly, it's worth noting that we have not recorded any increase in time that it takes to cut the greens in the morning. Yes, it's only been 6 mows compared to thousands in our database but it's insignificant. Not having time simply isn't an excuse to not do this. As my damaged greens recover they have had higher growth rates due to the increased fertilizer that was applied to try and speed the recovery. My undamaged greens got their regular fertilizer rates based on the growth potential and are growing much slower. In an earlier post I wondered how I would transition the high growth to low growth. What I have done is simply not apply nitrogen to the greens that are growing too fast. This has been the result. As you can see the damaged greens are still growing quite a bit faster than the undamaged but now that the undamaged greens are the only ones receiving supplemental ...

I never thought having dead greens could be so interesting. Extreme circumstances like having to grow in new greens has given me completely different growth rates across my greens. Obviously this isn't great for consistency but it is great for learning stuff and maybe improving for the future. Right now I have highly variable growth rates on my various greens and this can be used to my advantage to see how this different growth rate impacts playability. This week I decided to compare clipping yield to green speed. It's a limited data set and I will continue to collect it into the future to get better data but the first set of results is pretty interesting but not entirely surprising. Please remember that there are a million variables involved here. Grass type, cultural practices, height of cut, roll or no roll all can impact the ball roll. I think this will have to be measured on each course and for each cultural practice to figure out what is best for your course. Also note th...