The Turf Zone Podcast

PENNSYLVANIA TURFGRASS: Maxim J. Schlossberg, Ph.D.

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

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

(https://www.agriculture.pa.gov/Plants_Land_Water/Fertilizer/Pages/default.aspx).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ALABAMA TURF TIMES

Having worked at Auburn University (AU) for 30 years and nearing retirement, an opportunity was presented to Dr. Beth Guertal to get involved in significant international work. So, she retired from AU in 2022 a little earlier than expected to take advantage of this exciting possibility. She accepted a post with Kansas State University as Program Director for the Center of Excellence on Mitigation, Adaptation, and Resilience to Climate Change in Haiti. Currently, Dr. Guertal is responsible for managing the center’s day-to-day operations and serving as a leader in the national education, research and outreach community. While it promises to be challenging and exciting, Dr. Guertal says she certainly misses her Auburn colleagues.

She has long been a tour de force at Auburn University, as well as in the turfgrass industry in the Southeast. She received Bachelor of Science and Master of Science degrees in Agronomy from THE Ohio State University and went on to earn a PhD from Oklahoma State University. With a PhD in Soil Fertility, Beth was hired in 1993 by Auburn University’s School of Agriculture, Department of Agronomy and Soils (today, Department of Crop, Soil and Environmental Sciences), to do research and teach in that area, with a focus on Vegetable Crop production.

Dr. Guertal stayed in that position until 1998, when AU offered faculty with 25 plus years at the University generous retirement packages. “Pretty much the entire turfgrass team at AU (Drs. Coleman Ward and Ray Dickens) took the retirement offers, leaving AU turfgrass department with no one around (except, of course, the fabulous Dr. Pat Cobb). My department head came down the hall to my office and announced that Dr. Harold Walker would be moving to turfgrass weed control, and that I would take over general turfgrass research, including teaching the courses. I had a LOT to learn, and Dr. Walker really gave me a ton of help.” Beth believes the secret to success is to “show up early to every job and meeting; always give your best; and admit if you have no idea what you are doing. Generally, people love to provide advice and help.” Besides Dr. Walker doing just that, others also helped her to make a success in her new position like her Department Head, Dr. Joe Touchton and fellow professor, Dr. David Teem. “Joe was the best department head, as he was fair to everyone, had an amazing grasp of the financial budgets and knew everybody in the College. More importantly, he knew our stakeholders, and the agricultural power brokers in the state.”

Over time, her position within the turf program grew and allowed for significant opportunities for travel and engagement with a wide range of people across the state, nation, and world. “It has helped me so much to grow as a person.” However, the least fulfilling aspect of her job, Beth found to be getting funding for her programs. Funding was always needed to pay for her own salary, as well as the technicians’ salary, costs of running the turfgrass unit, and salaries for graduate students. Over the years, Dr. Guertal proved to be a stalwart researcher and teacher. Her hard work and dedication were rewarded when in 2017, she was named the Auburn University College of Agriculture’s Rowe Endowed Professor. The endowed professorship was established by 1978 Auburn alumni Mike and Leann Rowe to support tenured faculty who have demonstrated strong commitment to students, teaching, research and service.

At Auburn University Beth says she “loved, loved, loved teaching. Really, any kind of teaching. Students are simply the best, even when they are busily screwing something up. Their enthusiasm, love of new things and general upbeat demeanor made every day different and fun. I really do miss the students, in my new job.” The current Alabama Turfgrass Association President,

MTC TURF NEWS

Neal Glatt, GrowTheBench.com

“We have a dilemma” is how one of my employees, ten days into managing her first direct report ever, started the conversation. The issue was that there were some concerns about the work her new employee, who started with the company only ten days previously, had just submitted. It wasn’t that the work was wrong or necessarily bad, but it was certainly a bit different than the typical work we do.

Much to my manager’s credit, she told me that she wanted to give feedback but was concerned about how it would be received. Should she encourage the initiative, excitement, and action of the new employee by accepting the work as it was submitted? Or should she enforce the quality standards of work at our company by correcting the new employee?

In fact, every manager faces this dilemma on the job. How can an employee’s engagement be increased while providing constructive criticism? A manager who picks one or the other usually has mediocre team prone to expensive employee turnover. Yet often trying to pick a middle-of-the-road approach leads to neither objective being realized.

There are three pitfalls managers are subject to which leads to this situation. By taking action, they can avoid the problem and engage high-performing employees who produce great work.

Lack of Training

The reason employees typically don’t perform to the standards expected is because they simply were never taught effectively. Training isn’t something that happens once but rather must be ongoing. The best organizations and teams realize that in a rapidly changing business environment there must be continuous learning from trainers who can add new value.

My first-time manager recognized this issue immediately and told me that while she had trained her new employee on how to technically create the work, she had been planning to have a conversation around the quality and specifics in the coming days. This absolutely explains why the work done wasn’t exactly what had been expected. More training would have prevented the dilemma in the first place.

Lack of Time

Unfortunately, the demand of most workers today is to do more work in less time. For both employees and managers, finding the time to adequately train while meeting all their other daily obligations is difficult. Yet by expecting production too soon, it leads to greater issues than extending deadlines would have. Most managers realize only when it’s too late that by not slowing down, they lose employee engagement and limit the potential of future production forever.

Our new employee was so excited to get started working that my first-time manager gave her the green light to get started. Yet if she had extended more time for the project, she could have easily allowed the new employee to create a draft and meet for a scheduled review discussion where feedback would have been expected and easily received. If those expectations were in place, and the time constraints lifted, she would not have landed in the current predicament.

Lack of Trust

The type of critical feedback that managers often want to deliver is never an issue when their employees trust them implicitly. People greatly care about the intentions of those who give them feedback and these intentions become known from competence, consistency, and character demonstrated throughout a relationship. Managers can build more trust through frequent and transparent conversations which back up consistency between values, intentions, and outcomes.

For my first-time manager, I could deliver a criticism via text with no negative engagement ramifications because there is a high level of trust built over years of working together. But her dilemma was caused because it’s impossible to have this...

VIRGINIA TURFGRASS JOURNAL

This event continues to expand to meet industry needs. What started a few years ago as a two-day conference with a vision to uniquely serve the industry has expanded to four full days of classes and service. Virginia Beach remained our host city. Day one was devoted to the Service Project at Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s Brock Center and the adjacent Pleasure House Point. Days two and three were dedicated to classes at the Oceanfront Sheraton hotel with a series of seminars on Natives and Invasive Plants in the landscape. Participants learned about great business opportunities in these two emerging areas of landscaping. Pesticide and fertilizer certification and recertification classes consumed day two. Nearly 200 persons attended to obtain or renew state mandated certifications.

A new enterprise happened on days three and four: a condensed Lawn/Landscape Short Course. Basically, that two-day event focused on topics a student learns in the first semester of Horticulture 101. A special treat on the second day was moving the class to the Hampton Roads AREC. Participants were given hands-on training by Virginia Tech experts and toured the insect lab.

The Oceanfront Sheraton was prepared for our education and social time!

Next year’s Come to the Bay is moving! It will be held at the Hampton Roads AREC ! Mark your calendars for the week of January 22, 2024 for it.

 

Another Successful Service Project

“What an incredible day. I don’t know how many times I can say “thank you” as it doesn’t seem like enough. We can’t wait to watch everything grow. Thank you again for everything – it was a perfect day.”

Chris Gorri, Chesapeake Bay Foundation

 

The Service Project gets better each year!

In 2021, our inaugural year, we provided and planted 6,000 American Beachgrass plants at the Virginia Beach oceanfront. In the past two years, they have taken root, meshed together, and have protected valuable beaches from the ravages of many storms. Last year, we provided and planted 15,000 of those same plants at a City of Virginia Beach boat ramp off Shore Drive; dramatically located beneath Lesner Bridge. While a winter storm took about a fifth of those plants out to sea – landscaping the Chesapeake Bay, no doubt – the remaining plants took root and are doing their job of protecting the Lynnhaven River where it meets open water.

The 2023 Service Project was the most ambitious of them all. On Monday, January 23 we restored a 1,700 square foot bioswale at the entrance of Pleasure House Point and the Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s Brock Center. In addition to clearing the bioswale of invasive plants and planting appropriate perennials and self-seeding annuals, once again we provided and planted American Beachgrass plants. The bioswale project restored a failed engineering feature to its original purpose. Grass plants will prevent erosion and reduce foot traffic in areas designated for turtles and other wildlife.

As in 2022, the 2023 Service Project concluded with presentations by City of Virginia Beach Public School Environmental Studies students. These high school juniors and seniors researched an ecological topic (bioswales), expertly presented the topic, and fielded questions from the audience.

NORTH CAROLINE TURFGRASS: Neal Glatt, GrowTheBench.com

“We have a dilemma” is how one of my employees, ten days into managing her first direct report ever, started the conversation. The issue was that there were some concerns about the work her new employee, who started with the company only ten days previously, had just submitted. It wasn’t that the work was wrong or necessarily bad, but it was certainly a bit different than the typical work we do.

Much to my manager’s credit, she told me that she wanted to give feedback but was concerned about how it would be received. Should she encourage the initiative, excitement, and action of the new employee by accepting the work as it was submitted? Or should she enforce the quality standards of work at our company by correcting the new employee?

In fact, every manager faces this dilemma on the job. How can an employee’s engagement be increased while providing constructive criticism? A manager who picks one or the other usually has mediocre team prone to expensive employee turnover. Yet often trying to pick a middle-of-the-road approach leads to neither objective being realized.

There are three pitfalls managers are subject to which leads to this situation. By taking action, they can avoid the problem and engage high-performing employees who produce great work.

Lack of Training

The reason employees typically don’t perform to the standards expected is because they simply were never taught effectively. Training isn’t something that happens once but rather must be ongoing. The best organizations and teams realize that in a rapidly changing business environment there must be continuous learning from trainers who can add new value.

My first-time manager recognized this issue immediately and told me that while she had trained her new employee on how to technically create the work, she had been planning to have a conversation around the quality and specifics in the coming days. This absolutely explains why the work done wasn’t exactly what had been expected. More training would have prevented the dilemma in the first place.

Lack of Time

Unfortunately, the demand of most workers today is to do more work in less time. For both employees and managers, finding the time to adequately train while meeting all their other daily obligations is difficult. Yet by expecting production too soon, it leads to greater issues than extending deadlines would have. Most managers realize only when it’s too late that by not slowing down, they lose employee engagement and limit the potential of future production forever.

Our new employee was so excited to get started working that my first-time manager gave her the green light to get started. Yet if she had extended more time for the project, she could have easily allowed the new employee to create a draft and meet for a scheduled review discussion where feedback would have been expected and easily received. If those expectations were in place, and the time constraints lifted, she would not have landed in the current predicament.

Lack of Trust

The type of critical feedback that managers often want to deliver is never an issue when their employees trust them implicitly. People greatly care about the intentions of those who give them feedback and these intentions become known from competence, consistency, and character demonstrated throughout a relationship. Managers can build more trust through frequent and transparent conversations which back up consistency between values, intentions, and outcomes.

For my first-time manager, I could deliver a criticism via text with no negative engagement ramifications because there is a high level of trust built over years of working together. But her dilemma was caused because it’s impossible to have this level of confidence in another person after only ten days on the job.

MISSISSIPPI TURFGRASS: Jay McCurdy Ph.D., Associate Professor, Turfgrass Extension Specialist Department of Plant & Soil Sciences, Mississippi State University

Lawns are not going away, but how we manage them is changing.

Recent, rapid urbanization has driven the development of urban green space in the United States and abroad. The world population has almost doubled since 1970, and more than 80% of U.S. citizens reside in urban areas. As a result, much traditionally rural, agricultural, and wild land has been converted to lawns, parks, sports surfaces, etc. for aesthetics, recreation, and ease of maintenance.

Simultaneously, cities and suburbs are filling with folks who are willing and able to change their habits to fit their belief systems—supporting wildlife conservation, reducing inputs like water and fertilizer, and decreasing fossil fuel use. Those trends will continue, so how can the turf industry meet the needs and demands of an increasingly ecologically and socially conscious society?

Turfgrass has a role to play

Lawns and other grasslands are important in built environments. They offer greater noise and heat abatement than pavement, hardscape, and synthetic landscaping. However, turf does not replicate the cooling and shading effects of tree canopy, nor does it fill the habitat void left after clearing and removing natural environments for communities.

Turf provides erosion control, nutrient infiltration, and a familiar, low-maintenance aesthetic. Historically, one of turf’s main benefits has been line-of-sight for protection and separation from other humans and the wild—think roadside visibility, fire abatement, pest control, and home defense. With time, those practicalities have developed into the quintessential “American lawn.” Urban citizens worldwide recognize grasslands maintained as turfgrass lawns or open green spaces, such as parks, for their recreational and social functions as well as their aesthetics.

Problems arise from reliance upon any one system. Turf often lacks species richness, and many modern management practices are ecologically insensitive. For instance, turfgrass’s role in carbon sequestration is often touted, but the positive effect of sequestration may be nullified by management practices such as the seed, sod, and transport to establish, mowing, pest management, irrigation, and fertilization. The literature suggests that even modestly maintained lawns may be net greenhouse gas emitters. Most importantly, lawn-age limits the peak sequestration—that is, once a lawn reaches a certain age (30 to 70 years old), the carbon released through decay equals that absorbed in growth (Gu et al., 2015; Tidåker et al., 2017). Regardless of the net balance, reducing fertilization and mowing frequency are essential to minimizing environmental harms (Law & Patton, 2017).

Repeated pesticide and fertilizer application, as well as mowing, favors monoculture rather than plant biodiversity, although biodiversity is generally a key indicator of healthy ecosystem function. The detriments of “industrial” monoculture lawns have been much-discussed, but few arguments have focused on suitable alternatives for the typical suburban homeowner. Our collaborations with others in the southeast (see RefugeLawn.com) promise new plant materials and systems that incorporate forbs for pollinator habitat, but changing a societal norm like monoculture turfgrass is a slow process and will not be for everyone.

What does the future hold?

Lawns are not going away, but how we manage them is changing. New approaches to sustainable lawn and land care will incorporate the following principles:

1 ) Plant material selected for low inputs.

Preempting regulation requires good science, and there’s no better science than appropriate species and variety selection.

NEW ENGLAND BLADE

Operations Manager, Parks & Open Space, Brookline, Massachusetts DPW

Where did you go to school?

I started at Paul Smith’s College in the Adirondacks of NY as a Forestry – Park Planning and Administration major. At the time it was a two-year institution. After the two years, I transferred to Rhode Island College and received my Bachelor’s degree in management.

How did you get your start in the sports turf industry?

I spent 15 years with the TruGreen Companies. We partnered with McCoy Stadium in Pawtucket, RI as well as a few municipalities in Rhode Island. My real introduction and education began when I became the Assistant Superintendent of Parks for East Providence, RI. We didn’t have a defined turf management plan and so we developed it field by field. Its success culminated with one of our baseball complexes being selected to host the State Little League finals tournament.

Where did you go from there?

After 10 years in East Providence, I became the Operations Manager for Brookline (MA) Parks and Open Space. I’ll hit the 10-year milestone this June.

Who have been your sports turf mentors through the years?

The phrase ‘it takes a village’ certainly is true in my case. Tom Dorsey (Cranston, RI P&R) was the first to take me under his wing. Rex Eberly (South Kingston, RI P&R) was also someone always available for me to bounce ideas off. It certainly helped that we worked for the same department so I could call or drive five minutes and consult with Joe Medeiros (East Providence, RI P&R) at Pierce Field. He not only mentored on how to maintain exceptional fields but how to deal with users and the general public.

What’s your favorite thing about your current position?

Brookline has a long history of supporting its athletic facilities and parks. Meeting that expectation is demanding but also very satisfying. I’m fortunate to have an Athletic Field Supervisor, David Croteau, to lead our athletic turf management program. Between us we have more than 60 years of experience growing turf which is routinely tested in this urban, high usage environment.

What is a project you recently completed?

We recently completed an Athletic Field Needs Assessment and Master Plan. It revealed some of what we already suspected – fields are over-used, and we need more. I’m sure it’s the same for many of the members reading this magazine.

What is the next “game-changer” you see on the horizon for the sports turf industry? 

I believe robotics are going to start playing a role in many of the tasks that we do on athletic fields. I see them more as tools to let us concentrate on the important tasks that require a trained eye, like infield maintenance, while the robot mows or paints in the lines.

What’s your favorite / most useful:

Equipment?

Aerator, aerator, aerator – solid, core, dimple

Product?

Humates – it’s always about the soil

Technology?

Irrigation Central Control – water plays such an important part of what we do both as a means for our end product but also our role in sustainability and climate change.

Can you share a bit about your family life and what you enjoy doing in your free time?

We are a hiking and camping family, so being outdoors is key. I have three college-age daughters, so watching them grow into confident young women has been great. Of course, watching them clean their rooms out for the final time will also be enjoyable.

What advice would you share with people starting out in sports turf management today?

You can’t learn what we do in a college classroom or from the seat of a truck. You’ve got to get on your hands and knees and learn it. Yes, green thick grass looks great, but our true mission is to provide athletes of any age a safe playing surface. That’s the goal!

Tennessee Turfgrass – Larry Tankersley, Extension Forester, University of Tennessee Department of Forestry, Wildlife and Fisheries and Tom Samples, Ph.D., Turfgrass Science & Management, University of Tennessee Department of Plant Sciences

Trees and turfgrasses share the same basic requirements in order to live. Both capture energy from sunlight in order to produce carbon-containing substances that are used immediately to support growth, or can be stored in reserve. Photosynthesis, the combination of carbon, hydrogen and oxygen from carbon dioxide and water in the presence of light results in the formation of glucose and other sugars. Atmospheric carbon dioxide is also the source  of carbon in amino acids, proteins, starch and cell walls.

Trees and turfgrasses have vascular systems (xylem and phloem), and rely on water for oxygen and hydrogen, and to move essential nutrients absorbed from the soil to leaves, and sugars produced in the leaves to roots. Fourteen mineral nutrients are essential for their survival and reproduction. Nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium and sulfur are classified as macronutrients due to the quantity of each that is required. Due to the very small amount (usually 100 ppm or less) of each found in plant tissue, the remaining eight essential minerals, chlorine, iron, boron, manganese, zinc, copper, molybdenum and nickel, are referred to as micronutrients.

Local air temperatures, annual rainfall amounts, and soil texture and fertility levels often determine if a particular species or variety of turfgrass or tree will thrive in the landscape. Although trees and turfgrasses growing in close proximity to each other must share resources (Table 1), this does not necessarily mean that they cannot co-exist. Successful management strategies assure that the fundamental requirements of both trees and turfgrasses are being met every year, even though growing conditions for each may be less than ideal.

Table 1. Fundamental Requirements of Trees and Turfgrasses.

Shared Resources:

– Physical space, especially below ground

– Clean air, especially oxygen and carbon dioxide, free of toxins, above and below ground

– Sunlight, both enough (duration and intensity) and of the appropriate wavelengths (quality)

– Water, the right amount delivered on time

– Seventeen essential nutrients – carbon, hydrogen and oxygen from air and water, and 14 mineral nutrients supplied by the soil

– Minimum and maximum air and soil temperatures appropriate for growth and survival of both trees and turfgrasses

Light Intensity, Quality and Duration. The rate at which photosynthesis takes place within a tree or turfgrass usually increases with increasing light intensity. Light intensity is described as the amount of energy, or ‘packets’ of light referred to as photons, hitting the surface of a leaf over some time period. Light stimulates stomates to open. As a result, high light intensities are usually associated with high water transpiration rates. Only an estimated one to two percent of the solar radiation a turfgrass is receiving is absorbed and converted to chemical energy. Most of this absorbed energy is reradiated at much longer wavelengths, resulting in the release of heat. Turfgrass leaves with a horizontal orientation are more efficient absorbers of solar radiation compared to those growing more upright. The surfaces of turfgrass leaves may also reflect solar radiation. Dull and dry leaves are usually less reflective than glossy or wet leaves. Turfgrass leaves may also transmit solar radiation that may be absorbed by other leaves.

In his book “Turfgrass Science and Culture” published in 1973, Michigan State University researcher and author, Dr. James Beard,

Tennesse Turfgrass – Julie Holt, Content Director, TheTurfZone.com

How did you get into the turfgrass industry and end up where you are today?

I always loved the game of golf. My dad got me started super early, I started playing when I was first able to walk, basically. He put a club in my hand, and I grew up playing golf. Some of my fondest memories are going to the golf course with my dad at six o’clock in the morning on Saturday and Sunday, play golf at six, then be home by eleven o’clock, start the day. I was always around the golf course, and I came across an article in high school that college in SUNY Delhi was offering a class in turf management and I thought it would be interesting so I looked into that. I signed up, they accepted me and I started my turfgrass voyage, if you will. So I’ve been in the business now for over 25 years. I started back in 1996.

Where did you go from there – how did your path bring you to where you are now?

I grew up in Buffalo, New York. Actually a little city called Dunkirk, which is 40 miles southwest of Buffalo, New York. The winters there are pretty harsh, so it’s a six-month work window there in west New York. I had some relatives out in Las Vegas, so when I graduated college, I decided to go try to work in Las Vegas. I worked there for about a year, got kind of bored of it because it is literally just Vegas, there’s nothing else really around, except for casinos and golf courses.

Then I moved back home for six months. I had some family in the Carolinas, Greensboro, and I went down there for a weekend looking for a job, and a friend from back home called me and said that he heard that I was in the area, he happened to be in Charlotte, North Carolina and I went down there to visit him and they hired me on the spot as a second assistant superintendent, making nine dollars an hour, which at the time to me was an insane amount of money. I worked at Highland Creek as my first assistant job for about two years and eventually got picked up at Charlotte Country Club, where I spent ten years as senior assistant superintendent. I eventually moved on to River Hills Country Club, which was my first golf course superintendent job. I worked there for five years, and then interviewed here at Memphis Country Club and I’ve been here, starting my sixth year right now.

From those previous locations, and now that you are entrenched in Tennessee living there in Memphis, what has been a unique challenge of managing turfgrass where you are right now?

The weather. I thought it was going to parallel the Charlotte market, but it does not. The weather is just brutal. The summers, the humidity are just brutal, the heat. Then the winter – you’ve got some cold nights here. And then the rain, I did not expect all this rain. I think one year we had 78 inches, something like that. The winter months, we try to do a lot of project work. Cutting trees down, sod work, cart path repair… you struggle to get anything done because it’s either too wet or everything’s frozen. It’s tough, so the weather was my biggest shock moving here.

What’s been the biggest challenge you’ve had, not just there in Memphis, but in the turfgrass industry in general?

I would have to say it varies—I can’t believe I’m getting ready to say this – by decade almost. Originally, it was finding a job when I first started. It was breaking into being an assistant. I think colleges were churning kids out at the time and we had a hard time just finding an assistant’s position. So my first few years, it was just landing that assistant’s position. After that it was trying to grapple with member expectations – being a young assistant, learning to deal with all that… I don’t want to say heat, but the noise coming from members or guests. Highland Creek, my first course, was a public course, so you’d hear a lot of vocal opinions from the guests. You’d have to kind of dig through that feedback to find o...

Arkansas Turfgrass – Devon Carroll, Plant, Soil, & Environmental Science Ph.D. candidate, The University of Tennessee and Dr. Carrie Stephens, Professor of Leadership in the Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education & Communications, The University of Tennessee  Women’s Work

A look at most grounds crews at athletic facilities, golf courses, or landscape operations rarely reveals a woman working to maintain green spaces. Despite women comprising 51% of the U.S. population and 47% of the labor force, women represent far less than half of the labor force in the turfgrass or landscape industries. Given that turfgrass and landscape industries are estimated to support about 1.4 million jobs nation-wide, this labor group represents novel employment opportunities. Although female groundskeepers and landscape professionals have recently gained attention in media, their numbers are few. National turfgrass associations report only 2 to 4% of members who are female (Figure 1). Similarly, the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that as of 2019, women comprised only 6.5% of all landscaping and groundskeeping workers.

The low percentage of women working in the turfgrass or landscaping industry classifies such work as a non-traditional job. Non-traditional jobs are classified by the United States Department of Labor as an occupation that is comprised of 25% or less female employment. Other non-traditional labor sectors with similar percentages of female employment to turfgrass and landscaping include welding, construction, plumbing, and electricians (2.2 to 5.3% women). The low engagement of women in the green industry is a problem as labor is of growing concern. In recent years, a decline in the U.S. unemployment rate and immigrant and blue-collar worker availability has affected hiring across many professions. In the past eighteen months, the labor issue has been exacerbated by the compounding effects of COVID-19. As the industry struggles to fill positions, recognizing the under-utilization of women could be a solution. Can increased recruitment of women to the green industry help close the labor gap?

Imagine if the percentage of women working in landscape related professions rose from 6.5% to 10%. Based on current estimations by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, this relatively small increase would result in an additional 50,000 women seeking employment in the green industry. Now imagine if the percentage changed to 20 or 30% women.

In recent years, the green industry has worked to create space for women by developing programs such as the Women in Landscape Network, Ladies Leading Turf sponsored by Syngenta, Women in Golf sponsored by Bayer Environmental Science, and “Women in Turf” events held at industry association meetings. Continuing these efforts and refining recruitment methods to attract women to the industry could ease labor concerns and result in a more diverse workforce. Barriers faced uniquely by women may be limiting the number of women entering and remaining in the industry. In other agricultural fields, research has identified challenges and opportunities for women as a means of increasing their recruitment. This information is of value to the turfgrass and landscape industries as a resource for improving recruitment and retention strategies for women and to ease labor concerns.

Female Experiences in Turfgrass

Researchers at the University of Tennessee in the Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communications took a scientific approach to determine barriers and opportunities for women in the turfgrass industry by interviewing female leaders to explore their lived experiences. Thirteen female leaders participated in the study and represented diverse backgrounds of 6 to 30+ years of experience working in turfgrass; geographic locations in three countries and comprised of nine U.S.