Water is the most vital of our resources. Life on earth can’t exist without it—and neither can our industry. Private clubs and golf courses rely on water to do more than just keep the grass green. Watering our courses keeps the environment healthy, our employees paid and our industry alive. While most clubs understand that it can be an uphill battle to make the important water needs of golf courses known, especially during times of drought, it’s important that clubs both be aware of and discuss other water issues, which can be just as vital to club success. As these three articles show, it’s worth fighting to develop good water policies and practices, and collaboration can be an effective way to help protect the industry, the environment and the cities that they support.
Georgia Drought Calls for Collaboration/Conservation Practices
By Mike Crawford, CGCS
In 2006 a significant drought began to develop throughout the southeastern United States as below normal rainfall rates were experienced across the region. In Georgia, the drought peaked in the summer of 2007, and National Weather Service records show that Atlanta experienced a rainfall deficit of close to 18 inches that year. For a region that heavily relies on rainfall to recharge lakes and streams, this became a significant crisis throughout the state and specifically in north Georgia, where the drought was hitting the hardest.
In the spring of 2007, the Georgia Golf Course Superintendents Association (Georgia GCSA) had just completed a project that fulfilled an agreement with the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) to provide the state with Best Management Practices (BMP’s) for water conservation on golf courses. This BMP project had an ambitious goal of getting at least 75 percent of the Georgia GCSA member courses to participate in the program. A committee was formed and it started a vigorous campaign to educate its members about the importance of completing the BMP document. For golf courses that had limited resources or needed help in defining their BMP’s, a group of dedicated members would visit the golf course and work with the superintendent to accurately complete the document. This monumental effort paid off when the Georgia GCSA was able to present the EPD with completed BMP’s from more than 97 percent of its member clubs. This BMP project not only helped us build relationships within the EPD, but also laid the groundwork for negotiations that would soon make or break the golf industry throughout the state of Georgia.
As the drought continued to build during the summer of 2007, outdoor watering came under fire from the EPD, and water restrictions were implemented that placed substantial restrictions on golf courses. The restrictions for golf had the potential to be severe and could threaten the viability of the industry. Georgia has four levels of drought restrictions for golf courses that range from level I, where a system of odd and even days for watering were put in place, to drought level IV, where the elimination of any outdoor watering (except for greens) was to be enforced. The Georgia GCSA approached the director of the Georgia EPD to discuss concerns about the drought restrictions for golf and to educate the EPD staff on golf’s actual water use and needs. The EPD had many misconceptions about the golf industry’s water use; but, utilizing the recently completed BMP project, the GCSA was able to present data to back up what the regulators were being told.
EDP staff worked with GCSA to come to a resolution of the differences, especially in regard to requirements for watering and maintaining healthy turfgrass. EPD is charged with conserving the states resources, and was very diligent in defense of the policies that were in place.
Through ongoing meetings and e-mails, GCSA began to educate EPD on how golf courses are watered and why, what the industry’s actual annual water use was, and how the game of golf desires firm and fast playing conditions versus wet. Using the BMP water use information gathered and comparing it to the state’s records for water consumption of all other industries throughout Georgia, GCSA was able to show that as an industry, golf in Georgia uses less than seven-tenths of one percent of the water consumed annually in the state. Golf course superintendents wanted to do their part to conserve water, but it was abundantly clear that cutting off the water to golf would not significantly impact Georgia’s efforts to conserve water. In fact, we pointed out that dead and dying turfgrass would do more harm than good—adversely impacting the environment by failing to control erosion, no longer acting as a natural filter for pollutants in rainfall, and it would be unable to help provide a cooling effect by moderating temperatures versus bare ground or paved surfaces.
Additionally, GCSA noted that during a drought when we aren’t receiving supplemental rainfall and the turfgrass needs water the most, golf courses were being restricted the most severely. In addition to the adverse environmental effects this would create, the economic impact would be severe as well. The golfing public expects to be able to play on a golf course with good turfgrass conditions. Dead and dying turfgrass would create an unacceptable playing surface, and a significant—if not catastrophic—reduction in revenues could be expected. A recent economic impact study shows that golf is a $3 billion industry in Georgia, providing more than 30,000 jobs at golf courses and clubs throughout the state. Cutting off the water to golf could create an environmental and economic disaster.
As the discussions proceeded, the EPD began to learn more about GCSA, and the developing relationship fostered a level of trust and respect. At the conclusion of the negotiations, the state agreed to implement a 15 percent reduction of annual use during times of declared drought based on a water calculator GCSA presented that utilizes several scientific factors to determine the annual water needs of turfgrass within the state. This calculator takes into account average annual rainfall, evapotranspiration rates, crop coefficients and other data, and computes the water needs to provide healthy turfgrass. The percentage of reduction allows each golf course to individually manage its water use in a reasonable and responsible manner that makes sense for the facility while it conserves water.
Because the EPD was willing to listen to GCSA and learn about the industry, it recognized that golf doesn’t fit into a cookie cutter mold for water conservation. This new agreement allows golf to contribute to the conservation of a valuable natural resource without severely affecting the economic vitality of the industry.
Mike Crawford, CGCS, is director of golf course operations at TPC Sugarloaf in Duluth, Ga. He can be reached at [email protected].
Grass is Greener with Joint City/Golf Club Efforts
By Terra Waldron, CCM, CCE and Phil Shoemaker
Scottsdale started delivering blended water to golf courses in 1998. Today the city treats and delivers 20 million gallons of treated water per day to 21 golf courses or “users.” At the start, this seemed like a great arrangement, but many golf courses soon start- ed to realize that the agreement with the city had over- looked a vital element of their water needs—quality.
Water Quality Matters
Water quality and the need to meet EPA standards and protect public health concerns were always of the utmost importance. The potable water supply for residents and hotels comes from the Central Arizona Project (CAP), which is designed to bring Colorado River water to several Arizona counties. The 336-mile system of aqueducts, tunnels, pumping plants and pipelines is the largest single renewable water supply resource in the state of Arizona. When the potable water leaves the water campus it is considered to be acceptable for drinking. Even so, many residents and hotels still use water-softening devices for personal use, and the brine water from these units is deposited back into the wastewater stream.
Though the water from the campus was generally thought to be acceptable for growing grass, testing of the return wastewater—that which is used for golf course irrigation— revealed that excessive salt levels placed the water well above the threshold for growing healthy turf. Unfortunately, the city’s contract with area golf courses never addressed acceptable water quality or nutrient levels for turf cultivation.
As the conditions on golf courses started to decline, it became very apparent that the agreements between the clubs and the city needed to be renegotiated to include water quality. Most clubs were suffering high recurring expenses to re-grass the same areas. The combination of poor water quality, rain- fall amounts of less than 10-inches per year, winter overseeding, highly compacted soils and poor draining proved too much for the Bermuda grass to recover in time for the overseeding cycle to start over again. Each fall, the Bermuda grass was less healthy—leading to bigger problems and resulting in little or no turf the next summer.
Clubs generally adjust agronomy plans to compensate for the water issues; each has their own plans, but all involve the process of leaching the salts and improving drainage. Though many areas of the country/world may have water with higher salts, Arizona’s lack of rainfall and DG soils is a combination that compromised golf course conditions. Poor course conditions have a negative effect on everything from marketing to new members and member satisfaction to real estate values.
United for a Cause
Facing course degradation and decline, Tim Bakels, former VP/GM at Desert Highlands Golf Club (now the GM at Hamilton Farm Golf Club in New Jersey) and Phil Shoemaker, Desert Highlands Golf Course Superintendent, invited representatives from all of the golf clubs to meet in early 2004. Together, the North Scottsdale clubs united to form a steering committee to collaborate with the city on ways to improve water quality issues.
After a series of discussions with water chemists and soil/water consultants, the committee developed a plan that would lower the salt content to manage- able levels.
As a short-term fix to this growing problem, Scottsdale developed and implemented a blend of treated water and water from the water campus that would provide better quality water during key grass growing seasons. The improved water quality helped clubs to better maintain their courses—at least temporarily.
A Long-Term Solution
The city of Scottsdale and the steering committee studied several long-term options for the water improvement process, including on-site treatment at each golf course or treatment at the city water campus. Many clubs did not have the real estate available for expansion, and the dilemma of what to do with the brine water was a real problem. The final and best solution was to improve the water at the city water campus. The city retained an engineering firm to study and recommend upgrades to their existing facility. The Advanced Water Treatment (AWT) system was developed and became the plan that all of the golf clubs and Scottsdale agreed was the best solution.
In order to gain community support for the long- term water improvement plan, the group began to generate awareness of the problems facing local golf courses. Area courses conducted an economic impact study that demonstrates the importance of golf to the Scottsdale market and the large role in annual Scottsdale tourism.
Success of the water improvement process also included overcoming political concerns. The golf courses were willing to pay a reasonable amount to see the project through to completion, but there are high costs associated with the design and construction of a wastewater treatment facility expansion—and Scottsdale did not want to invest taxpayer money to help offset the cost. Annual operational costs also needed to be negotiated. Concern about what to do with the brine water was also still a problem.
These issues were eventually worked out, and a new agreement between Scottsdale and the RWDS
users was signed. The new agreement—an addendum to the existing contracts—addressed nutrient levels and detailed the funds that each club, depending upon water allotment and number of courses, would be expected to contribute.
A New System, but Challenges Remain
In April 2011, the city began delivering the improved quality water on a permanent basis—a welcome day that many clubs were not sure would ever come.
Most clubs had been irrigating with the high salt content water for many years, and the salt levels in the soils are very high. To help clubs rebound and provide better turf conditions, aggressive cultural programs are in place. Unfortunately, it’s still an ongoing challenge to educate golfers that it will take several years to reclaim the soils.
Hopefully using funds typically dedicated for annual sodding/re-grassing can offset some of the additional water improvement expenses. This is yet to be seen, as it is the first year of improved water under the new arrangement. The golf course users are committed to controlling all agronomic inputs, and this includes applying better quality water. We believe this is the first instance in which a city water operator has worked directly with the end users to negotiate and implement a plan to improve water quality.
The benefits of this project come with a significant price tag, but expectations are high that the end result of providing good water for better year-round conditions will pay off—providing local courses with the water they need to flourish as oases in Arizona’s unforgiving desert.
Terra S.H. Waldron, CCM, CCE, is vice president/ COO of the Desert Highlands Golf Club and HOA in Scottsdale, Ariz. She currently serves on NCA’s Communications Committee. She can be reached at [email protected].
Phil Shoemaker has been the golf course superintendent of Desert Highlands Golf Club since 1999, and additionally at its inception from 1982–1986. He can be reached at [email protected].
Advocating for California’s Water Policy
By Kirk O. Reese, CCM
It will come as no surprise to the many golf courses dependent upon outside water sources that more attention needs to be paid to the formation and implementation of water policies. As Mark Twain foreshadowed, the rights of our most precious resource to nurture and sustain the game of golf, or to fill a swimming pool, or to water a clay court will be fought over, and those who are able to help draft and implement good water policy will benefit both the club industry and their own club’s fortune.
Over many years, a convoluted series of legislation, regulation, treaties and settlements have led to the formation of competing bodies authoring water policy for different regions in California. There is not a holistic water policy for the entire state, and, as it stands, the lack of such a policy is a major impediment to the fortunes of California. Therefore, an amalgamation of policies with far reaching impacts will be spliced throughout different constituencies with stakeholders likely capitalizing on the opportunity to influence the decision makers. It is imperative that the club industry participates. Otherwise clubs are left to the mercy of the other voices in the room: environmentalists, farmers, developers and land use planners to name a few. Here’s a step-by-step guide to how Los Angeles-area clubs contributed to the discussion:
Understand Oversight for Water Resources
The first order of business is to understand the structure of the regional or state system of water oversight. In the Los Angeles area, potable water is regulated by a municipal monopoly—the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP). But in specific areas such as the San Fernando Valley, the LADWP regulates the sources of non-potable water as well as riparian (including underground) water supplies. It is said that in the Valley the LADWP “owns the rain,” and they truly function as a monopoly in the San Fernando Valley. In other areas of Los Angeles, owners of land retain riparian rights, leading many clubs to drill wells to augment their water supplies over the past ten years. Other organizations that have oversight of water sources include the Metropolitan Water District, California Department of Conservation, Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, to name a few. Meeting with these kinds of organizations can help to elucidate the specifics of water policy and provide an idea of the future direction that water policy may take.
Organize and Collaborate on the Message
Next, industry allies should form an organization capable of effectively communicating the needs of the club’s constituency. In response to the policy concerns governing the sport of golf and the many disparate governing bodies that construct and regulate the industry, major elements of the golf industry formed the California Alliance of Golf (CAG), a group that spans public and private entities who have a stake in the success of golf. CAG is comprised of companies like American Golf, Pebble Beach Companies, casino-owned courses, the Northern and Southern California Golf Associations, the professional and facility associations such the National Club Association, California State Club Association, Club Managers Association of America, Golf Course Superintendents Association of America, National Golf Course Owners Association and the PGA of America, and many individual public and private courses.
CAG has built a structure for participating in pol- icy formulation and regulation in the club industry and has hired a lobbyist in Sacramento who acts as a watchdog for issues affecting the golf industry. CAG also represented those members of the golf industry served by the LADWP at a hearing on watering restrictions during a drought. CAG was able to effectively help develop and draft an improved water policy beneficial to golf courses. Although not a total victory, the result was far better than allowing the LADWP to formulate policy without key input from the industry.
Reach Out to the Community
Finally, engage the club and its neighbors in the process. Make others aware of the facts and issues. There is strength in numbers, and governmental agencies are often looking for stakeholders to participate in policy formulation. Invite yourself to the discussion and combine resources and intellect to work towards better solutions. You, your club and your industry will be glad you did.
Kirk O. Reese, CCM, is general manager and chief operating officer of the Los Angeles Country Club. He is a director of the National Club Association and co-chairman of NCA’s Membership Committee. He can be reached at [email protected].