Hal Project TU070342

7/28/2019 Hal Project TU070342

1/35

Environmental and HealthBenefits of Golf Courses

HAL Project No. TU07034

A Literature Review by

F. R. Higginson and

P. E. McMaugh

Environmental and HealthBenefits of Golf Courses

HAL Project No. TU07034

A Literature Review by

F. R. Higginson and

P. E. McMaugh


2/35

HAL PROJECT NO. TU07034 GOLF EXTENSION

ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH BENEFITS OF GOLF COURSES

A LITERATURE REVIEWby

F. R. Higginson and P. E. McMaugh

Turfgrass Scientific Services Pty Ltd

14 Carolyn Avenue

Carlingford NSW 2118

PrinciPal Partners

corPorate Partners individual suPPorters

Peter Williams & Associates

AcknowledgementsThe Australian Golf Environment Initiative is pleased to have as its partners the following organisations

and individuals:


3/35

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

REVIEW OF LITERATURE SPECIFIC TO THE GOLF INDUSTRY

WATER QUALITY

WATER USE COMPARED TO OTHER INDUSTRIES

BIODIVERSITY VALUE

CREATING AND RECREATING INDIGENOUS FLORA AREAS

WETLANDS AND THEIR BENEFITS

CARBON SEQUESTRATION

CARBON FOOT PRINT OF GOLF COURSES

SEDIMENT, NUTRIENT AND PESTICIDE MOVEMENT ASSOCIATED WITH GOLF COURSES

GOLF COURSE CONSTRUCTION MANAGING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

GOLF COURSE CONSTRUCTION REJUVENATION OF DEGRADED SITES:

AESTHETIC, SOCIAL AND HEALTH BENEFITS OF TURFGRASS:SUGGESTED AREAS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH:

KEY REFERENCES


4/35Page 1

ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH BENEFITS OF GOLF COURSESA LITERATURE REVIEW

HAL PROJECT N0. TU07034 GOLF EXTENSIONby

F. R. Higginson and P. E. McMaugh

INTRODUCTION

Following the literature review undertaken by Higginson and McMaugh (2008), the Australian Golf Course

Superintendents Association (AGCSA) requested an expansion of the review that is focussed principally on the

environmental aspects (benefits or otherwise) of golf courses, and to identify any knowledge gaps for the industry.

The key factors to be included were as follows;

i. Water quality

ii. Water use compared to other industries

iii. Bio-diversity value

iv. Creating or recreating indigenous flora areas

v. Wetlands and their benefits

vi. Carbon sequestration

vii. Carbon foot print of golf courses

viii. Nutrient and soil movement associated with golf courses

ix. Golf course construction managing the environmental impacts

x. Golf course construction rejuvenation of degraded sites.

This study was undertaken to provide the golf industry with a focus for future research projects. It is important that

the industry substantiate statements about the benefits of golf courses with data from scientific literature.

The golf industry is also interested in the social and health benefits of golf but doubts whether there is much

specific information related to golf courses. This aspect has also been covered in the review.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE SPECIFIC TO THE GOLF INDUSTRY

The objective of this extension to a previous research project funded by HAL is to review the scientific literature and

provide recommendations to the golf industry, based on sound scientific principles that will identify future research

areas required to alleviate any negative environmental impacts, and to suggest action to improve the general

publics conception of golf courses.

The seminal study of the environmental benefits of turfgrass was conducted by J.B. Beard in the early 1990s (Beard,

J.B. & R.L. Green 1994). Beard (1994) presents similar information to the original 1994 paper (i.e. Beard & Green,

1994) but specifically re-interprets it for golf courses and their environment. Beard (2000) is a recent update also

relating specifically to golf course environments, and was partially supported by the United States Golf Association

(USGA). It is the authors view that information contained within these three publications is directly relevant to

golf courses within the Australian context. They are considered to be key references for this review.

The golf course industry has effectively responded to the environmental issues raised above in a very positive way.

Environmental management programs for golf courses have become common practice in recent years (e.g.:

Stubbs, D., 1995 & 1996; Australian Golf Union, 1998). The golf industry has also instituted programs of environmental

accreditation, and the importance of these programs is recognised by an annual awards process. As well, the golf

industry, through the AGCSA, has recently established a Water Management Initiative which aims to educate and

inform turf managers of water saving options in turf applications.

Golf courses can also consider certification under the Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program for Golf Courses

(ACSP). In joining the ACSP, courses become part of a network of golf courses dedicated to the goal of developingenvironmentally sound maintenance practices that enhance and continue to improve the wildlife habitat on their

properties. The information generated as part of the process provides a form of insurance by documenting that the

club is protecting the environment and enhancing the property so that future generations can continue to enjoy the

property and its environmental benefits. It helps establish credible assurance that the club is handling chemicals,


5/35Page 2

fertilisers, and fuel in a proper manner; that water is being used efficiently; and that water features and irrigation

sources are properly managed to maintain good water quality. It also ensures that the club is providing a healthy

habitat for a variety of wildlife species. Audubon International also provides a strong back-up support system, in

which volunteer Audubon Stewards are available to assist courses with undertaking and implementing the program

(Yarrington, F., 2006).

As of June 30th, 2003, 2,010 courses throughout the United States and in 25 countries were enrolled in the ACSP, and

a total of 390 golf courses (19%) had achieved the distinction of Certified Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary for their

efforts to implement and document a full complement of conservation activities, including chemical use reductionand safety, water conservation, water quality management and wildlife habitat improvement (Nus, J.L. (ed.), 2004).

The golf course industry, particularly in Australia, has been very active in developing Environmental Management

Systems (EMS), a voluntary, standardised, systematic approach to the management of environmental issues. Private

industry (Environmental Business Solutions) in association with AGCSA has developed one of the most advanced

programs in the world in applying the EMS concept to golf courses (Carrow, R.N. & Fletcher, K.A., 2007).

WATER QUALITY

Because of severe drought and a resulting shortage of municipal-

supplied treated water (potable water), mandatory waterrestrictions have been in place within most of urban and rural

Australia for the past four or five years. The impact of these long-

term restrictions on use of potable water on parks, sports grounds,

golf courses and public gardens has been estimated to have

reduced consumption by 14 28%, and to have affected 75% of

Australias population (Fam, D. et al., 2008).

The shortage of available potable water has, in particular, driven

golf clubs to seek alternative supplies of water to maintain greens

and fairways in reasonable order for club patrons. There are many avenues here to explore, such as creek water

and stored water from dams within the golf club, groundwater or bore water, urban stormwater, recycled water, and

treated water from external sources such as sewage treatment works and other industrial sources. The key factorin all of these processes is water quality. Water quality guidelines are available within Australia for all forms of water

(ANZECC, 1992), but to achieve these goals on the golf course requires expensive chemical or biological testing of

water prior to and during its use. Beehag (1996b) has published a useful literature review of turfgrass tolerances to

water quality. Quality issues reviewed include salinity (EC), pH, cations (sodium and potassium), anions (carbonate,

bicarbonate, chloride, nitrate N, ammonia N and sulfate), and trace element levels (heavy metals and boron).

In many cases, urban stormwater or on-site run-off water is often of adequate quality for irrigation, but the problem

is that it is always available in large quantities when you do not need it. This means that it must be stored. On-site

storage in lakes, ponds, reservoirs or dams is the obvious solution for golf courses as such features can easily be

incorporated into the course design. An important point is to design these features in such a way as to ensure that

they do not become a source of water quality problems themselves, through eutrophication (high nutrient levels)and consequent algal blooms, or the harbouring of mosquitoes (Cullen, P., 1996).

Two golf clubs in NSW have adopted a natural approach to managing high nutrient levels in their irrigation reservoirs

(Harris, K., 2007). They have installed rafted reedbed systems, consisting of buoyancy rafts upon which a coir mat

with pre-grown wetland plants is placed. Both clubs used this innovative system because there were very few

other options available to them for managing the regular algal outbreaks at their reservoirs. To date, rafted reed

beds have proved effective in controlling algal blooms at both sites and provide another tool for treatment of

undesirable water quality. This is an area that the authors have selected as suitable for further investigation (refer

recommendations section).

Currently many clubs are considering using recycled water from sewage treatment works and sewage mining (i.e.:

the technique of pumping raw effluent from a sewer main and treating it on site) to recycle large volumes of water

and this is a trend that will become increasingly important in the future (Richardson, G., 1996; Thomson, A. & I. Beer,

1996).


6/35Page 3

One example of sewer mining is the SMART system (Sewer Mains Access Reclaim Technology). This system has

been developed to provide unlimited supplies of irrigation water, regardless of drought or water restrictions. The

water produced contains valuable levels of fertiliser in the form of ammonia and nitrogen. The system extracts

raw sewage from a sewer main and treats the effluent to a standard suitable for irrigation (Richardson, G., 1996).

The cost effectiveness of such schemes remains a problem at this stage of development (Cullen, P., 1996) but the

potential is immense.

Pennant Hills Golf Club was the first club in Sydney to introduce a sewer mining system as an alternative water source

(Dahl, K. & Kirkby, R., 2008). The treatment process uses a membrane bio-reactor to remove solids and pathogens

from sewage water. Water passing through the membrane can be used directly, or sent for further treatment by

disinfection or salt reduction. One problem with the scheme has been the high sodium content of THE sewage,

requiring the club to introduce a long-term gypsum application program, which includes monthly applications on

greens, three-monthly on tees and surrounds, and six-monthly on fairways. The water reclamation plant was a multi-

million dollar investment, but effectively ends the clubs reliance on potable water for irrigation.

The high sodium (Na) concentration in sewage and other municipal wastewaters is a major problem. Research in

New Zealand measured nutrient leaching and changes in soil characteristics of four contrasting soils irrigated with

secondary-treated municipal wastewater (Sparling G.P., et al., 2006). After four years of treatment, results indicate

that leaching losses of N applied ranged from 22% for coarse-textured soils to < 5% for other soil types. Leaching

losses of P applied ranged from 13% to < 1%. All irrigated soils, however, had a marked increase in exchangeableNa which reached 4 22% ESP (Exchangeable Sodium Percentage).

Golf courses have a number of advantages over other areas for effluent reuse. Generally,

they comprise relatively large areas of urban land; they consist of well established areas of perennial grasses, which

are good water users; the management is usually intensive, thus any problems with a scheme would be quickly

noticed and corrected as part of the monitoring process; and the managers generally have a good knowledge of

soils and fertilisers and are highly competent irrigators (Thomson & Beer, 1996).

For recycled water or effluent reuse, the increase in availability of water may require golf courses to upgrade their

irrigation systems. Many courses have older hand-moved sprinklers for greens and tees and movable gun irrigators

for fairways. These older systems may be used for effluent irrigation, but for efficient effluent reuse, conversion to a

modern pop-up irrigating system should be considered. This has the potential for full automation via computer timers

and can enable use of soil moisture monitoring devices that allow accurate assessment of the water requirements

for the turfgrass, so as to avoid over-watering and possible contamination of groundwater (Thomson & Beer, 1996).

The quantity of effluent applied should only be sufficient to meet the plants requirements. As well, the pathogen

content in the effluent should be monitored to minimise health risks to players and workers on the course. For NSW,

adequate monitoring systems required for effluent reuse are available (Hird, C., 1996).

In-situ monitoring of soil moisture content has been regularly practised for the past two decades. Soil solution

monitoring has made nowhere near the same progress (Falivene, S., 2008). There are three reasons why soil solute

monitoring should be considered. Firstly, either through lack of water or the use of as little water as possible, leaching

below the root zone has been reduced, enabling salt build-up within the root zone. Secondly, improvements in

the application of fertilisers have not been matched by the ability to monitor and interpret nutrient levels in theroot zone; and thirdly, increasing interest in using recycled water or effluent of lower quality requires some form of

monitoring. Analysing soil solution provides a quick, easy and economical way to measure salt and nutrient levels

in the soil throughout the season. Soil solution analysis is also a valuable environmental tool because it can be used

to detect excess nutrients moving below the plants root zone. Golf course managers should investigate this tool as

part of their environmental management programs (Falivene, S., 2008). This is an area identified as a possible future

research program (refer recommendations section).

As well, there are some highly innovative techniques being investigated, such as managed aquifer recharge.

Managed aquifer recharge involves adding a treated water source, such as recycled water or captured runoff

water, to underground aquifers under controlled conditions. Water stored in this way can be pumped and re-used

when required. This technique is currently being trialled across the Swan Coastal Plain in Western Australia, and alsoin Adelaide (Dowie, A., 2007; Satterley, J., 2007; 2009). Natural aquifer recharge or aquifer regeneration is already

in use as a significant water source in the Centennial Park/ Botany sands region of Sydney. This is an area identified

as requiring further investigation (refer recommendations section).


7/35


8/35Page 5

A water survey conducted by the Victorian Golf Association (VGA, 2005) provides comprehensive information on

the nature of water use in that particular section of the golf industry. According to the survey, the average 18 hole

golf course has approximately 20 hectares of turf, including the greens, and the average water application rate is

5 ML/ha. The lack of national statistics for the golf industry has been recognised and a national survey of water use

patterns was conducted by Golf Australia and the AGCSA on behalf of the Australian Golf Industry Council (AGIC,

2007). This survey provides the first detailed understanding of water use by Australias golf courses and highlights the

value of the golf industry to the Australian economy. The document clearly illustrates that the golf industry is already

a proactive water manager and has been an early adopter of efficient water management practices. The AGIC

study has found that almost one third of golf clubs are currently under some sort of water use restriction.

The study (AGIC, 2007) also found that there are about 1,000 18-hole equivalent golf courses covering some 58,000

hectares in Australia that have some dependency on water for the irrigation of grass playing surfaces. A typical 18-

hole equivalent course uses an average of 124 ML of water per year. Irrigated surfaces (20% of the course) receive

an average of 10.7 ML/ ha, considerably higher than an earlier estimate by the Victorian Golf Association (VGA,

2005). An interesting observation, however, is that groundwater and recycled water accounts for almost 60% of the

water used.

This study determined that over 40% of golf clubs nationally have in place a formal water management plan (WMP)

and that over two thirds of clubs either have or are currently exploring other water alternatives. In addition, golf clubs

are also pursuing a number of shorter term practices aimed at using water more efficiently. These include:i. Use of wetting agents;

ii. Less frequent watering;

iii. Installation of more efficient irrigation sprinkler heads;

iv. Use of in-situ monitoring of soil moisture content to aid irrigation systems; and

v. Changing to less water dependent turfgrass types (conversion from cool-season to warm-season

varieties).

To address the issue that turfgrass is an excessive user of water, the golf industry has been very proactive in promoting

positive attempts to address the problem; such as selection and use of drought tolerant or drought avoiding

varieties of turfgrass and the use of controlled irrigation systems that apply water only when required by use of in-situ

soil moisture monitoring systems or other irrigation scheduling techniques. Recent surveys conducted by the industry

have shown very positive gains in using water more efficiently (VGA, 2005; AGIC, 2007).

Irrigation Technology: The total irrigated area of a golf course needs to be assessed in terms of the courses water

requirements. The golf course design should consider the amount of irrigated turf appropriate to the site, taking into

account the environmental conditions and available water resources. Limiting the irrigated area of a golf course is

an important water efficiency strategy. Victorian golf clubs have made significant advances in this area. In the VGA

Sustainable Water for Golf Survey, it was reported that between a third and 40% of metropolitan and country clubs

have reduced the irrigated area of their golf course as a means of saving water (VGA, 2005).

The conversion to warm season grasses in southern Australia has seen a significant improvement in water use

efficiency. Plant species suited to the local climate and soils should be selected wherever possible. A common

measure of water use efficiency is the proportion of water used by the turf compared to the amount of waterdelivered to the turf area. Whilst the amount of water delivered can be measured, it is very difficult to actually

measure the amount of water used by the turf. One measure of efficiency is the Irrigation Index (Ii) (Connellan G.J.,

2005). This index compares the depth of water actually applied to the estimated depth of water required over the

complete irrigation season. This simple measure enables the manager to assess how efficiently the irrigation system

is performing, and how the performance compares with other sites. An irrigated area that is being well managed

would have an Ii value of 1.0 or less. If the Ii value is greater than 1.0, it would suggest that there is some wastage

of water.

There are many factors that can impact negatively on the performance of turf irrigation systems. These include poor

hydraulic (flow and pressure) operating conditions, incorrect nozzle sizing, and poor installation and maintenance.

A key measure of performance of sprinkler irrigation systems is the uniformity of application. It is not possible toachieve high efficiency with sprinklers that have poor uniformity (Connellan G.J., 2007).


9/35Page 6

With increasing restrictions on the use of potable water, managers of urban turf and landscaped areas must

achieve greater water usage efficiency if open public spaces are to survive and be used. To achieve this, a logical

and scientifically sound approach to irrigation in urban areas in Australia is about to be published (Connellan, G.,

2009). This publication is based on the need to deliver specific landscape outcomes using principles of water

sensitive urban design. The book promises to present the latest irrigation technology, including developments

in applicators, distribution and control technology and environmental sensors, such as weather stations, soil

moisture sensors and rain sensors. When published, this book should be a useful tool to golf course managers

as the author is very well respected within the industry.

Water management strategies currently exist that achieve significant savings in watering by utilising sophisticated

computer-operated irrigation systems that monitor rainfall, evaporation and soil moisture levels simultaneously. As

such systems can assess soil moisture content and status, sprinklers can be activated in areas when and where

needed, and only with the requisite quantity.

An example of this type of approach is a research project, funded by Horticulture Australia Limited (Pathan, Barton and

Colmer, 2003; 2007; Barton L. & Colmer T.D., 2006), which evaluated a soil moisture sensor-controlled irrigation system

for improving water use in turf. The cumulative volume of water applied at two sites in Western Australia to areas controlled

by a soil moisture sensor was 25% less in summer than areas irrigated according to current recommendations of WA

Water Corporation (during times without water restrictions). Use of the soil moisture sensor-controlled system saved

100 L of water from leaching per square metre during a summer period (November to April) of 154 days. This project

effectively demonstrates the value of utilising some form of soil moisture sensor to control irrigation of turfgrasses.

Although irrigation technology is strongly advocated as a means of improving water-use efficiency and can

optimise watering regimes, it has also been shown to increase the incidence of soil water repellence on sandy-

textured soils. Soil water repellence can cause irrigation water to infiltrate unevenly into the soil surface, bypassing

a proportion of the turfgrass roots causing localised areas of turfgrass death. A three-year research project is being

conducted by the University of Western Australia aimed at maximising turfgrass water use efficiency for warm-season

turfgrasses by decreasing the incidence and severity of soil water repellence (Barton L. & Colmer T.D., 2007). Barton

L., Wan G. & Colmer T.D. (2008) summarise the experiments being conducted as part of this research program.

Use of Wetting agents: Water repellence or hydrophobicity is a widely reported phenomenon in turfgrass soils andcan reduce water infiltration to such an extent that even extremely long periods of irrigation are unsuccessful in

wetting the soil. Localised dry spot (LDS) is a problem in turf caused by hydrophobic conditions within the rootzone.

LDS is characterised by irregular water-stressed areas of turfgrass that leads to a deterioration in turf quality. Wetting

agents or surfactants are one means of treating water repellent soils, together with core cultivation and thorough

wetting. The sandy nature of turfgrass rootzones, particularly on golf greens and tees, tends to exacerbate the

development of water repellency problems as water repellency is more of a problem in coarse-textured soils.

A recent study in the USA investigated the effects of several wetting agents on sand-based rootzone hydrophobicity

and putting green turf appearance (Leinauer B. et al., 2007a). The results indicate that all wetting agents tested had

a positive response but some performed marginally better than others. For a summary of the research outcomes,

see Leinauer (2007b).

The above results differ significantly from that of Kostka & Bially (2005) where a synergistic reaction between different

surfactant chemical groups gave large improvements in performance. Within Australia, there is an increasing use

of wetting agents through venturi injection into standard irrigation systems with mounting overall beneficial effects.

Obviously, this is an area requiring further research under Australian conditions (refer recommendations section).

Within the USA, turfgrass has also been publicly criticised as being a high water user. To counteract this, and to

scientifically examine the facts presented on both sides of the argument, the Council for Agricultural Science

and Technology hosted a workshop in 2006 (CAST, 2008). This workshop provided an opportunity for researchers,

scientists, environmentalists and water specialists to join together to discuss the issues facing the turfgrass industry.

The publication arising from this workshop (Beard & Kenna (Eds), 2008a) is an outstanding contribution to the field of

water quality and quantity issues affecting turfgrass in an urban environment. In the Authors view, this publication isvery important to the Australian turfgrass industry as the issues encountered and the responses by scientists to those

issues, are the same as those being encountered within the Australian context. Some examples are:


10/35Page 7

Water availability and conservation are a priority for the turfgrass industry. The first step is to select the correct

turfgrass for the climate in which it will be grown. During the last 30 years, turfgrass scientists have determined

the water use rates for all major turfgrass species. Turfgrasses can survive on much lower amounts of water

than most people realise, and several turfgrass species have good drought resistance. Turfgrasses with deep,

extensive root systems, coupled with decreased water use, are more drought resistant and have a greater

water conservation potential. Water usage rates vary with species and cultivars, as documented by extensive

research (Beard, 1989a; Feldhake et al., 1983; Huang & Fry, 1999). Selecting low water use and/or drought-

resistant turfgrass species and cultivars is a primary means of decreasing water needs. A great deal of this

information is available on the Internet through sources such as the Turfgrass Information File (Michigan State

University, 2007).

Plant selection and landscape design are key factors in urban landscape water conservation. Although water

usage rates for turfgrasses have been extensively reported (see above), far less is known about the actual

water use of ornamental plants, especially large trees, and even less about other shrubs and species used in

mixed landscape designs. There are perhaps 12 major turfgrass species used extensively in urban landscapes

throughout the USA and Australia, whereas the number of ornamental species may exceed several thousand.

It may be this paucity of research on ornamentals and total landscape water use, compared with research

that has enabled the precision irrigation of turfgrass that has led to restrictions on turfgrass or its removal in

many water conservation programs (Beard & Kenna (Eds), 2008a.

Specific cultural practices can be used to decrease water use and enhance drought resistance in urban

landscapes, including mowing height and frequency, turfgrass nutrition and turfgrass irrigation. Secondary

practices, such as soil cultivation, topdressing, wetting agents, plant growth regulators and pest management,

also influence potential water conservation.

The use of alternative water for irrigation is another means of conserving potable water in both high rainfall

areas, and in regions of recurring drought. In dry regions of the country, and in highly populated metropolitan

areas where water is limited, irrigation with municipal recycled water, untreated household grey water, or other

low quality water is a viable means of coping with potable water shortages.

Most pesticides currently used in turfgrass present relatively low risks of significant groundwater contamination.

A healthy turfgrass provides considerable protection against leaching because of high levels of organic

matter and associated microbial activity, serving to immobilize and degrade applied pesticides and nitrates.

Nitrate leaching may present problems in some segments of the turfgrass industry where nitrogen fertilisation

rates have not been lowered to account for turfgrass age and clippings return.

Perceived environmental problems must not be addressed in isolation, but in terms of all of the interrelationships

and with all stakeholders associated with these landscapes. The ultimate goal is to provide quality urban

areas for activities and recreation while conserving and protecting our water resources and supplies.

A useful summary of the outcomes of the above workshop (CAST, 2008) is presented in Beard & Kenna (2008b).

Breeding and selection of turfgrass varieties: There has been considerable research within the USA over the

past 30 years to seek species and cultivars of turfgrass that are drought tolerant. Beard (1989a) has published

comprehensive reviews of research carried out on water use rates and water stress of turfgrasses. Kim and Beard

(1988) studied the comparative evapotranspiration (ET) rates and associated morphological characters of 11 warm-

season turfgrasses representing 9 species. Significant differences in ET rates were found both among and between

10 warm-season turfgrass species (Taliaferro & McMaugh, 1993) encouraging selection and genetic development

for drought tolerance and other physiological characteristics.

Research in this area is still continuing, especially in the arid southwest of the USA (the fastest-growing region within

the United States) where a field study is being conducted by the University of Arizona to determine water use rates

(ET) of commonly used turfgrass varieties for this harsh environment (Kopec D. M. et al., 2006). Results for totalconsumptive water use indicate that some varieties utilise as much as 18% less water during summer than others,

providing potential for selection and breeding of more water-efficient turfgrass varieties.


11/35Page 8

Aldous (2000) provides a good summary of the size and extent of breeding and selection within the Australian (and

New Zealand) turfgrass industry and lists the most important species currently being utilised, as well as some new

species being considered as future possibilities.

BIODIVERSITY VALUE

Urbanisation significantly reduces the amount of habitat

available for flora and fauna. Global estimates indicate that

a possible 50% or more of all species could be at risk (Fam D.,

et al., 2008). Promoting urban biodiversity by the use of green

space is a feasible option, and obviously, golf courses can and

do play a major role in this area. Golf courses provide a habitat

for flora and fauna in the urban environment as there is much

less disturbance of the area than in busy urban streets.

The conservation value of suburban golf courses in South East

Queensland was assessed by investigating their capacity to

support urban-threatened species of birds, mammals, reptiles and frogs. Terrestrial vertebrate assemblages were

compared between golf courses and nearby Eucalypt fragments and with suburban bird assemblages. Biotic

diversity varied among golf courses. While some golf courses had conservation value (supporting high densities ofregionally-threatened vertebrates), most failed to realise that potential, supporting only common urban-adapted

species. Golf courses were generally a better refuge for threatened birds and mammals than for threatened reptiles

and amphibians. While species-specific studies are required to identify the ecological role played by habitats on

golf courses and the potential for long-term viability, the results confirm that suburban golf courses can have local

conservation value for threatened vertebrates. Given their ubiquity, golf courses present a significant opportunity

for urban wildlife conservation. Whilst the the golf industry is making genuine attempts to improve its environmental

management standards, it is important to ensure that those efforts target the needs of regionally threatened species

(Hodgkison S.C., et al., 2007).

In the United Kingdom, Tanner and Gange (2005) studied the diversity of vegetation (tree and herbaceous species)

and three indicator taxa (birds, ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) and bumblebees (Hymenoptera, Apidae))

on nine golf courses and nine adjacent habitats (from which the golf courses had been created) in Surrey, UK.

Although there are approximately 2,600 golf courses within the UK, occupying 0.7% of the total land cover, it is

unknown whether this area represents a significant resource in terms of biodiversity conservation, or if it is significantly

less diverse than the surrounding habitats.

The main objectives of the Tanner and Gange (2005) study were to determine whether golf courses support a higher

diversity of organisms than the farmland they frequently replace; and to examine whether biodiversity increases with

the age of the golf course. Results showed that both birds and insect taxa had a higher species richness and higher

abundance on the golf course habitat than on nearby farmland. While there was no difference in the diversity

of herbaceous plant species, golf courses supported a greater diversity of tree species. Bird diversity showed a

positive relationship with tree diversity for each habitat type. It was found that introduced tree species were more

abundant on the older golf courses, showing that attitudes to nature conservation on courses have changed overtime. Although the courses differed in age by up to ninety years, the age of the course had no effect on biodiversity,

abundance, or species richness of any of the animal taxa sampled.

It was concluded from this study that golf courses of any age can enhance the local biodiversity of any area by

creating a greater variety of habitats than intensively managed agricultural or urban areas. As a consequence, golf

courses have a very positive role to play in providing a habitat for flora and fauna populations.

From a biodiversity point of view, Australian golf courses have made considerable progress in dealing with Avian,

Amphibian and Macropod fauna. Despite the obvious emphasis on birds, frogs, kangaroos and wallabies, animal

species that are easily identified by golf-playing patrons, there has been an almost total neglect of equally-important

and beautiful insect populations, such as Lepidoptera (Butterflies and Moths) and Coleoptera (Beetles), and alsosome reptiles, such as Squamata (skinks, lizards and snakes). Admittedly, some reptiles can be hazardous (such as

some snakes and crocodiles), but skinks, lizards, monitors, geckos, dragons and goannas are generally harmless

and can be encouraged to co-habit with humans in the appropriate environment. As well, there has been very little

research done on the diversity of soil micro-flora and fauna in golf courses, other than those treated as pests (such


12/35Page 9

as soil-borne insect, bacterial and fungal diseases). There are developing and emerging technologies becoming

available where the principles of biodiversity are being used for insect and disease control. These are considered

as areas requiring further research (refer recommendations section).

CREATING AND RECREATING INDIGENOUS FLORA AREAS

Martin (Martin, P.M., 2004) has reviewed the potential of Australian native grasses for use as

managed turf. He points out that, as greater demands are placed on turf for high performance

under increasingly difficult environmental conditions, opportunities are opening up for the

addition of new species to the list and/or the transfer of unusual adaptive traits found in some

native grasses to traditional turf species. He concludes that most of the Australian native species

thought to have some turf potential (eg. Microlaena stipoides, Sporobolus virginicus, Agrostis

aemula complex and Austrodanthonia) would not repay the effort required to make them

commercially acceptable as recreational turfgrasses. They may, however, have an important

role to play in environmental turf plantings such as landscaping, where tolerance to human

traffic is not a major requirement. This is particularly relevant to golf courses for areas of rough,

or where landscaping is a major consideration.

Trees, whether native or introduced varieties, offer benefits to a golf course by providing an aesthetic view, shade, and

habitat for native birds and other animals. They can also significantly increase the biodiversity of a golf course site.Research at the Australian National Universitys Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies (CRES) on biodiversity

conservation in farmlands (associated with Landcare and Greening Australia plantings of native trees), in native

forests, and in Australian plantation forests (whether native hardwood or introduced softwood) show significantly

that any plantings of trees will have a positive benefit on biodiversity, particularly for birds, reptiles, amphibians,

Monotremes (echidnas), Phalangerids (possums, gliders and koalas) and Macropods (kangaroos and wallabies).

The biodiversity benefit to insect species and other invertebrates is also positive, but not as well documented (see

Lindenmayer, D.B., 2009; Lindenmayer, D.B. & Hobbs, R.J., 2004; 2007). From a golf course managers point of view,

the message is that any plantings of trees (whether introduced or native) or native shrub species will have a positive

effect on biodiversity within the vicinity of the golf course.

Trees, however, can also have an unfavourable effect on turf growth and on the game of golf (Oatis, D.A., 2006).

Trees are valuable to many landscapes, both aesthetically and environmentally. Trees also provide shade, and

golfers certainly appreciate shade on hot days. They also function as effective wind breaks in harsh, windswept

environments. Trees, however, have some very negative aspects in that they shade turf, and turf does not perform

as well in shady conditions. They are also a significant hazard to golfers in that falling branches can injure or even

kill golfers, and they can act as very effective lightning conductors during electrical storms, creating another hazard

for golfers as well.

Tree roots compete very effectively with turfgrass for moisture and nutrients, and when they have surface roots,

playability suffers and turf maintenance equipment may sustain damage as well. Trees located in high traffic

areas create permanent traffic patterns that funnel traffic and concentrate wear problems. While the cost of

planting trees is easy to calculate, the long-term costs of maintenance are impossible to compute and are rarely

considered. Moderation is the best policy with respect to golf course tree plantings. Most courses can be improvedby systematically removing undesirable, hazardous and unnecessary trees. Turf and playability can be improved

and the relative value and quality of tree plantings can be increased at the same time (Oatis, D.A., 2006) (refer

recommendations section).

In golf course rough conditions, particularly on links-style courses, consideration should be given to the management

and encouragement of native grasslands. Native grasslands in Australia are defined as vegetation communities

in which grass plants are structurally dominant because the groundcover of woody plants is less than 10%. Native

grasslands in their natural state contain a high diversity of other herbs, including sedges, rushes, lilies, orchids and

forbs (broad-leaved herbs). About 700 species of native herbs have been identified in the grasslands of south-

eastern Australia, the majority of which are not grasses.

The perennial grasses in native grasslands form the structural background of the community, yet this structure

can fluctuate dramatically with the seasons and in response to soil moisture, temperature, grazing, fire, frost and

management. Such communities have and encourage considerable biodiversity, and are easy to maintain in

areas of low traffic, such as rough and borderlands between fairways (Eddy, D.A., 2002).


13/35Page 10

Ornamental plantings are also an integral part of golf course construction and design. There is, however, a paucity

of research on their use in golf courses. This is an area that the authors identify as requiring further investigation,

particularly in association with Nursery and Garden Industry Australia (NGIA). As well, native shrubs are an important

component of sand belt areas of both Sydney and Melbourne, and also in links-style courses and areas of rough.

Together with ornamental plantings, these areas require further collaborative research in association with NGIA.

(refer recommendations section).

WETLANDS AND THEIR BENEFITS

Run-off from urban areas and golf courses is automatically

presumed to contribute significantly to non-point source

water pollution. This, however, need not necessarily be the

case. Generally, golf course drainage directly discharges

into surface water systems, whereas urban stormwater is

managed in some way, albeit crudely, using direct discharge

to surface waters or temporary storage in retention basins

that eventually evaporate or drain to surface waters. A

significant role that golf courses can play in urban stormwater

management is to utilise the stormwater creatively, by

incorporating in the golf course design a series of artificial

wetlands that serve as both water hazards and water quality management tools (Reicher, Z.J., et al., 2005).

The above study, conducted at Purdue University in the USA, used created wetlands on a golf course as stormwater-

receiving locations and as a means of improving water quality. Unlike most stormwater retention basins, a created

wetland with active plant growth and anaerobic sediment activity will have a significant retention and degradation

capacity for introduced materials. Wetlands are able to cleanse the run-off water of nitrate and phosphate nutrients,

remove significant amounts of suspended solids and organic matter, and help remove heavy metals, trace

elements, pesticides and pathogens by chemical, physical and biological processes. The wetlands water, once

cleansed, can be returned to the golf course via the irrigation system.

Results of this study (Reicher, Z.J., et al., 2005) using a 10ha wetland cell, indicate that over a 5 year period, the

wetland efficiently removed an estimated 97% of nitrate/nitrite N plus ammonia N, and also removed 74% of P

nutrient from storm events. Mass loading removal of dissolved solids was 59%, indicating that the wetlands were

effective in removing dissolved solids during storms. However, mass loading removal of suspended solids was 0%

for this study. Suspended solids passed through the system, rather than being retained for sufficient time to allow

sedimentation.

The use of artificial wetlands in golf course design is largely a means of storing and treating stormwater. The main

issues to consider are:

Sufficient catchment area to supply enough water;

Safety of the water with respect to microbiotic contamination, especially aerosols that may affect staff and

golfers (NRMMC,EPHC,AHMC, 2006);

Design of the storage so that they look good but hold sufficient water to be effective; and

Risk associated with people falling in mostly an issue when golf courses have open public access with

minimal fencing (refer recommendations section).

Various references are available to assist managers with aspects of managing wetlands on golf courses (Kenna, P.K.

& M.P, Kenna, 1994; Libby, G., et al., 2004).

There are many examples of the successful use of wetlands on golf courses as a means of collecting and treating

stormwater, but also as an attractive natural hazard for golf play, and an area for increasing biodiversity within the

golf course environment (eg: Bacon, P., 2004; 2005a; 2005b; 2008).

Wetlands offer considerable potential for increasing bird biodiversity on golf courses. In the south-western USA,

the greatest diversity of breeding birds is normally found in riparian habitats (areas surrounding rivers or lakes). It

is estimated that the bird diversity in riparian zones surpasses that of all other western lands combined (Merola-

Zwartjes, M. & J.P. Delong, 2005).


14/35Page 11

This scenario is similar to Australias inland rivers and swamps, such as within the Murray-Darling Basin, where riparian

zones act as an oasis for migratory and resident birds (Kingsford, R.T., 2006 (Ed.), Briggs, S., 1990). Golf courses can

simulate these environments as part of their design, by providing a combination of habitat characteristics that are

reminiscent of the riparian systems used by birds. The conservation value of golf course habitats has to be carefully

planned, however, to exclude the more evasive or pest species of birds (such as the Sacred Ibis in South-Eastern

Australia, which can quickly ruin a putting green) by increasing the complex vertical structure and diversity of plant

species composition in the out-ofplay areas of the course, and in particular, by increasing the extent and usage

of native plants (Merola-Zwartjes, M. & J.P. Delong, 2005).

Wetlands also offer potential for increasing amphibian biodiversity on golf courses (Semlitsch R.D., et al., 2007).

Amphibians are known to use man-made ponds, such as water hazards, sediment retention basins, or farm ponds.

Golf course ponds can be managed in such a way as to promote amphibian abundance and diversity. Some

key factors need to be considered, firstly, eliminating fish from ponds is a critical step as ponds without fish allow

for greater amphibian abundance. The presence of fish eliminates most amphibian species through predation on

eggs, larvae and juveniles, and through competition for food resources. Additionally, fish also can carry diseases

that are associated with amphibian mortality, especially stock fish obtained from hatcheries. Man-made ponds are

frequently stocked with fish to control mosquitoes or algae; however, amphibians can serve the same role in the

aquatic environment.

While common sense suggests that permanent ponds would be better for amphibians, the greatest amphibiandiversity is actually associated with ponds that dry for a short part of the year. Pond drying increases amphibian

diversity by eliminating fish and insect predators, as well as other large competitors. Finally, it is necessary to minimise

the potential for frog ponds to be exposed to contaminants by increasing no-spray zones or vegetative buffers,

which help by filtering contaminants from reaching the aquatic environment (Semlitsch R.D., et al., 2007).

Golf courses provide one of the best opportunities for the clean-up of surface water run off from urban streets and

hardscape areas, and there are numerous studies to show the effectiveness of cleaning water supplies by passing

them through golf courses (Beehag, G.W., 1996; Scaife, D., 1996). Many of the studies of the benefits of turf as a

whole, such as pesticide entrapment and water purification, have been carried out on golf course facilities.

When the potential movement of water and dissolved nutrients from a golf course to surrounding areas is a concern,

grass buffers, bio-swales, wet cells, and constructed wetlands can be useful tools in maintaining water quality.

Increasing the residence time of the soil solution on the golf course is critical and can allow the grass root system,

as well as other soil organisms, to effectively filter nutrients from the water before it leaves the golf course site (Miltner

E., 2007).

CARBON SEQUESTRATION

Australian soils are generally, on World standards, very low

in carbon. The usual range for organic carbon content

in Australian soils is between 1 and 5% (CSIRO, 1983).

Some unusual and rare soils, such as Alpine Humus soils,

can accumulate up to 12% but most Australian soilsare exposed to high temperatures and dry conditions

which limit carbon accumulation. The effects of living

organisms on soil organic matter and carbon are

substantial. Of these, vegetation is the primary source

of soil organic matter and thus the major influencing

factor on the amount present.

Grasses in general, and particularly turfgrasses, develop a dense root mass and an organic thatch layer that is

ideal for storage of carbon in soils. The extensive fibrous root system of turfgrasses contributes substantially to soil

restoration and improvement through organic matter and carbon additions (Beard, 1993).

When people think carbon they usually think trees, but in reality 82% of carbon in the terrestrial biosphere is in the

soil (Jones C., 2007). Healthy grasslands may contain over 100 times more carbon in the soil than on it, making a

well managed perennial grass ley the quickest and most effective way to restore degraded land (Jones C., 2007).


15/35Page 12

As stated above, grasses develop a dense root mass and an organic thatch layer that are both ideal for aiding

the storage of carbon in soils. A study of historic soil testing records in the USA at Fort Collins, Colorado, (Y. Qian &

R.F. Follett, 2002) estimates that golf course greens and fairways alone can sequester carbon (C) at average rates

approaching 0.9 and 1 tonne per hectare per year, respectively. They concluded that C sequestration in turf soils

occurs at a significant rate that is comparable to that reported for USA land that has been placed in the United

States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Conservation Reserve Program (Follett, R et al., 2001).

The above researchers at Fort Collins report on historic data that indicates a strong pattern of soil organic matterresponse to decades of turfgrass culture. Total C sequestration continued for up to about 31 years in fairways

and 45 years in putting greens. The most rapid increase occurred during the first 25 to 30 years after turfgrass

establishment. A further paper by the same research team (Bandaranayake et. al., 2003) using CENTURY model

simulations near Denver and Fort Collins indicate that turfgrass systems can serve as a C sink following establishment.

Model estimates are that 23 to 32 Mg/ha (tonnes/ha) soil organic carbon were sequestered in the 0 to 20cm below

the soil surface after about 30 years. These results compare very favourably with those estimated above from soil

testing records (Qian & Follett, 2002). They conclude that this research indicates that turfgrass systems serve as a

sink for atmospheric C for approximately 30 to 40 years after establishment at approximately 0.9 to 1.2 Mg/ha/yr

(see Figure 1 below).

Figure 1 CENTURY-simulated soil organic carbon before and after establishment of fairway turfgrass in Fort

Collins and Denver in three different soils (Bandaranayake, W0. et al., 2003).

By extrapolating from published data on root dry matter under turfgrass swards, it is possible to obtain another

estimate of the role that turf plays in carbon storage within soils (Boeker, 1974; Boeker & Von Boberfeld, 1974). These

authors report root dry matter from 0 to 20cms under various turfgrass swards grown in the Rhine Valley, Germany.

The results indicate that up to 11% of a cubic metre of topsoil can be comprised of organic matter derived from

root material. This represents a very substantial addition of carbon to the soil, approximately 4.5% by weight in the

top 20cm. Results are summarised in Table 1 below:

Table 1: Results from Boeker & Von Boberfeld (1974)*

Soil depth Root Dry Matter Organic Matter Organic Matter Organic Carbon

Cm. Gm/1000 sq.cm. % by volume % by weight % by weight

0-5 110 11 7.81 4.45

5-10 3.5 0.35 0.25 0.14

10-15 2.0 0.2 0.14 0.08

15-20 1.0 0.1 0.07 0.04

*Assumes a soil bulk density of 1.4 gm/cubic cm, and an average C content in organic matter of 57% (Hazelton

& Murphy, 1992).

As these results were collected at two or three sampling dates, it is possible to estimate the rate of carbon sequestration.Averaging all of the Rhine Valley data in Table 1 provides a carbon sequestration rate of about 2.2 tonnes/ha/year. This

is about twice the rate reported by Qian & Follett (2002) in Denver and Fort Collins, Colorado. There is considerable

variation in the Rhine Valley data which appears to be very much species related. Results are compared in Table 2 below:


16/35Page 13

The above data indicate that turfgrass is able to sequester carbon at about 1-3 tonnes/ha/yr. This agrees with a

tropical study undertaken in the eastern plains of Columbia, which are treeless plains of the Orinoco Basin, where

introduced pastures have been estimated to accumulate about 3 tonnes of carbon/ha/yr (Fisher, M.J. & Thomas

R.J., 2004).

A study in the USA, reported in the International Turfgrass Society Newsletter ( Novak, J., 2006), states that there are

an estimated 40 million acres (i.e. 16.2 million hectares) of tended lawns in the USA, making turfgrass one of their

largest crops and one that has a significant and positive impact on their economy, health and environment. It adds

that lush lawns are a sink for carbon dioxide, pulling in greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere as they grow. Itis estimated that 2% of the US land surface covered by lawns could account for about 5% of the carbon dioxide

absorbed by all plants.

Table 2: Estimates of Carbon Sequestration Rates by Various Authors.

Authors Results reported Organic Matter Tonnes/ha/yr Carbon Tonnes/ha/yr

Qian & Follett. Soil test results Century Model 1.6 2.1 0.9 1.2

Bandaranayake et al

Boeker & Von Boberfeld Poa/Festuca 3.2 1.8

Boeker, 1974 Agrostis/Table 1 0.7 0.4

Boeker, 1974 Festuca/ Table 3 4.6 2.6

Boeker, 1974 Lolium/Phleum/Poa/ Table 5 3.8 2.2Boeker, 1974 Festuca/Table 7 5.4 3.1

Boeker, 1974 Festuca/ Table 8 6.5 3.7

Boeker, 1974 Lolium/ Table 9 2.4 1.4

In another estimate from the USA (Kent, S. et al., 2007), urban turf is estimated to cover 20 million hectares. Using

Qian & Folletts (2002) estimate of carbon being sequestered under turf at about 1 tonne/hectare/year, US urban

turf would be responsible for carbon storage of about 20 million tonnes/year. This figure compares favourably with

a gross carbon sequestration rate of 22.8 million tonnes/year by urban trees in the USA (Nowak, D.J. & Crane, D.E.,

2002).

Another study of carbon storage and flux in urban residential greenspace (Jo & McPherson, 1995) reports much

lower rates of carbon sequestration than those reported above. Total net annual carbon inputs from grass andother herbaceous plants were estimated to be between 0.2 and 0.3 tonnes/hectare/year, whereas trees and

shrubs contributed between 5 and 8 tonnes/hectare/year. This study, conducted in north-west Chicago, indicates

that great variations in carbon sequestration rates are to be expected due to variations in temperature and other

climatic conditions.

The value of large green spaces as carbon sinks with their combination of trees and turf cannot be underestimated

in an urban environment. Many golf courses in Australia have in recent years become very much aware of their

critical role as natural sanctuaries for wildlife in the urban environment (Australian Golf Union, 1998). Many clubs

have been accredited through the world-wide Audubon Society Wildlife Sanctuary Accreditation Scheme, and

more are in the process of gaining accreditation.

Their role, however, in carbon sequestration is another positive environmental image that has not yet been exploited

by the industry. There are a large number of golf courses within Australia of reasonable age with known dates of

construction, and enough differences in soil type, to provide the basis of some very accurate data collection on

turfgrass capture of carbon and on soil accumulation of carbon. There is the potential for some excellent short and

long-term studies in this particular area (refer recommendations section). Accurate quantification of data on the

role that golf courses play in carbon sequestration is in short supply.


17/35Page 14

CARBON FOOT PRINT OF GOLF COURSES

Jo & McPherson (1995) make a very important observation, namely

that although urban greenspace helps reduce atmospheric

carbon, it also contributes to carbon emissions through the

consumption of energy by landscape management activities,

such as mowing, pruning, irrigation and fertilisation. These activities

can generate carbon either directly or indirectly. Direct release

occurs, for example, when petroleum is used to mow grass orelectricity is used to pump water. Indirect release occurs when the

material or equipment used for maintenance requires energy in its

manufacture or installation (such as fertilisers).

The above study (Jo & McPherson, 1995) estimates that the annual carbon generation from using petroleum as

the power source for mowing is about 0.15 tonnes/hectare/year (14.58 g/sq m/year), which is equivalent to 60% of

the amount estimated to have been sequestered. The loss of carbon to the atmosphere via mowing is therefore

a substantial component and combined with carbon release from irrigation pumps and pruning activities, nullifies

the carbon storage capacity of grasses and herbaceous plants in urban green space. They conclude that the

estimation of landscape carbon inputs and outputs for the study area indicated that soils and woody plants were

carbon sinks, while grass was a net carbon source because of maintenance requirements, particularly mowing.

There is great variability in the available data on whether turfgrass is a sink for carbon, or whether its maintenance

nullifies the sink effect. Milesi, C. et al. (2005) report that the cost in carbon emissions due to fertilisation and

operation of mowing equipment ranges from 15 to 35% of the sequestration. They state that for turfgrass, the

gross soil carbon sequestration potential has to be discounted by the carbon emissions involved. At least two of

the sources of emissions can be quantified in their model, namely emissions associated with N fertilisation (10%

of the C sequestration potential), and emissions deriving from the operation of lawn mowers (between 5 and

25% depending upon management scenarios). Further reductions in the C sequestration potential that cannot be

accounted for in their model are connected with irrigation practices, especially where pumping is involved, and

with the disposal of lawn clippings in landfills (Milesi, C. et al., 2005).

Another study, commissioned by the lawn mower industry sector (Outdoor Power Equipment Institute Inc. or OPEI),indicates that responsibly-managed lawns can reduce the carbon footprint from turfgrass (Sahu, R., 2008). This study

states that perennial managed grassland systems, such as turfgrass with minimal disturbance (i.e. residential lawns,

golf courses, parks, etc.) sequester the greatest amounts of carbon because their roots are able to grow deeper

and access more carbon ( Sahu, sic.). It also states that, for an average managed lawn, turfgrass captures four

times the amount of carbon from the air than the carbon output of a typical mower; and that for a well-managed

lawn, turfgrass captures five to seven times the amount of carbon than the carbon output of mowing. These figures

are substantially different than those of Jo & McPherson (1995) and Milesi et al. (2005) quoted above.

Little data has been presented in the paper (Sahu, R., 2008) to support such claims, although the author makes

the very good point that the largest amount of carbon intake occurs with the recycling of nitrogen contained in

grass clippings. He advocates that grass clippings should be left on the ground to break down and recycle, and

also advocates responsible watering as part of good lawn management. In other words, his proposed model for

good lawn management minimises carbon loss from irrigation systems (not estimated above) and from emissions

associated with N fertilisation (estimated at 10% by Milesi et al., 2005). The author concludes that the carbon

sequestration of turfgrasses can be maximised by measures such as, cutting regularly and at the appropriate

height, feeding with nutrients left by grass clippings, watering in a responsible way, and not disturbing grass at the

root zone. This conclusion appears to be justifiable from available evidence but may not suit the management

regimes of many turfgrass professionals. The utilisation of mulching mowers may well fit with this management

scenario, but this needs more research to validate it.

Turf can and should be playing a more positive role in the global warming debate. Most climate-change scientists

now believe that global warming caused by human activities has already begun and 90% believe that countries

should take immediate steps to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions. Turfgrass requirescarbon dioxide to survive, and as it removes it from the atmosphere, it replaces it with oxygen as a result of the

photosynthetic process. Grass is such an efficient carbon dioxide/oxygen converter that an area of just 15 square

metres can generate enough oxygen to meet the needs of a family of four (Journal of Environmental Turfgrass 4:1,

1992).


18/35


19/35Page 16

An Australian study looked at irrigation and fertiliser regimes on nitrogen (N) leaching from couch grass sod (Cynodon

dactylon) in sandy soils of Western Australia (Barton, Wan & Colmer, 2006a & 2006b). This study concluded that N

leaching from couch grass production on sandy soils will be low if irrigation regimes supply sufficient water for

turfgrass growth without causing excess water to move beyond the rooting zone. Under well-managed irrigation

regimes (i.e. 70% replacement of pan evaporation), they expect N leaching to be low for all fertiliser types as

long as N is applied at a rate and frequency that matches turfgrass requirements. The risk of N leaching is greatest

during the establishment of turfgrass, especially if this coincides with high rainfall. Higher irrigation rates (i.e. 140%

replacement of pan evaporation) can be detrimental by enabling N leaching, and by decreasing root growth of

the couch grass sod by up to 30%. Although there is an obvious direct relevance of this research to the WesternAustralian turfgrass industry, the study has considerable relevance to a large part of the Australian turf industry

because of the importance of couch grass within the Australian context. This is particularly so within urban areas,

such as sports fields, bowling greens, and golf greens where a similar sand-based growth medium to that of the

standard USGA green (see Snyder & Cisar, 1997) is utilised. These sand-based growth media would be expected to

perform similarly to Western Australias natural sandy soils.

Cisar (2004) also reports on techniques being used within the USA to reduce nutrient leaching from sand-based

soils. For modern sports play, turfgrass is often grown on coarse-textured soils such as sands that require routine

application of nutrients from fertilisers, particularly nitrogen and phosphorus. Strategies used to reduce N and P

leaching include regulations that limit the amounts of N and P applied, management systems that minimise off-

site losses, and the use of slow or controlled release fertilisers. Other techniques used include applying lower ratesof fertiliser frequently through the irrigation system (fertigation) and/or adjusting irrigation rates to replace only the

amount of water used in evapotranspiration (ET) (Cisar, J.L., 2004).

Surface run-off is important in transporting both dissolved chemicals and suspended sediment from turfgrass systems

to surface waters. Although the volume of surface runoff and sediment loss from turfgrass systems is relatively low

compared to other management systems (see Table 4 adapted from Gross C.M. et al., 1990), the volume of run-

off from bare soil on turfgrass construction sites is considerably higher (19.2 vs.


20/35


21/35Page 18

Figure 3: Effect of soil type on subsurface nitrogen loss. Percentage nitrogen loss is averaged over studies

reporting results for the various soil types. The range of values reported is represented with the I bar.

(USGA, 1994)

Periodic nutrient applications are an integral and essential part of establishing and maintaining high-quality turf on

golf courses. However, these applications increase the potential for nutrients to be transported off-site in surface

runoff or through subsurface drainage features. Runoff and nutrient loss research from turf has generally been

conducted in small scale field studies and, to a lesser extent, in watershed studies. The general conclusions of the

small scale studies indicate that with well maintained turf, the amount of runoff is small, and the concentrations of

nutrients in the surface runoff are often below levels of major concern. However, while studies on a small scale are

valuable, they may not represent the diversity and connectivity associated with a watershed-scale study (King K.W.

& J.C. Balogh, 2006).

Two such watershed-scale studies are summarised below. Generally, results from watershed-scale golf course

assessments are consistent with those reported from small plot-scale studies. Nutrient loading, however, is oftengreater from watershed-scale systems than from plot-scale studies. The first of the two studies reported below

(Miltner, E., 2007) has results consistent with plot-scale studies, whereas the second study (Starrett, S., et al., 2009)

shows a greater than expected nutrient loading.

A US study (Miltner, E., 2007) conducted in Washington State measured nitrate N and soluble P in soil solution at

36 sites strategically located around a golf course. The results indicate that even in fertilised fairways, soil solution

concentrations of N and P were usually below water quality thresholds. Grasses proved to be extremely efficient in

scavenging nutrients from the soil due to their dense, fibrous root systems. As soil solution moved down-slope through

the monitored areas, concentrations remained low. In the few cases where nutrient concentrations increased in

buffers and wet cells, there was no evidence that these higher concentration waters continued to move down-

slope or percolated deeper into the soil profile. This indicates that as the soil solution moved through these areas,where the rate of flow was lower due to gentler slopes, nutrients were likely to be removed from the water through

uptake by plants or soil micro-organisms, or immobilized by other soil processes (such as absorption onto clay or

other particles). Nutrient concentrations in native wetlands and lakes on the course were not impacted by the golf

courses fertiliser maintenance practices.

When the potential movement of water and dissolved nutrients from a golf course to surrounding areas is a

concern, grass buffers, bioswales, wet cells, and constructed wetlands can be useful tools in maintaining water

quality. Increasing the residence time of the soil solution on the golf course is critical and can allow the grass root

system, as well as other soil organisms, to effectively filter nutrients from the water before it leaves the golf course

site (Miltner E., 2007).

A more recent study (Starrett, S., et al., 2009) investigated nutrient loading via surface water run-off from a new golfcourse in Kansas, USA, and compared this to the sites previous native prairie condition. The purpose of the study

was to investigate the new golf courses impact on surface water quality during the construction phase and during

golf course operations. The study began in 1998 and monitoring continued for nine years afterwards. Data analysis

showed that the golf course construction phase had the greatest impacts on surface water quality, with average


22/35


23/35Page 20

Hills Golf and Country Club is another such example.

Kooindah Waters at Wyong in NSW is a good example of creating wetlands on a degraded tip site and incorporating

this into the natural wetlands and swamp in a responsible way to develop a housing estate and a golf course. West

Lakes in Adelaide is another such example.

The authors believe that this particular area has enormous potential for golf course design and construction, and

provides an avenue to convert unsightly degraded lands into areas of useful and aesthetic value. The concept,however, lacks a clear set of design principles and lacks an authoritative historical survey of the efficacy and benefits

achieved by designs to date. This is identified as an area requiring further research by the AGCSA in conjunction with

AGIC (refer recommendations section).

AESTHETIC, SOCIAL AND HEALTH BENEFITS OF TURFGRASS

A recent consumer survey (Turf Producers Australia, 2007) has revealed that 72% of consumers considered it

important to have a lawn/grassed area in their home and only 14% did not consider it to be important. The same

survey revealed that 74% of consumers considered it important to have a lawn/grassed area in community areas,

such as local parks and gardens, and only 8% did not consider it to be important. The benefits of local parks and

gardens for passive recreation are immense, commonly being used to walk the dog, have family picnics, kick a ball

with ones mates, or simply just to relax, go for a walk and enjoy the scenery.

Golf courses and natural parklands provide the largest areas of open green space in most towns and cities. This is

especially so in Australia where the availability of land has been relatively plentiful. These large open vistas provide

social and health benefits not only to those who participate in the sport but also to those who live adjacent to these

facilities and can enjoy their benefits in a passive way. There have been no specific studies of the health benefits

directly attributable to playing golf, and this deserves a scientific investigation. As well, the detailed importance and

value of golf courses in environmental protection and human well-being has not been evaluated in a thorough

manner, and is certainly worthy of a much more intensive study.

Health and wellbeing: Parks and nature are currently undervalued as a means of improving and maintaining

health. Although most people are aware of the health benefits of sport and recreation, the range of other healthand wellbeing benefits arising from contact with parks and nature are not as well known (Maller, C., et al., 2008).

Contact with the natural world (through active interaction or even passive contemplation) has the ability to affect

human health and wellbeing in countless positive ways. As evidence presented below clearly demonstrates, there

are immediate and long-term favourable, emotional and physiological changes proceeding from contact with

nature through animals, gardens, natural landscapes, and wilderness (Maller, C., et al., 2008).

The implications of this research to the golf industry has not been specifically targetted but golf, as a leisure and

sport, must play a major role in health and wellbeing of its participants. To our knowledge, there have been no

specific studies of health and wellbeing derived from playing golf, and this is an area that should be targetted for

research by the Australian Golf Industry Council (refer recommendations section).

The Parks Forum (the peak body for park management agencies within Australia and New Zealand) has established

a National Coordination Group for a Healthy parks, healthy people message (Maller, C., et al., 2008). The

significance of this message is to communicate the many health and wellbeing benefits available from humans

interacting with nature in park settings, and the implications of this for public health in general. For this Forum and its

member agencies to be able to increase their understanding of the Healthy parks, healthy people message, and

for them to be able to communicate it to governments and the community at large, it is essential that up-to-date

information about the importance of parks and nature for human health and wellbeing be available. To enable

this, a joint initiative between Parks Victoria and the NiCHE (Nature in Community Health and Environment) Research

Group at Deakin University has revised and updated an earlier literature review (Maller, C., et al., 2002) to provide

key information about the Healthy parks, healthy people message. (Maller, C., et al., 2008).

This review (Maller, C., et al., 2008) cites Federal Government claims that the World Bank and the World HealthOrganisation predict that cardiovascular disease and poor mental health are likely to be the two biggest contributors

to human disease by the year 2020 (Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care and Australian Institute

of Health and Welfare, 1999). Evidence cited in the review shows that parks and nature can be a significant

contributor to reducing premature death and disease in these two fields. Promising evidence is also emerging that


24/35Page 21

positive influences from park environments, and associated flora and fauna, enhance human wellbeing in relation

to other health issues. The authors conclude that parks are one of our most vital health influences, and suggest that

both the health and parks/environment sectors need to act more proactively in collaboration to enrich the role that

parks play in improving and sustaining the nations health.

In terms of health and quality of life, parks have been viewed mostly as venues for leisure and sport. Yet recent

research shows that green nature, such as parks, can reduce crime, foster psychological wellbeing, reduce

stress, boost immunity, enhance productivity and promote healing (Maller, C. et al., 2002). According to Maller et

al. (2002; 2008), parks are a fundamental health resource, particularly in terms of disease prevention. The initial

evidence documenting the positive effects of green nature on blood pressure, cholesterol, outlook on life and

stress-reduction is sufficient to warrant its incorporation into strategies for the Australian National Health Priority Areas

of Mental Health and Cardiovascular Disease.

Maller and fellow researchers at Deakin University (Maller et al., 2002; Maller et al., 2006; SMH, 2008g) conclude that,

There is a clear message for park managers to join public health fora, as not only do parks protect the essential

systems of life and biodiversity, but they also are a fundamental setting for health promotion and the creation of

wellbeing that to date has not been recognised. The extent to which turfgrass in parks contributes to these areas

awaits specific investigation, although it can be reasonably implied that turfgrass, as an integral component of the

park landscape, must play a major role in these health benefits.

As well as the above Australian research, there are many examples of similar findings amongst overseas research. A

United Kingdom study (Pretty, J. et al., 2007) concludes that regular contact with nature and green space enhances

mental health and positively influences psychological wellbeing. The study also indicates that participating in regular

physical activity generates many physical and psychological health benefits. They state that levels of physical activity

have dramatically declined over recent decades and consequently health has suffered, such as obesity, coronary

heart disease and type II diabetes. Therefore, the authors have hypothesised that there may be a synergistic benefit

in adopting physical activities whilst at the same time being directly exposed to nature. They have called this green

exercise (Pretty, J., et al. 2005).

It is generally recognised that greenery filled public areas provide a comfortable and pleasant living environment

for urban residents. A Japanese study (Takano et al., 2002) concluded that living in areas with walkable green

spaces positively influenced the longevity of urban senior citizens. Walkable green spaces are defined in this study

as greenery filled public areas that are nearby and easy to walk in, such as parks and tree-lined streets. The authors

analysed the survival of 3144 senior citizens in Tokyo and concluded that, after controlling the effects of the citizens

age, sex, marital status, and socio-economic status, the factor of walkable green spaces near their residence

showed significant predictive value for the survival of urban senior citizens over the following five years (p


25/35Page 22

towards native lovers as compared to exotic lovers in preferences for parks and gardens, the population tested

was only small (n=148). Native lovers comprised 45% of the population and exotic lovers 33%. The message to

the industry is that there is still a large proportion of the population that prefers European-type gardens comprising

rolling lawns and trees, but that this group appears to be declining within the Australian context, particularly when

water conservation issues are considered. Furthermore, this study did not include sports fields and parks designed

for active forms of recreation, an area where turfgrass is still very much the preferred option when compared

to its competitors, such as artificial turf and hard-surface areas (eg: asphalt, etc.). A recent survey (Turf Producers

Association, 2007) showed that 60% of the population surveyed considered synthetic turf to be un-Australian, and

only 14% disagreed with that view.

SUGGESTED AREAS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

1. Various techniques to store and clean runoff water (Section 2.1; p.3)

In many cases, urban stormwater or on-site run-off water is often of adequate quality for irrigation, but the problem

is that it is always available in large quantities when you do not need it. This means that it must be stored. On-site

storage in lakes, ponds, reservoirs or dams is the obvious solution for golf courses as such features can easily be

incorporated into the course design. An important point is to design these features in such a way as to ensure that

they do not become a source of water quality problems themselves, through eutrophication (high nutrient levels)

and consequent algal blooms, or the harbouring of mosquitoes (Cullen, P., 1996).

Two golf clubs in NSW have adopted a natural approach to managing high nutrient levels in their irrigation reservoirs

(Harris, K., 2007). They have installed rafted reed bed systems, consisting of buoyancy rafts upon which a coir mat

with pre-grown wetland plants is placed. Both clubs used this innovative system because there were very few other

options available to them for managing the regular algal outbreaks at their reservoirs. To date, rafted reed beds

have proved effective in controlling algal blooms at both sites and provide another tool for treatment of undesirable

water quality. This is an area that the authors have selected as suitable for further investigation.

2. Soil solution monitoring (Section 2.1; p.5)

In-situ monitoring of soil moisture content has been regularly practised for the past two decades. Soil solution

monitoring has made nowhere near the same progress (Falivene, S., 2008). There are three reasons why soil solute

monitoring should be considered. Firstly, either through lack of water or the use of as little water as possible, leaching

below the root zone has been reduced, enabling salt build-up within the root zone. Secondly, improvements in theapplication of fertilisers have not been matched by the ability to monitor and interpret nutrient levels in the root zone;

and thirdly, increasing interest in using recycled water or effluent of lower quality requires some form of monitoring.

Analysing soil solution provides a quick, easy and economical way to measure salt and nutrient levels in the soil

throughout the season. Soil solution analysis is also a valuable environmental tool because it can be used to detect

excess nutrients moving below the plants root zone. Golf course managers should investigate this tool as part

of their environmental management programs (Falivene, S., 2008). This is an area identified as a possible future

research program.

3. Managed aquifer recharge (Section 2.1; p.5)

Some highly innovative techniques of using recycled water are currently being investigated, such as managedaquifer recharge. Managed aquifer recharge involves adding a treated water source, such as recycled water or

captured runoff water, to underground aquifers under controlled conditions. Water thus stored can be pumped and

re-used when required. This technique is currently being trialled across the Swan Coastal Plain in Western Australia,

and also in Adelaide (Dowie, A., 2007; Satterley, J., 2007; 2009). Natural aquifer recharge or aquifer regeneration

is already in use as a significant water source in the Centennial Park/Botany sands region of Sydney. This is an area

identified as requiring further investigation (refer recommendations section).

4. The use of wetting agents and their beneficial effects (Section 2.2; p.8)

A recent study investigated the effects of several wetting agents on sand-based rootzone hydrophobicity and

putting green turf appearance (Leinauer B. et al., 2007a). The results indicate that all wetting agents tested had a

positive response but some performed marginally better than others.

The above results differ significantly from that of Kostka & Bially (2005) where a synergistic reaction between different

surfactant chemical groups gave large improvements in performance. Within Australia, there is an increasing use

of wetting agents through venturi injection into standard irrigation systems with mounting overall beneficial effects.

Obviously, this is an area requiring further research under Australian conditions. As well, the AGCSA should look at


26/35Page 23

preparing a definitive booklet or pamphlet on the topic of wetting agents that could be of benefit to the industry

at large.

5. Encouragement of other fauna, such as beautiful and harmless insects, reptiles and amphibians, as part

of biodiversity (Section 2.3; p.11)

Australian golf courses have made considerable progress, from a biodiversity point of view, in dealing with Avian,

Amphibian and Macropod fauna. Despite the obvious emphasis on birds, frogs, kangaroos and wallabies, there

has been an almost total neglect of equally-important and beautiful insect populations, such as Lepidoptera

(Butterflies and Moths) and Coleoptera (Beetles), and also some reptiles, such as Squamata (skinks, lizards andsnakes). Admittedly, some reptiles can be hazardous (such as some snakes and crocodiles), but skinks, lizards,

monitors, geckos, dragons and goannas are generally harmless and can be encouraged to co-habit with humans

in the appropriate environment.

As well, there has been very little research done on the diversity of soil micro-flora and fauna in golf courses, other

than those treated as pests (such as soil-borne insect, bacterial and fungal diseases). There are developing and

emerging technologies becoming available where the principles of biodiversity are being used for insect and

disease control. These are considered as areas requiring further research.

6. Hidden costs of maintaining trees (Section 2.4; p. 13)

While the cost of planting trees is easy to calculat

Documents

Hal Project TU070342