The Turf Zone Podcast

ATA Turf Times – Melanie Bonds, ATA Executive Director

The Pandemic year of 2020 was extremely challenging for everyone, and much to our dismay we had to cancel the Expo. The Board looked at various formats to host at least a portion of the Expo, but because of the general shut-down, we were unable to plan a viable event. It was very frustrating, but as we return to a semblance of normality, we are re-committed to making this the best Expo in our seven-year history!

To further that aim we have a wonderful line up of speakers and an unsurpassed education program! Attendees will have outstanding breakouts and our general session will inspire all those in the turf industry who want to continue to learn and grow in their profession! Our education committee (Drs. Beth Guertal, Dave Han, Jay McCurdy and Bryan Unruh) achieved a broad-spectrum approach to topics. The general session speakers are highlighted below.

Brad Jakubowski with Penn State University has been involved with the Green Industry for over 30 years, working within the residential/commercial, golf course and sport field areas. He is an Instructor of Plant Sciences and Ph.D. candidate at Penn State University. Brad currently teaches a variety of irrigation and turfgrass management courses at Penn State. In his discussion, Weather Apps and Weather Decisions, Let’s Make the Most of Both!, he shares the best in weather apps and web-based information and how to use this information to make the best management, game-time and event management decisions possible! Bring your phones!

Dr. Jim Brosnan is ready to talk weeds! “Why Do They Keep Talking About Resistance?” is Jim’s topic. A Professor in the Plant Sciences Department at the University of Tennessee (UT) and Director of the UT Weed Diagnostics Center, his research focuses on controlling unique and problematic turfgrass weeds, particularly those with resistance to herbicides. Dr. Brosnan has consulted at multiple venues on the PGA Tour (including several major championship host sites,) in addition to National Football League franchises. Dr. Brosnan received a B.S. in turfgrass science from Penn State University, an M.S. in plant, soil and insect sciences (turfgrass) from the University of Massachusetts Amherst, and a Ph.D. in agronomy (turfgrass) from Penn State University.

Dr. Chase Straw earned his B.S. degree from the University of Kentucky in Turfgrass Science. He will speak on Technologies for Turfgrass Management: Current Trends and Future Applications. As an undergraduate, he gained experience managing sports fields at the collegiate (University of Kentucky) and professional (Boston Red Sox and Cincinnati Bengals) levels. He went on to earn his M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Turfgrass Science from the University of Georgia. He spent two years as a Postdoctoral Research Associate at the University of Minnesota before becoming Assistant Professor of Turfgrass Management and Physiology at Texas A&M University in February 2020. Chase’s research focuses on spatial and temporal variability within turfgrass systems to develop practical strategies for reducing management inputs and improving the overall user experience.

This year the committee added a break-out on career management. For anyone wishing to advance in their profession (and who doesn’t) don’t miss Armen Suny’s presentation, “Job Search 101.” Mr. Suny is a search and consulting executive with Kopplin Kuebler & Wallace. He provides executive searches for general managers, golf course superintendents, golf professionals, assistant general managers, and clubhouse managers. He graduated from the famed turfgrass management program at Penn State. Suny has held the positions of golf course superintendent, general manager, vice president of agronomy, PGA tournament director, golf course designer and golf development project workout manager. He has extensive, direct, hands-on experience at major championships,

Pennsylvania Turfgrass – Tanner Delvalle, Pete Landschoot, & Mike Fidanza / Mike Fidanza

Bluemuda Research Update

Research examining mixtures of Kentucky bluegrass and cold-tolerant hybrid bermudagrass, often referred to as “bluemuda,” for sports turf applications in Pennsylvania was initiated at Penn State University Park and Berks campuses in 2020. The bluemuda concept has been successfully implemented on some sports fields in transition zone states, but not in Pennsylvania. The advantage of mixing these two species is that bermudagrass grows rapidly during summer months and can tolerate hot, dry conditions better than cool-season grasses.  Bermudagrass also tolerates traffic very well in summer months and can recuperate from wear and other types of injury relatively quickly. However, bermudagrass does not retain color or produce growth from mid-late fall to early-mid spring in the Mid-Atlantic region, hence the need for a cool-season species in the mix.

Preliminary results of experiments revealed that ‘Tahoma-31’ bermudagrass sprigged in June of 2020 was very quick to establish, providing 100% cover in less than 5 weeks. When Tahoma-31 and ‘HGT’ Kentucky bluegrass were combined, seasonal changes in species composition occurred. In summer, bermudagrass dominated the stand, whereas in late September through October, a transition to primarily Kentucky bluegrass occurred, as bermudagrass became less competitive. Preliminary observations thus far indicate that stand uniformity and quality is improved when Kentucky bluegrass is seeded into existing bermudagrass during September, rather than sprigging bermudagrass into established Kentucky bluegrass in late spring. The use of growth covers resulted in earlier spring green-up of bermudagrass, with greater than 50% green cover in early April at the Penn State Berks campus near Reading. Even in the absence of growth covers, Tahoma-31 survived the winter of 2020 with no winterkill at either location. Additional experiments are being carried out in 2021.

– – –

Fairy Ring Liked the Summer of 2021!

If you visited the Twitter this summer, and entered the commonly used hashtag of #FriskyFairyRingFriday, you would have discovered many awesome photos of fairy ring affecting turf. Well, it’s “awesome” to a turfgrass pathologist. Not so much for the turfgrass manager. The wet spring and early summer, followed-by a challenging hot and dry period, caused or perhaps “revealed” fairy ring symptoms to literally show-up overnight. Fairy ring expresses itself as Type-III (appearance of mushrooms or puffballs), Type-II (lush turf growing in dark green rings or arcs), or Type-I (dead necrotic turf in a circle or arc, often the result of hydrophobic soil conditions). These three types can occur singularly or all together. Even the best preventive fungicide programs were a challenge to keep fairy ring suppressed this year. For curative control, good success was observed when the affected sites are first aerified (i.e., poke a lot of holes), apply a soil surfactant and irrigate thoroughly, and then apply a fairy ring-labeled fungicide and irrigate again. It also helps to irrigate again every few days to ensure uniform soil moisture. This should halt the fairy ring and give your turf the best chance for recovery. And if it’s any consolation, fairy ring is mother nature’s way of saying you have healthy soils.

Mississippi Turfgrass – Melanie Bonds, ATA Executive Director

The Pandemic year of 2020 was extremely challenging for everyone, and much to our dismay we had to cancel the Expo. The Board looked at various formats to host at least a portion of the Expo, but because of the general shut-down, we were unable to plan a viable event. It was very frustrating, but as we return to a semblance of normality, we are re-committed to making this the best Expo in our seven-year history!

To further that aim we have a wonderful line up of speakers and an unsurpassed education program! Attendees will have outstanding breakouts and our general session will inspire all those in the turf industry who want to continue to learn and grow in their profession! Our education committee (Drs. Beth Guertal, Dave Han, Jay McCurdy and Bryan Unruh) achieved a broad-spectrum approach to topics. The general session speakers are highlighted below.

Brad Jakubowski with Penn State University has been involved with the Green Industry for over 30 years, working within the residential/commercial, golf course and sport field areas. He is an Instructor of Plant Sciences and Ph.D. candidate at Penn State University. Brad currently teaches a variety of irrigation and turfgrass management courses at Penn State. In his discussion, Weather Apps and Weather Decisions, Let’s Make the Most of Both!, he shares the best in weather apps and web-based information and how to use this information to make the best management, game-time and event management decisions possible! Bring your phones!

Dr. Jim Brosnan is ready to talk weeds! “Why Do They Keep Talking About Resistance?” is Jim’s topic. A Professor in the Plant Sciences Department at the University of Tennessee (UT) and Director of the UT Weed Diagnostics Center, his research focuses on controlling unique and problematic turfgrass weeds, particularly those with resistance to herbicides. Dr. Brosnan has consulted at multiple venues on the PGA Tour (including several major championship host sites,) in addition to National Football League franchises. Dr. Brosnan received a B.S. in turfgrass science from Penn State University, an M.S. in plant, soil and insect sciences (turfgrass) from the University of Massachusetts Amherst, and a Ph.D. in agronomy (turfgrass) from Penn State University.

Dr. Chase Straw earned his B.S. degree from the University of Kentucky in Turfgrass Science. He will speak on Technologies for Turfgrass Management: Current Trends and Future Applications. As an undergraduate, he gained experience managing sports fields at the collegiate (University of Kentucky) and professional (Boston RedSox and Cincinnati Bengals) levels. He went on to earn his M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Turfgrass Science from the University of Georgia. He spent two years as a Postdoctoral Research Associate at the University of Minnesota before becoming Assistant Professor of Turfgrass Management and Physiology at Texas A&M University in February 2020. Chase’s research focuses on spatial and temporal variability within turfgrass systems to develop practical strategies for reducing management inputs and improving the overall user experience.

This year the committee added a break-out on career man- agement. For anyone wishing to advance in their profession (and who doesn’t) don’t miss Armen Suny’s presentation, “Job Search 101.” Mr. Suny is a search and consulting executive with Kopplin Kuebler & Wallace. He provides executive searches for general managers, golf course superintendents, golf profes- sionals, assistant general managers, and clubhouse managers. He graduated from the famed turfgrass management program at Penn State. Suny has held the positions of golf course superintendent, general manager, vice president of agronomy, PGA tournament director, golf course designer and golf development project workout manager. He has extensive, direct, hands-on experience at major championships,

New England Blade – Julie Holt, Content Director, TheTurfZone.com

Jason Drummond, Head of Athletic Grounds at Amherst College in Amherst, Massachusetts

Turfgrass Management, University of Massachusetts – Amherst

 

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

I began in golf course maintenance on Cape Cod in high school and eventually worked my way up to Superintendent at a course in Northampton, MA.  As our family grew, I switch career paths to sports turf management at Springfield College (Springfield, MA), where my first assignment was the softball field. There I was able to put my own spin on things, such as making a design on the infield with the chalk liner or painting a logo free hand.

Where did you go from there?

At Springfield College they assigned me to the baseball field as well, and eventually the athletic department had me taking care of all the outdoor athletic facilities. As part of the school’s athletic construction master plan, all of the fields were to be converted to synthetic turf, which was not of interest to me. When the opportunity presented itself, I secured the position of Head of Athletic Grounds at Amherst College which allows me to work on six natural grass fields and two synthetic fields.

Who helped you the most when you first started out in the sports turf industry?

My cousin, Steve Guise. A former STMA President, Steve has assisted in the construction of some of the biggest professional athletic fields in the country and was Track Superintendent at Santa Anita Race Track in California. I also admire the work of Ron Dobosz of Wilbraham Parks and Recreation. My kids have played on the Wilbraham fields many times and they are always in fantastic shape. Brett Gawanter at Deerfield Academy is another professional I look up to. His campus and athletic fields are some of the nicest I have ever seen, and Brett’s turf knowledge and background are stellar.

What’s the best business advice you’ve ever received?

From my parents: “Treat people the way you want to be treated.” Plain and simple!

What’s your favorite thing about your current position/responsibilities?

I really enjoy working outdoors and getting my hands dirty. And although I don’t have one favorite thing, it’s nice to work every day with people you enjoy. Depending on the season, the crew and I often spend more time together than with our families.

Is there a recent project you’ve been able to complete?

During Covid, the focus of our work shifted. College grounds and athletic grounds staff joined forces. It was all hands on deck in order to support the students and the college.

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

I see two big game changers: Fraise mowing and synthetic/natural grass hybrid. At Amherst, we plan to start fraise mowing the softball field to reduce the amount of organic matter and provide a new seed bed to establish a better Rye / KBG outfield. I’d like to incorporate this practice into my long-term plan. Regarding hybrid grass, it is only going to get better.  Spring sports start in February, so having a small amount of synthetic to get through the beginning of the season until the natural grass begins to kick in would be ideal.

What’s your favorite/most useful:

Equipment? Three things! My ride on paint sprayer is a big time-saver. My Z sprayer/spreader is just right for all of my fields and I like that I can see and control the amount of product I’m putting down. My Toro sidewinder provides a great cut and a great stripe.

Product? Streamliner and sweet spot tamp. The Streamliner always puts down a consistently precise chalk line and is far superior compared to any of the other liners I have used. With the sweet spot tamp, I don’t have to worry about my hands vibrating every time I use it,

MTC Turf News – Daniel O’Brien; Doug Karcher, Ph.D. and Mike Richardson, Ph.D.

This article was originally published in GCM, June 2021.

Putting green firmness can be a difficult metric to define and interpret. Turf scientists discuss different measurement methods and how to translate the data into management decisions.

We’ve been extremely fortunate to work with a lot of neat “gadgets and gizmos” during our research, taking all types of measurements, usually on putting greens. We’ve collected a lot of interesting data and learned quite a bit along the way, but we must confess that when it comes to firmness, we still have a lot of questions. We’ll work our way back to those, but let’s start with the basics of what we do know.

Putting green firmness: Important and elusive

In and of itself, firmness isn’t a difficult concept to understand or appreciate. After all, it’s one half of the celebrated mantra of “firm and fast,” it has direct implications on playability, and the overwhelming consensus is that it’s a desirable attribute of a quality golf course. We care about firmness because it relates to ball-bounce and shot-hold capacity and the durability of the putting surface. When managed properly, firmness can be a defining hallmark of the skill and strategy required to play the game at the highest level.

But where the waters become a little murky is when you try to articulate what ideal firmness looks like. We often talk about firmness not so much by what it is, but by its absence — “These greens are too soft/too hard.” Ultimately, firmness is about rewarding (and demanding) quality golf shots while preserving the integrity of the putting surface.

The key point in all of this is, with firmness, sometimes it’s easier to attach a number than a definition. With technology today, we can measure a lot of things, but firmness measurements on their own are just a number. If you’re going to spend the time collecting those numbers, you need to have a picture of what that number looks like at the moment of impact when the golf ball meets the putting surface.

Tools for measuring putting green firmness

When it comes to producing a number you can work with, there are several options for how to do it. We’re going to separate those options into two basic camps: accelerometer measurements and depth measurements (Figures 1 and 2). There is a third “indirect” option for assessing firmness through volumetric water content (VWC), which we’ll touch on as well.

Starting with accelerometer measurements, the Clegg Impact Soil Tester is the standard in turfgrass research. Originally developed by Baden Clegg, Ph.D., for testing road subgrades (1), this device has proven particularly useful for evaluating the hardness (or softness) of turfgrass surfaces. The accelerometer is contained within a weighted cylinder (aka impact hammer), which is raised to a prescribed height and dropped through a guide tube, and upon impact with the ground, everything comes to an abrupt stop. The deceleration caused by that collision with the ground is recorded through electrical impulses and reported in units of gravities (G) (7). While these units are not something most of us encounter on a daily basis, the take-home message is, the larger the number, the firmer the surface.

It is important to note that there are different models and protocols for the Clegg. Different models have different hammer weights, and protocol differences typically involve variations in the height from which the hammer is dropped or the number of drops in a single location before the value is recorded. If you’re trying to compare your measurements to a reference dataset or a range of values, be sure you know the model and protocol used. The American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) is a good source for more details on specific testing protocols. For turfgrass situations, the 2.25-kilogram model is very common,

Pennsylvania Turfgrass – Tom Serensits and Andy McNitt

The heart of the fall sports season is now upon us. Although the stresses of summer heat have passed, the rigors of games and practices are not only hard on players and coaches, but the playing field too (Fig 1).

A few simple tips can help minimize the effects of field wear and tear whether you are managing natural or synthetic turf – or both.

Seed Early and Often

The importance of overseeding heavily-used fields and heavily-used areas within a field cannot be emphasized enough. Seeding is one of the most important in-season maintenance practices on heavily-used fields (Fig. 2).

You should not wait until the turf begins to thin. Seeding high-use areas before significant turf loss creates a “temporary seed bank” in the soil, which is ready to spring into action as the existing turf stand thins.

In almost all cases, perennial ryegrass provides the most in-season seeding success. Compared to other options such as Kentucky bluegrass and tall fescue, perennial ryegrass offers several advantages.

First is speed. Perennial ryegrass germinates in five to seven days and grows quickly after germinating. Germination and maturation time for both Kentucky bluegrass and tall fescue is much slower. Plus, perennial ryegrass will establish under slightly cooler temperatures compared to bluegrass or tall fescue.

Second, perennial ryegrass is less expensive (even though seed costs are up this year). You often will see blends of Kentucky bluegrass and perennial ryegrass, but for the best bang for your buck, stick with 100% perennial ryegrass. You don’t have time for Kentucky bluegrass to get established and it’s not very traffic tolerant when it’s young and immature. Plus it’s expensive in comparison to ryegrass. Previous research at Penn State shows that ryegrass is more traffic tolerant than tall fescue until both have been established for 14 weeks. That’s three and half months. You don’t have that kind of time, stick with ryegrass.

As for selecting the cultivar of perennial ryegrass to use, visit www.ntep.org and select the latest perennial ryegrass test date. The National Turfgrass Evaluation Program consists of turfgrass cultivar evaluations conducted at universities throughout the United States.

When looking at the perennial ryegrass data for several of the NTEP test sites closest to your location, don’t get hung up selecting the cultivar at the top of the list. Pick the cheapest cultivar in the top two-thirds of the list. Quality is important, but so is quantity, and if you can pick a good cultivar that is inexpensive, you can buy more seed. Also, the textbook suggestion of always mixing a minimum of three cultivars can be ignored in the case of highly trafficked turf.

First, the breeders tell us that there is already significant genetic variation within perennial ryegrass cultivars. Secondly, you are growing this grass almost like an annual. It gets worn out and replaced via additional seeding often. So the mantra is: cheap price for adequate quality and most importantly volume, volume, volume. Shoot for a minimum of 30 lbs per 1000 square feet per year. That seems like a lot, but we believe it should be set as your minimum for highly trafficked locations. Lower trafficked areas likely require much less (Fig 3.).

Timing – Dr. Dave Minner and Dr. Andrew Hoiberg (2013), authored several foundational research publications on this topic. Their conclusions were that seeding early in the season was more beneficial than seeding later. Upon reflection, this makes sense. Seed spread in mid-November doesn’t help the surface much during our fall season. Maybe it’s around to help next spring, but it’s not helping your field right now because it’s still in the bag. We’ve discussed this with Minner et al. over some adult beverages on more than one occasion.

Alabama Turf Times – Chad Lambert, Sur-Line Turf

When I was asked to write this article, I had some doubts as to my qualifications. I have been a contractor for over 30 years with no Ph.D. to give me the extra wealth of knowledge usually poured into such an article. However, I was asked to share my expertise, so here we go! I started working in the turfgrass industry not by accident, but by birth. My father, Louis “Skip” Lambert III, was a well-known agronomist, contractor and founder of Sur-Line Turf, Inc., in Northport, Alabama in 1991. Prior to this, Dad worked with Southern Turf Nurseries, and I can remember him talking about Prescription Athletic Turf (PAT) and Enka Turf Systems at an early age.

The PAT system had the ability to pump water into or out of the playing surface using pipes installed underneath the playing surface. The Orange Bowl in south Florida had this system installed due to the high rainfall they experience each year, especially during hurricanes. The University of Alabama’s Bryant Denny Stadium had its PAT system installed in 1991, and still has it in place. Enka Turf used synthetic mats to strengthen the playing surface and prevent cupping. Arkansas’ Razorback Stadium was recently renovated using a similar system.

These were high end athletic field systems installed in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s at some of the most high-profile turf venues across the United States. I got to walk some special places going to work with Dad as a young boy, (Citrus Bowl, Orange Bowl, Atlanta Fulton County Stadium, Houston Astrodome, numerous Southeastern Conference venues, Augusta National Golf Club, and many more). Dad retired in 2006 and I’ve carried on in his footsteps.

High Profile Athletic Fields

All the venues mentioned previously are high-profile for sure. So, what defines a high-profile athletic field? The definition of a high-profile facility is determined by the money available for construction and maintenance. Qualified athletic contractors use the same equipment and personnel to build everything from little league to professional fields. The true difference lies in site design, materials, and maintenance, all of which cost money.

Sites are extremely important to athletic fields. They vary greatly and affect cost exponentially. Generally, the higher profile complexes can effectively change the landscape to fit their needs. Often high-profile facilities are in urban areas, where space becomes a huge factor.

Design is also an all-important factor and can make or break the facility. Architects and designers are challenged to create the perfect stage or playing surface. At times this stage must be incorporated within a stadium that allows fans good access and is a fun place to observe sporting events. Players and staff also require adequate facilities, and all this must mesh with field efficiency. This design team often uses more than one professional, with at least one that specializes in design of the playing surface specifically. The sports field designer is the person in charge of designing a stage that will accommodate whatever sport is to be played under varying conditions provided by Mother Nature. The exception is closed stadiums, which present new challenges.

Types of Playing Surfaces

Possible materials used to build high-profile athletic facility playing surfaces are determined by the specific design or type of field. With that said, there are three basic types of playing surfaces no matter the sport being played.

* Natural Grass

* Synthetic Turf

* Hybrid Systems (combines both natural and synthetic turf)

All of them have a place in modern athletic facilities.

Natural Grass

Natural grass fields are still considered the standard by which every other type of playing surface is compared.

Arkansas Turfgrass – Daniel O’Brien; Doug Karcher, Ph.D. & Mike Richardson, Ph.D.

This article was originally published in GCM, June 2021.

Putting green firmness can be a difficult metric to define and interpret. Turf scientists discuss different measurement methods and how to translate the data into management decisions.

We’ve been extremely fortunate to work with a lot of neat “gadgets and gizmos” during our research, taking all types of measurements, usually on putting greens. We’ve collected a lot of interesting data and learned quite a bit along the way, but we must confess that when it comes to firmness, we still have a lot of questions. We’ll work our way back to those, but let’s start with the basics of what we do know.

Putting green firmness: Important and elusive

In and of itself, firmness isn’t a difficult concept to understand or appreciate. After all, it’s one half of the celebrated mantra of “firm and fast,” it has direct implications on playability, and the overwhelming consensus is that it’s a desirable attribute of a quality golf course. We care about firmness because it relates to ball-bounce and shot-hold capacity and the durability of the putting surface. When managed properly, firmness can be a defining hallmark of the skill and strategy required to play the game at the highest level.

But where the waters become a little murky is when you try to articulate what ideal firmness looks like. We often talk about firmness not so much by what it is, but by its absence — “These greens are too soft/too hard.” Ultimately, firmness is about rewarding (and demanding) quality golf shots while preserving the integrity of the putting surface.

The key point in all of this is, with firmness, sometimes it’s easier to attach a number than a definition. With technology today, we can measure a lot of things, but firmness measurements on their own are just a number. If you’re going to spend the time collecting those numbers, you need to have a picture of what that number looks like at the moment of impact when the golf ball meets the putting surface.

Tools for measuring putting green firmness

When it comes to producing a number you can work with, there are several options for how to do it. We’re going to separate those options into two basic camps: accelerometer measurements and depth measurements (Figures 1 and 2). There is a third “indirect” option for assessing firmness through volumetric water content (VWC), which we’ll touch on as well.

Starting with accelerometer measurements, the Clegg Impact Soil Tester is the standard in turfgrass research. Originally developed by Baden Clegg, Ph.D., for testing road subgrades (1), this device has proven particularly useful for evaluating the hardness (or softness) of turfgrass surfaces. The accelerometer is contained within a weighted cylinder (aka impact hammer), which is raised to a prescribed height and dropped through a guide tube, and upon impact with the ground, everything comes to an abrupt stop. The deceleration caused by that collision with the ground is recorded through electrical impulses and reported in units of gravities (G) (7). While these units are not something most of us encounter on a daily basis, the take-home message is, the larger the number, the firmer the surface.

It is important to note that there are different models and protocols for the Clegg. Different models have different hammer weights, and protocol differences typically involve variations in the height from which the hammer is dropped or the number of drops in a single location before the value is recorded. If you’re trying to compare your measurements to a reference dataset or a range of values, be sure you know the model and protocol used. The American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) is a good source for more details on specific testing protocols.

Virginia Turfgrass Journal – Julie Holt, Content Director, TheTurfZone.com

The Turf Zone: Welcome to the Turf Zone. In this episode of Virginia Turfgrass, I’m talking to Marc Moran, CSFM and Agricultural and horticultural instructor at Atlee Hight School. Marc, thank you for joining me.

TTZ: We’re talking because Virginia Turfgrass Council is doing a focus on education programs and you lead the turfgrass course at Atlee Hight School. So let’s just start and talk about what that program looks like and how it got started.

MM: So it’s a two-year turf science course. We’ve been in place as an official program, course-wise since 2001-2002. In 2000-2001, I was part of a multi-teacher department and we were going through some proposed changes in our county, we were moving away from production agriculture and trying to get an idea of where our community wanted us to be. We’re still a strong agricultural county, but our school system was trying to move the focus from production to more of a modern agricultural model, so in that year that was going on we were talking about changes, but we hadn’t really decided on what was going to happen. I had taken on a, I was teaching landscape design construction, landscape contracting and I was looking for some outside projects and also we had gone through a coaching change in our football program. One of our assistants took over for our longtime head coach, who had retired. And one of the responsibilities of our coaching staff at the time was to manage their athletic facilities and that was across all sports. And this particular coach didn’t really have a strong background and he was like, “I need some help.” I have an undergraduate degree in Agriculture Education and also Horticulture, and some previous experience through my work with Southern States, and at home in our farm community. So I kind of tied back to a lot of those things and I said I would try to do my best to help him. Most of my experience through Southern States was with corn, wheat and soybeans, and I said, “We should be able to figure it out.” So we went through that discussion and in the meantime I was looking for more projects for my students to work on and we were focused on land measurement. I wanted to venture into surveying a little bit, teach kids how to use surveying instruments and autolevels and transits and things like that. I kind of created a lesson where we plotted points on our playing surface of the football field. And they didn’t realize it at the time, but the points I had plotted were our athletics logo. So “A” and swords, like you would see at University of Virginia. So this “A” and crossed sabres look. So I’d plotted those points, I had an alum who was really sharp in autoCAD, so I laid it out on paper and then we just did angles and distances and things like that, did a little bit of trig with the kids. When we plotted them, they were just a bunch of flags on the fields, then some of the kids started to realize it was our logo. So once we had the logo laid out we went ahead and outlined it, painted it. So it became our first ever sports turf project was our school logo on the 50-yard line at homecoming. And then we really got into it and the next thing you know, its like, “Can you checkerboard our end zones?” Sure, we can figure out how to do that and we were using backpack sprayers to paint, we had no technology at all, and no knowledge. We just made it up as we went. So then my experience with the sports turf, and I got approached by our boosters and, “We like what you did so far, and can you help out a little bit more?” They never really had an agronomy plan and we basically had our coaches put down whatever a sales person who they worked with over time, you know they trusted them. You know, they should have, they didn’t give them bad advice, but they never had a plan.

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

How did you get involved in this line of work and what was your career path?

Many years ago when my two sons were playing Little League baseball, the dads had to work on the fields, and I owned a tire business here in Columbia. With us dads working on the ball fields, one thing led to another and it became a passion. Other people started to ask us, “Can you come look at our dirt?” or “Can you come look at our mound?”

I had the opportunity to sell my tire business, and I told my wife that we’re going to take a huge leap of faith and chase the passion. In 1996 we started Southern Athletic Fields and grew that until 2018, when we sold SAF to Profile Products. Since then I’ve done a little for them, but now we’ve branched out and started a couple other companies. We have Game Time Sports Fields, it’s renovation, grading, whatever needs to be done on an athletic field, we try to do it. Then Line to Line is accessory based – netting and painting, bases, drags, all the other things that I enjoy doing. We’re trying to reinvent the wheel and come up with new, and maybe sometimes better, ideas on how to maintain baseball and softball fields.

Have you always primarily worked in baseball and softball, or have you ventured into other sports?

We painted and striped football and soccer fields, we’ve done a lot of topdressing and grading of football and soccer fields. So we’re not just baseball and softball, but I think most people know me as “The Dirt Guy,” so that’s kind of where we’ve had our home.

Do you do a lot of turfgrass maintenance, or do you rely on someone else to work with you while you’re doing dirt work?

We have some partners that do most of the turf part of it. We have tried over the years to specialize in the ballfield dirts, mound clays, and the particular types of infield mixes. We’ve been very fortunate from the Little Leagues to high school to colleges to Major League fields to have our particular type of infield mix.

Some people call you the “King of Dirt.” How did you earn that title?

Well, that was not my idea. I think there’s one reason they call me that, no one else ever wanted to be tagged with that label. We’ve always said, it’s not just dirt. There’s a lot more to it. From the beginning when we’d just find something that was kind of red that would work on a ballfield, and we’d begin to understand what made this particular blend work. So we started getting into the differences between sand, silt and clay. We started looking at the different components of dirt and we started looking at the percentages of sand, the percentages of silt, the percentages of clay.

Not all areas are the same, so we got into that and found the proper blend, if you will. We were very fortunate. I’ve driven thousands of miles, and when you see red dirt, you think, “Well, that’s it.” We were fortunate to find an area that it did work and the percentages were there. Early on, that was before people got into what’s called engineered soils, but to have a consistent supply, and that’s what we were looking for long-term, was a consistent infield mix that a school or an organization could get from us and know that from one year to the next that they were dealing with basically the same material. As time has gone on and our customers and our coaches and field managers have understood that there’s different things that go into this besides just going out in the field with a tractor. We’ve learned a lot and we’ve tried to educate our customers to the point now where we can, through our blending process that we have, there’s very few other people that are doing the blending that we have done here when we were Southern Athletic Fields, and we continue to do them now with Line to Line. So year after year after year,