The lowest of the low! THE STRI’s Alistair Beggs has a bit of a rant about mowing heights


greenkeepers and not just golfers) is doing this industry nothing but harm. The most recent advice I read in some journals and magazines is to cut at 2mm on a regular basis and give the members what they want. What rubbish!


There are no prizes for cutting your greens at a height so absurdly low that nothing other than weeds will grow. This is not sustainable, it is not sensible, nor is it necessary, irrespective of the soils, the grasses, or the environment you have.


It is a researched fact that mowing low reduces the capacity of the plant to photosynthesise. Once this basic metabolic activity is compromised so is the general health of the plant, and weakness and decline is inevitable thereafter. The decline may take longer on some greens than others, but the result will be an agronomic and playing disaster - the last thing any club needs in the present climate!


Effective course management is all about finding a balance between the requirements of the golfer and the requirements of the plant. T’was ever thus. However, whilst the requirements of the plant have largely stayed the same over recent times, the requirements and expectations of the golfer have changed immeasurably. There is an insatiable hunger for speed at all costs, fuelled by television and tournament golf. Unfortunately, the plant we


some of this is coming from in my experience,


THE constant demand for ever-faster surfaces (and,


rely on is not designed to be pummelled and thrashed by man and machine on a week-by- week basis and, unsurprisingly, it needs a break from time to time.


As golfers we like nothing more than playing on firm, well paced putting surfaces where the ball rolls true. I maintain that these characteristics can be achieved without recourse to absurd mowing heights. The best greens in this country comprise native browntop bent and fescue grasses with annual meadow grass, mown at around 4mm (for routine play) and, perhaps, a little lower for special events. With occasional rolling and verticutting in the correct circumstances, alongside regular topdressing, these greens provide good natural pace without needing to be mown any more tightly.


Perhaps, rather than being prescriptive about heights of cut, we should focus more on the performance of our greens. This means measuring the quality and speed of roll so that these key elements deliver for the golfer. At the same time, we should be measuring the health of the component plants in order to achieve a performance balance between the surface and the plant system. It’s not about height of cut it is about performance. So, let’s refrain from talking specifics, particularly when it comes to height of cut.


The adoption of the 2mm recommendation across the country would ruin many of our courses, and create an abundance of drought and disease prone turf. It would do very little for the finer grasses we work so hard to encourage, and would promote annual meadow grass which, as a ruderal species,


In the last issue, Terrain Aeration’s David Green reported how he had fallen foul of VOSA regulations that hit him hard in the wallet.


Well, since then, things have moved on. Here’s an update on ...


The pursuit of harpyness


regulations regarding the fitting of tachometers to 4x4s towing trailers. Well, as is my wont, I wrote to VOSA to ask for some points to be clarified -s


I simple ones.


Here’s the reply I got from a senior VOSA official whom I will call ‘She who must be obeyed’ or, as they are referred to in text speak, SWMBO! “I refer to your letters of 18 November and


28 December 2009 regarding various issues you have with road transport legislation. Your letters have, this week, ( MID JANUARY) been passed to me for a response. I note that you wish a reply in writing so that


it can be produced during any roadside check. However, you cover many topics which would result in many, many pages of written advice, most of which would not require our Examiners to have to read at the roadside as they are quite well aware of how VOSA expects them to enforce the various regulations.” Well, that got my dander up, so I penned the


following response: “If an intelligent reasonably educated (2 x Degree level) professional Health and Safety


n my last ‘grump’ (pages 112-1 113 of Dec/Jan


issue) I reported how my wallet had been severely damaged by falling foul of new VOSA


Consultant, Quality Assurance Manager and Managing Director i.e. me, requires many, many pages of written advice (your choice of phrase not mine) to understand the tachograph and other road related regulations, I have to wonder just what chance the proverbial “average man on the Clapham omnibus”, who just happens to work in the grounds keeping sector, and who is occasionally required to tow a trailer of under 1020kg unladen weight with a GPM train weight of greater than 3500kg on a public road for commercial purposes, has of getting it right and avoiding fines and prohibitions that could, in time, cost him his livelihood? You have made my principal point completely


without even talking to me. No published regulations should require such


in depth written advice, as you suggest is needed, for them to be unambiguously understandable to an educated man such as I.” In reply I received further correspondence


from SWMBO referring to my complaint about the impenetrability of the regulations. “Unfortunately, we will not be able to


overcome some of the annoyances of how digital tachograph equipment works as we are stuck with it because of how the legislation was


written by the EU Commission, but I can certainly give you information that can minimise the burden and impact. Unfortunately, one thing I can’t address is


how the legislation has been drafted. It’s not a matter for VOSA. It is done by our masters at the Department for Transport or the EU Commission. We just enforce it to the best our ability but, having said that, we also sometimes have difficulty with how things have been written. Nature of the beast I’m afraid.” Here, SWMBO, who is employed as the VOSA


legislation and policy advisor for traffic enforcement, admits that the digital tachograph has “annoyances” in the way it works, and, also, that the legislation is a “beast” and was drafted so poorly by the EU commission that even the full time professional policy advisor to VOSA sometimes struggles with its interpretation. This is surprisingly honest and, already, rather more than she perhaps should have said. Eventually, I ended up talking to SWMBO.


Needless to say I was left shaking with fury as there were several matters which she could not resolve without talking doublespeak, some matters she was going to have to look into again (what!) and others where I said that I


would thrive in a highly pressurised environment.


Top players are becoming increasingly vocal about the failings of annual meadow grass under tournament conditions around the world. In the UK, with its wet, maritime climate, the water retentive thatch it produces, along with its incessant seeding, are real problems when it comes to producing smooth and firm surfaces throughout the day. It would do nothing but harm to golf course budgets at a time when clubs have to be ever mindful of costs and, in some cases, it would lead to already well-paced surfaces becoming unplayable.


Finally, in a climate where there is a desire to make golfers play more quickly to shorten the time it takes to play a round of golf, it would be the death knell for pace of play. Most golfers simply cannot cope very well with stimpmeter speeds in excess of 9ft, so giving them 10 or 11ft would make an already slow game even slower.


Sadly, I have seen with my own eyes, and too many times over the last twenty years, the results of prolonged low mowing in this country. It does nothing for the plant, the golfer or the reputation of the clubs who practise it. Resist it at all costs and, instead, focus on a holistic and sustainable programme of work, which will deliver good performance for the player, for the plant and for the pocket.


By Alistair Beggs BSc Hons


Grumpy


old Git!


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132