The Turf Zone Podcast

The Turf Zone

All Your Turf News In One Place

Episodes

  1. 1d ago

    A Message for VTC Members from the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality

    Welcome to The Turf Zone podcast. This episode features a message for VTC members from the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. Written by Kati McCall, Water Supply Planner, Office of Water Supply, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality We are reaching out on behalf of DEQ’s Water Supply Planning and Analysis team regarding the Virginia Water Withdrawal Reporting Regulation (9VAC25-200).1 This regulation requires users withdrawing groundwater or surface water in Virginia to report annual water withdrawals if withdrawals exceed 1 million gallons per month for crop irrigation purposes or 10,000 gallons per day for all other purposes (300,000 gallons per month). Users that fall below these thresholds or are otherwise exempted from the regulation are encouraged to report voluntarily. Water reporting data provided through the annual reporting process allows DEQ to better understand how water use throughout the Commonwealth impacts surface water and groundwater resources, evaluate whether current water sources can meet future needs, and protect beneficial uses. Water reporting data for 2026 is due to DEQ no later than January 31, 2027. In preparation for the 2026 reporting cycle, our team is conducting an initiative to increase registration of agricultural facilities across the Commonwealth through the distribution of targeted outreach materials. Water reporting data is considered in the development of regional water supply plans2 (required by 9VAC25-7803) and in the water withdrawal permitting process, which includes a simulation of total reported water use within the watershed. Increased availability of water reporting data from agricultural facilities may facilitate more accurate long-term planning of water resources by informing regional water demand projections for agriculture. Additionally, agricultural producers may benefit from reporting annual water withdrawals; a few potential benefits are: Increasing efficiency: comparing current withdrawals to reported withdrawals can provide insight into potential issues at the facility by identifying periods of unusual use (e.g., line breaks, leaks, and other water loss) Drought awareness: users who report withdrawals are notified when the Virginia Drought Monitoring Task Force4 establishes or expands drought advisories affecting their region, and as new drought-related tools developed by DEQ become available Documenting use: reporting annual water withdrawals is the best way to document use for the facility (e.g., when applying for a permit) Planning for the future: calculating and reporting annual water withdrawals may help users to predict and plan for future water needs (e.g., when expanding operations) We are hoping to partner with the Virginia Turfgrass Council, given your extensive network of agricultural producers, to increase awareness of the annual reporting process and potential benefits. Would you be willing to assist us with this initiative by sharing these targeted outreach materials with your network (e.g., through inclusion in an upcoming newsletter)? Outreach materials are available on DEQ’s Agricultural Water Use Resource Center webpage5, including the Annual Water Withdrawal Reporting Agricultural Brochure6, the Water Estimation Tool for Agricultural Withdrawals7, and the Water Withdrawal Dashboard8. Folks may contact the water supply planner serving their region9 with any questions regarding the annual reporting process or associated outreach materials. Please let us know if you have any questions by calling (804) 350-4079. You have been listening to The Turf Zone Podcast. Follow The Turf Zone on X, Facebook and LinkedIn for all things turfgrass, featuring podcasts, magazines, events and more. Visit www.theturfzone.com for more. The post A Message for VTC Members from the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality appeared first on The Turf Zone.

    4 min

  2. 4d ago

    Advancing Precision Weed Management in Turfgrass Systems with Machine Vision-Guided Targeted Spraying

    Welcome to The Turf Zone podcast. This episode features the article “Advancing Precision Weed Management in Turfgrass Systems with Machine Vision-Guided Targeted Spraying” Written by Brooke Heikkila – Graduate Research Assistant Navdeep Godara – Assistant Professor of Turfgrass & Forage Weed Science, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, North Carolina State University and Pawel Petelewicz – Assistant Professor of Turfgrass Weed Science, University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, Agronomy Department Turfgrass managers are facing increasing weed challenges due to evolving regulatory framework and growing incidence of herbicide-resistant weeds. The release of the first turfgrass-specific commercial machine vision-guided sprayer (ALBA, Ecorobotix Inc.) enables automated and localized herbicide applications in turf. Although often referred to as “spot spraying” in marketing materials, “targeted spraying” is a more accurate description as it distinguishes this system from manual spot treatments and other existing precision weed management approaches. Such targeted application systems have already been successfully deployed in other crops using platforms such as the John Deere See and Spray, Agritech America WEED-IT, Verdant Robotics Sharp Shooter, Ecorobotix ARA. Using See and Spray technology, comparable weed control was observed between the broadcast and targeted spraying methods, but the targeted spraying reduced the treated acreage by up to two-thirds. In turfgrass, this technology not only offers significant herbicide savings but also opens the door for practitioners to combat herbicide-resistant weeds by incorporating alternative chemistries, including nonselective herbicides or herbicide tank mixtures combining multiple modes-of-action which are not typically feasible in broadcast applications. Overall, spot spraying is not a new concept, as many turfgrass managers already employ it to control weed escapes following broadcast herbicide applications or where selective chemistries are not an option. Manual spot spraying involves individuals walking the golf course or other turfgrass areas with a sprayer loaded with herbicide to make localized applications directly to weeds. Traditional spot spraying is labor-intensive, time-consuming, and requires applicators to accurately identify weeds, necessitating additional training and expertise. It ultimately increases application costs and is also prone to human error, often resulting in overapplication and missed weeds. However, targeted spraying systems such as ALBA, utilize artificial intelligence combined with machine vision to detect problematic weeds within turfgrass canopy in real-time to apply herbicides only to those small areas where individual weeds are present. ALBA is a tractor pull-behind unit that can operate at speeds up to 4.5 miles per hour and uses an enclosure to block ambient light and to create consistent lighting conditions to continuously scan the turfgrass canopy with its cameras to detect weeds. When a weed is spotted, an individual nozzle – one out of 108 – activates to directly target the weed with a 1.2 × 1.2-inch spray resolution per nozzle. As targeted application systems continue to advance and competing platforms emerge, it is critical to understand how to effectively integrate and leverage these sprayers within turfgrass weed management programs. Several preliminary field experiments using ALBA and its ARA-based predecessor research platform were conducted by the NC State Turfgrass Weed Science Program and the UF/IFAS Turfgrass Weed Science Program to understand the applications of this technology. Preliminary studies showed that machine-vision guided targeted spraying substantially reduces herbicide usage and treated acreage while maintaining weed control efficacy, offering both economic and environmental benefits while targeting wide variety of problematic weeds with high accuracy. Reduction in Herbicide Volume Used – In a study focused on controlling false-green kyllinga in bermudagrass fairways, machine vision-guided targeted spraying with ALBA reduced herbicide spray volume by 77% compared to broadcast treatments. False green kyllinga cover was 17% at the experimental sites during study initiation, triggering significant savings due to the weed-specific, localized targeted treatments compared to broadcast herbicide applications. Broadcast applications of standard kyllinga control products typically cost around $190 to $240 per acre, but targeted treatment can lower the cost by more than $145 per acre even when dealing with moderate level of weed infestation (~15% weed cover). Similarly, in another ongoing study, when annual bluegrass weed cover was 10% in bermudagrass fairways, targeted applications achieved a 66% reduction in herbicide spray volume compared to conventional broadcast treatments. Sulfonylurea herbicides for postemergence control of annual bluegrass cost around $140 to $185 per acre and targeted spraying can reduce the cost by at least $92 per acre when weed cover is 10% or less. Practitioners can expect greater savings at turfgrass sites with lower weed infestations, which are typical of intensively managed surfaces and when applying expensive herbicides such as PoaCure or organic herbicides during winter dormancy of warm-season turfgrasses. Targeted application system was also evaluated for control of broadleaf weeds, dallisgrass, smooth crabgrass, and tropical signalgrass in studies conducted independently or in collaboration between Mississippi State University, NCSU, Virginia Tech and UF IFAS, and observed a 53% to 95% reduction in spray volume. In all the aforementioned cases, weed control levels achieved with targeted spraying were no different from broadcast applications. Thus, these studies demonstrate that, across various problematic weed species, this novel application system can substantially reduce the herbicide volume required, lowering costs without compromising weed control efficacy. Lower Treated Acreage – During broadcast herbicide applications, substantial areas without weeds are often treated unnecessarily. Targeted applications can reduce the treated acreage, enabling practitioners to use herbicides such as MSMA, which are currently restricted to spot treatments on less than 25% of the total golf course acreage per year. Targeted spraying systems are particularly useful for herbicides with limited or no residual activity, as it allows localized treatments to weed instead of broadcast applications to turfgrass. Targeted spraying for false-green kyllinga control (17% weed cover) in bermudagrass fairways resulted in 85% reduction in treated acreage compared to broadcast spraying. In a similar study, an 80% reduction in treated acreage was found when only treating annual bluegrass in dormant bermudagrass at 10% weed cover. A study conducted by UF/IFAS Turfgrass Weed Science Program using circular, non-overlapping targets of varying patch sizes (4-10 cm diameter) to simulate random different weed densities and dispersions within the 1-20%, 21-40%, and 41-60% coverage, indicated total spray deposition of approximately 40%, 64%, and 74%, respectively. This corresponded to estimated herbicide savings of 60%, 36%, and 26%. Spray deposition increased with rising weed pressure, while the non-sprayed area, directly reflecting herbicide savings declined accordingly. These results confirm that variation in herbicide savings with targeted applications is driven primarily by weed density, with dispersion playing a secondary role, exerting stronger effects at low weed densities but negligible influence at higher densities. The reduction in treated acreage can potentially diminish the environmental impact of herbicides by minimizing overall pesticide load released into the environment, limiting off-target movement, reducing the risk of groundwater contamination, and lowering the risk of human exposure associated with pesticide applications. Targeted approaches permit treatment to a limited portion of turf, enabling the effective use of chemistries with area-use limitations. Effective reduction in area treated with targeted spraying will become increasingly important as new regulations come into effect, particularly in the context of upcoming Endangered Species Act-imposed changes. Therefore, research projects funded by the Turfgrass Council of North Carolina will focus on investigating the agronomic and environmental benefits of targeted application systems for managing problematic weed species. Alternative Herbicide Options for Resistance Management – Targeted spraying also enables selectivity at the sprayer level rather than relying only on selectivity of the herbicide used. This potentially allows turf managers to use nonselective herbicides that were previously not an option for broadcast treatment due to severe injury to actively growing turfgrasses. Broad spectrum herbicides like glyphosate, glufosinate, or flumioxazin are highly effective against a wide variety of weeds, but practitioners often wait for turfgrass to go dormant before spraying nonselective herbicides, while in some geographies, such as Florida, achieving full dormancy is not even possible. However, with this new technology, practitioners will have the option to incorporate nonselective herbicides year-round with minimal collateral damage to turfgrass. Glyphosate (Roundup Pro Concentrate) applied via broadcast application at 12 fluid ounces per acre rate reduced bermudagrass green cover significantly, but targeted spraying had similar level of green cover as nontreated plots as documented in our recent study. Likewise, glufosinate applied at 41 fluid ounces per acre (as Finale XL T&O) reduced bermudagrass cover drastically after broadcast application but had minimal effect on turfgrass after targeted spraying. Targeted spraying technology also allows use of novel a

    15 min

  3. 6d ago

    A Golden Milestone, The 50th Annual MTC Conference at Turf Valley Resort

    Welcome to The Turf Zone Podcast. This episode features the article “A Golden Milestone, The 50th Annual MTC Conference at Turf Valley Resort” After five decades of advancing the turfgrass profession in Maryland, the 50th Annual Maryland Turfgrass Council (MTC) Conference convened on December 16, 2025, at the scenic Turf Valley Resort. The event marked a major milestone for our Council in celebrating half a century of education, innovation, and collaboration across all sectors of the turf industry. A Full Day of Learning and Networking Attendees were welcomed with a breakfast beside the Trade Show, where sponsors showcased the latest tools, products, and services serving the turfgrass community. After a warm welcome and the annual meeting, the program shifted into a series of breakout education sessions tailored to lawn and landscape, sports turf, and golf course professionals. Members, industry professionals, sponsors, and exhibitors gathered to share insights, tackle challenges, and explore emerging technologies shaping turf management today. A special thanks to the conference sponsors; Harrells, Corteva, Landscape Supply, Nutrien Ag Solutions, Quantico Creek Sod Farms, Pocono Turf, SiteOne, and Green Industries. Education Opportunities The 2025 conference featured a dynamic lineup of speakers and panel discussions addressing cutting-edge topics: A technology panel sparking conversation on how robotics and AI are impacting turfgrass operations, reflecting innovations rapidly entering the industry. Sessions exploring new and persistent turf diseases, advancements in application technologies, and precision turfgrass management. Expert insights on managing pest pressures, optimizing root zone environments, and improving efficiency in integrated pest management approaches. Each session delivered practical takeaways and research-based strategies that turf managers can apply through the coming season. The Turfgrass Community Central to the MTC mission is strengthening connections across our profession, and this year was no exception. Whether catching up with colleagues between sessions, discussing solutions with exhibitors on the Trade Show floor, or sharing a meal during a lively lunch break, the conference fostered engagement at every turn. Looking Ahead This 50th Conference celebration was a testament to the enduring spirit of Maryland’s turfgrass professionals whose work shapes landscapes, recreational spaces, and playing fields across the state. As we reflect on this milestone year, we also look forward to building on this legacy at future gatherings and continuing to raise the standard of excellence in our industry. Please mark your calendars for the 2026 Maryland Turfgrass Conference on December 15th, 2026. We look forward to seeing everyone there for the 51st year. You have been listening to The Turf Zone Podcast. Follow The Turf Zone on X, Facebook and LinkedIn for all things turfgrass, featuring podcasts, magazines, events and more. Visit www.theturfzone.com for more. The post A Golden Milestone, The 50th Annual MTC Conference at Turf Valley Resort appeared first on The Turf Zone.

    3 min

  4. Jun 1

    Creative Membership Models for Private Clubs

    Welcome to The Turf Zone podcast. This episode features the article “Creative Membership Models for Private Clubs” written by Larry Hirsh for golfprop.com and read from Virginia Turfgrass Journal. Among the intriguing elements of the private club world are the various membership models that exist. Of course, there are equity, where the members own the club and non-equity, where an investor owns the club; but within each category there are numerous variations. Clubs exhibit a wide variety of operating models, typically designed to suit their market, economics and their club culture. Of late, a lot of the “news” in the private club world has come from the newly developed, uber upscale clubs often with entrance fees well into six figures, or even seven. Some have a partial refundability element, and as one might expect are very exclusive. However, of those I’ve encountered of late, I’d like to focus on a few I find intriguing as ways to help grow the game, encourage club membership and broaden golf’s appeal. Most contradict the concept of exclusivity that many clubs seek, but such exclusivity isn’t always for the best, either economically or socially. Of interest in resort and vacation areas is the model I’ve encountered whereby placing your vacation home in the rental pool entitles the owner to a substantial discount on dues and guests and extended family members discounts on golf and other fees. Obviously, this creates financial incentive for property owners to participate by reducing club dues but of course exposes the property owner to (usually short term) tenants and the risks inherent in same. With resort guests/renters also having access to club facilities, exclusivity is limited, however clubs with a variant of this model typically establish privileges, preferences, access or activities exclusive to members to establish and cultivate a culture of membership. Among the more unique membership models I’ve (recently) heard about is one residential golf community club where resident members join the club but pay their initiation fee upon the sale of their home. Another model which I’ve always found of interest is that often found in Scotland and other areas of the United Kingdom and Europe where even top clubs are much more inclusive than many in the US and rely on visitor fees for much of their revenue. The benefits of this model are that membership dues are maintained at more nominal levels, and the culture of the club is quite different than many elite clubs in the US. As Royal Dornoch General Manager Neil Hampton wrote in the club’s recent newsletter, “What I have always enjoyed about Royal Dornoch is that it is an inclusive club. There are so many different facets to the club, yet everyone comes together as one and has fun with each other. We have visitors playing seven days a week and invite them to share our courses and clubhouse just as we do. I think it is wonderful and epitomizes the Highland way, that we do not have separate areas for members or visitors and everyone mixes together, sharing their experiences.” Privileged to be a member at Royal Dornoch, I agree with his comments. I’m sure there are many more I’m not yet familiar with. One thing I’ve always maintained is that every club needs to know what it wants to be. To some, golf (especially club membership) is a status symbol, to others it’s an “everyman’s” game. At some clubs, one’s net worth is estimated halfway down the first fairway. Each club establishes, develops and maintains its own culture and that is often dictated by the extent of the club rule book which in turn can often determine the membership models for the club. At some clubs the financial commitment alone excludes many. At others it’s social status or heritage. At more inclusive clubs the membership is typically much more diverse. One of the most creative membership models more prominent in past years was the refundable deposit where the member was entitled to the return of his entrance fee after a specified period of time or upon resignation based on certain conditions. While still available at some clubs, this option is quite sensitive (for the club) to economic fluctuations and fell out of favor in the pre-COVID period from 2000–2020 when the golf/club industry was experiencing challenging times. Whether this experiences a resurgence will be interesting to see. I’ve always fallen back on the definition of “club”. Webster’s dictionary most relevant and simple definition of a club is: to unite or combine for a common cause. At the clubs we’re talking about, that basically means social and athletic activities. Sometimes it’s much more complex than that. You have been listening to The Turf Zone Podcast. Follow The Turf Zone on X, Facebook and LinkedIn for all things turfgrass, featuring podcasts, magazines, events and more. Visit www.theturfzone.com for more. The post Creative Membership Models for Private Clubs appeared first on The Turf Zone.

    5 min

  5. May 22

    Students Shine at National Turf Bowl Competition

    Welcome to The Turf Zone Podcast. This episode features the article “Students Shine at National Turf Bowl Competition” College Park, Md. — Students from the University of Maryland (UMD) placed fourth out of 79 teams at this year’s Turf Bowl, an intercollegiate academic competition that tests students’ technical and professional knowledge of the turfgrass industry. The Turf Bowl challenges students in a wide range of subject areas, including turfgrass management, pest management, and soil science. To prepare for this highly competitive contest, Geoff Rinehart, lecturer in turfgrass management at the Institute of Applied Agriculture (IAA), and his team of students met weekly during the fall semester, reviewing material the students learned in classes and doing practice quizzes. “This is extra learning and extra preparation that’s going to help them professionally,” said Rinehart. “They are getting deeper exposure to the material and learning how to work as a team under pressure.” The strong performance earned the team $8,000 in prize money, which will be reinvested into student professional development, including travel to future conferences and competitions. “It feels great to know that our team played a role in the future education of turfgrass students,” said Owen Scott. Several team members mentioned how proud they felt knowing their hard work paid off. “The most rewarding part of competing was being able to work as a team and working through problems with contrasting viewpoints and coming to a consensus that we all agree on,” said Carson Thomas. “I felt like I learned new things within the turf industry from my teammates as well as new perspectives from different golf courses and sports facilities.” The team lauded the support that they received from the faculty and administrators at the IAA. “None of this would have been possible without the help of Geoffrey Rinehart, Joe Poulas, and Carole Dingess who all contributed to the organization and studying that led up to the Turf Bowl competition,” said Owen Scott. The recognition is particularly meaningful for a smaller program competing against nationally prominent universities. “It puts Maryland on the national map,” said Rinehart. “That kind of recognition is good for our students, our college, and the program as a whole.” You have been listening to The Turf Zone Podcast. Follow The Turf Zone on X, Facebook and LinkedIn for all things turfgrass, featuring podcasts, magazines, events and more. Visit www.theturfzone.com for more. The post Students Shine at National Turf Bowl Competition appeared first on The Turf Zone.

    3 min

  6. May 20

    How Should Fertility be Used to Manage Brown Patch Disease in Tall Fescue Lawns?

    Welcome to The Turf Zone podcast. This episode features the article “How Should Fertility be Used to Manage Brown Patch Disease in Tall Fescue Lawns?” written by Dr. Brandon Horvath, Professor and Turfgrass Pathologist, University of Tennessee Plant Sciences. Tall fescue is a prominent lawn grass choice especially in the Middle and Eastern Tennessee regions where cool-season turfgrasses are more prevalently used. Brown patch, caused by Rhizoctonia solani, is the most damaging pathogen affecting tall fescue lawns throughout Tennessee. This fungal disease can transform a lush, vibrant lawn into a patchy, unsightly expanse when conditions favor disease development. While fungicide applications are often necessary for severe outbreaks, proper fertility management serves as the foundation of an effective preventative strategy. Fertility practices directly influence plant health, disease susceptibility, and recovery potential. Unfortunately, many common fertilization practices can actually make the problem worse. Supported by several years of research findings, we have recently employed a different approach that maintains some growth turfgrass potential via fertility that enables infected plants to recover following disease pressure. Understanding the relationship between fertility inputs and disease development will allow lawn care professionals to implement proactive management programs that reduce disease severity while maintaining a quality turfgrass stand. This article explains how different fertility approaches affect brown patch in tall fescue lawns and provides practical ideas for turfgrass managers to implement these approaches in a lawn care setting. Understanding Brown Patch Disease Pathogen Biology and Life Cycle Rhizoctonia solani is a soilborne fungal pathogen that is present in most turfgrass environments. The fungus survives unfavorable periods as mycelia in thatch and soil. Under specific environmental conditions, primarily with high temperature and humidity, the fungus becomes active and begins to attack the plant. In tall fescue, R. solani primarily infects the leaf blades and sheaths, creating lesions that eventually result in a circular “patch” appearance. The fungus spreads via mycelial growth, moving from plant to plant through direct contact. Unlike other turfgrass diseases, brown patch does not spread via spores. Environmental Triggers in Tennessee Tennessee’s climate creates ideal conditions for brown patch development during much of the main growing season. The Brown Patch pathogen becomes active in response to: Temperature thresholds: Nighttime temperatures that consistently remain above 65 degrees Fahrenheit with daytime temperatures between 80 to 85 degrees Fahrenheit. These conditions typically develop in TN from mid-May through September, sometimes persisting into October. Humidity factors: Relative humidity that exceeds 80 percent greatly increases infection rates. Our humid summer climate, especially during nighttime, will frequently exceed this threshold. Leaf wetness: Extended leaf wetness periods of 10 plus hours dramatically increases infection rates. Evening irrigation practices, frequent summer thunderstorms, and morning dew are common in Tennessee and contribute to this risk factor. So, it is under these conditions that the plant becomes most susceptible to fungal attack and infection. Historically, conditions coincide with timing of when recommendations suggest backing off on fertility applications to allow the plant to “harden off”. However, our work has shown that a plant that is not able to actively recover will be in a worse position as multiple rounds of disease take place and decimate the stand. Nitrogen Management and Brown Patch Susceptibility Nitrogen is the most important nutrient for proper turfgrass growth, and there is a direct and significant impact on nitrogen management with brown patch susceptibility in tall fescue. Traditionally, research has shown that water-soluble, quick-release nitrogen sources (such as urea, ammonium sulfate, and ammonium nitrate) significantly increase brown patch severity compared to slow-release formulations. The main reason for this effect has been that at higher doses, the plant grows more rapidly, resulting in a thinner cuticle and lush, succulent growth. Modern practices, however, allow for much lower application rates of N fertility, and a spoon-feeding approach can often improve turfgrass performance. Using controlled-release nitrogen sources like polymer-coated urea will deliver nitrogen more gradually, which in turn will reduce disease-prone succulent growth while maintaining adequate plant growth for recovery. This relationship is really the key to using fertility to help manage the damage caused by brown patch. Ideally, the turfgrass manager wants the plant to grow just enough that when conditions aren’t conducive for disease, the plant will grow out of the symptoms and recovery will take place. When that condition exists, the turfgrass plants will be capable that when exposed to another disease cycle, some damage will occur, yet recovery will again take place. Application Rate and Timing Under-fertilizing a turfgrass stand or lawn is much more common today than over-fertilizing. As long as the applicator avoids excessive nitrogen application during high-risk periods, one of the most common fertility mistakes that often leads to more severe brown patch outbreaks can be avoided. By providing the plant with “just enough” fertility, the need for plant growth can be balanced with not overstimulating the pathogen’s ability to attack. I began to change my own perspectives on these recommendations about a decade ago, when some of our research clearly demonstrated that having moderate fertility applied during the growing season led to lower brown patch severity and also a decrease in undesirable competition from bermudagrass encroachment. As a result, I began making some adjustments in my recommendations on fertility: Late Spring (April to May): Limit applications to 0 point 5 to 0 point seven five pounds of nitrogen per 1000 square feet using primarily slow-release sources as temperatures begin to approach the brown patch threshold. Alternatively, one could use a very slow-release poly coat urea, that would provide approximately 3 pounds of nitrogen per 1000 square feet for the April to August Period (approximately 20 weeks) Summer (June to August): Make low rate applications (0 point 1 to 0 point 2 pounds of nitrogen per 1000 square feet; approximately point 6 to 1 point 2 pounds of nitrogen per 1000 square feet total for 3 months) during the highest risk brown patch season. These applications are made to just maintain some turfgrass growth and recovery potential without sparking lush succulent growth. Slow-release sources can also be used. Early Fall (September): Use fertilization at 0 point seven five to 1 point oh pounds of nitrogen per 1000 square feet as temperatures moderate to focus on turfgrass recovery from summer stress and disease pressure. Late Fall (October to November): Apply 1 point oh to 1 point 5 pounds of nitrogen per 1000 square feet, emphasizing root development and carbohydrate storage. In total, here in Tennessee, managers should target about 4 to 5 pounds of nitrogen per 1000 square feet per year for a quality Tall Fescue lawn. Making these slight adjustments in how we fertilize will help reduce the damage caused by disease while allowing for turfgrass recovery throughout the season, maintaining turf quality. Conclusion Effective brown patch management in tall fescue lawns requires an “all-hands” approach centered around proper fertility practices. By understanding the relationship between nutrition and disease development, lawn care professionals can significantly reduce brown patch severity while maintaining acceptable turf quality. Key takeaways include: Timing is critical: Avoid quick release, high rate, nitrogen applications during high-risk periods (June to August in Tennessee) Source matters: Use slow-release sources to smooth out nitrogen release over time mimicking a low rate “spoon feeding” approach Integrate approaches: Coordinate fertility with appropriate cultural practices and if needed, fungicide interventions Prevention focus: Implement proactive programs rather than reactive treatments Using these research-based fertility practices, I’m confident that turfgrass and grounds managers can significantly reduce the impact of brown patch in client and home landscapes while promoting healthier, more resilient tall fescue lawns. The post How Should Fertility be Used to Manage Brown Patch Disease in Tall Fescue Lawns? appeared first on The Turf Zone.

    10 min

  7. May 18

    Presentations and Activities for Procrastinators Recertification Seminar

    Welcome to The Turf Zone podcast. On this episode we preview presentations and activities for the procrastinators recertification seminar on June 11, 2026 in Maryland. Introductory comments are from 8:00 AM to 8:10 AM with moderator Dr. Carroll. From 8:10 AM to 9:00 AM will be a presentation titled “Thinking Outside the Chemical Box: Prospects for Alternative Approaches to Weed Management in Turf” by Dr. Daniel Buonaiuto, Assistant Professor, Department of Plant Science and Landscape Architecture, University of Maryland. For the past half century, the field of weed science has been focused on chemically managing noxious weeds and invasive plants. While this focus has led to useful advances in weed control, it has also given rise to herbicide resistant weed genotypes and increased incidences of negative environmental and health impacts. Scientists are calling for a new weed science research agenda focused on integrating chemical control with mechanical, cultural and biological management approaches, but new research agendas take time, and the weeds are growing right now. In this session we’ll survey the tools and techniques that are available right now that can aid turf professionals in managing problematic weeds with fewer chemicals. We’ll also discuss the potential for practitioner-research partnerships to rapidly advance our collective expertise in integrated weed management in turfgrass systems. From 9:00 AM to 9:50 AM will be a presentation titled “Improving Dollar Spot Control While Reducing Fungicide Inputs” by Mr. Uday Kumar, Doctoral Candidate, Department of Plant Science and Landscape Architecture. Dollar spot is the most common and costly disease on golf course fairways in the Mid-Atlantic region, and most courses rely heavily on calendar-based fungicide programs to keep it in check. This presentation covers two practical, research-backed approaches that can help superintendents get better control while reducing the number of sprays applied each season. Three years of field trials at the University of Maryland showed that timing fungicide applications using the Smith–Kerns dollar spot prediction model at the 20% threshold provided the same level of control as a standard 14-day calendar program while reducing applications by two to four sprays per season. In addition, nightly UVC irradiation delivered by an autonomous mower consistently suppressed dollar spot in lab, greenhouse, and field conditions. When UVC was combined with fungicides at 28-day intervals, turf quality remained acceptable while significantly reducing chemical inputs. Together, these tools offer a more precise and sustainable approach to dollar spot management on golf course fairways. Presentations will break from 9:50 AM to 10:00 AM then resume with a presentation titled “IPM Strategies for Ornamental Landscape Diseases” from 10:00 AM to 10:50 AM presented by Dr. David Clement, Plant Pathologist, University of Maryland Extension. Many landscape ornamental diseases require early diagnosis for effective management. Scouting is critical to finding symptoms early. This presentation will cover the common diseases in Maryland landscapes along with key diagnostic symptoms coupled with Integrated Pest Management strategies. From 10:50 AM to 11:40 AM Mr. Geoffrey Rinehart, Senior Lecturer, Institute of Applied Agriculture, University of Maryland will present “Fertilizer Product Selection and Nanotechnology Use in Fertilizer Programs” This presentation will provide information about what nanotechnology is and how it is being researched to improve the efficiency and efficacy of turf fertilizers and plant protectant products. In addition, this talk will encompass an overview of the major nitrogen fertilizer sources and their respective release characteristics. Timings for utilizing various major fertilizer sources for improved turfgrass health and effective nitrogen utilization will be discussed. From 11:40 AM to 12:30 PM Dr. Mark Carroll. Associate Professor, Department of Plant Science and Landscape Architecture, University of Maryland will present “Organic Lawn Care: Principles, Science and Landscape Architecture, University of Maryland” Synthetic fertilizers and pesticide treatments are often the primary chemical inputs in conventional lawn care; however, growing human health and environmental concerns have many homeowners seeking lawn care programs that are marketed as Natural or Organic. Natural and Organic programs emphasize the use of materials and practices that enrich soil organic matter and promote presence of organisms perceived to be beneficial to promoting plant health. This presentation will review the principles underlying an organic approach to turfgrass management and will provide an overview of the materials being used by lawn care operators in Maryland that offer organic or natural lawn care services. Difficulties in adhering to organic precepts when offering an organic or natural lawn care program will also be discussed. From 12:30 PM to 1:15 PM the presentations will break for lunch and resume with a presentation titled “Pesticide and Fertilizer Spray Calibration Field Demonstration” from 1:15 PM to 2:00 PM by Steve Holman, Paint Branch Turfgrass Facility Research Technician. For additional information about the event visit the Maryland Turfgrass Council website at www.mdturfcouncil.org You have been listening to The Turf Zone Podcast. Follow The Turf Zone on X, Facebook and LinkedIn for all things turfgrass, featuring podcasts, magazines, events and more. Visit www.theturfzone.com for more. The post Presentations and Activities for Procrastinators Recertification Seminar appeared first on The Turf Zone.

    6 min

  8. May 13

    How to Price Your Services for Profit

    Welcome to The Turf Zone podcast. This episode covers the business behind the green with the article “How to Price Your Services for Profit” written by Kristina Kelly. When it comes to running a turfgrass business, your work is rooted in results. Healthy lawns, properly installed sod, and satisfied customers are the visible signs of success. And behind every vibrant blade of grass is a business owner making daily decisions that impact their bottom line. One of the most important? Pricing. Setting the right price for your services can feel like trying to hit a moving target. Charge too little, and you’re leaving money on the table or risking your ability to sustain operations. Charge too much, and you might struggle to stay competitive in your market. Whether you’re a seasoned professional or new to the industry, understanding how to price your services for profit is key to long-term stability and growth. Know Your True Costs Before setting any price, you need to understand what it actually costs to deliver your services. That means looking beyond just materials and labor. Your total cost should include direct and indirect expenses, such as: Labor wages, including payroll taxes and workers’ compensation Equipment maintenance, fuel, and depreciation Material costs, like sod, seed, fertilizer, and irrigation supplies Insurance, licenses, and permits Office overhead, marketing, and administrative costs If you’re only calculating based on materials and hourly labor, you may be unintentionally operating at a loss. Developing a simple spreadsheet or using job-costing software can help you track these figures and understand your cost per service. This step lays the foundation for profitable pricing. Factor in Your Desired Profit Margin Once you know your costs, it’s time to add your profit margin. This isn’t greedy. It’s necessary. Profit allows you to reinvest in your business, build a financial cushion, and pay yourself a fair wage as the owner. A healthy net profit margin in service industries typically ranges from 10 to 20 percent, though it may vary based on your service mix and market. For example, if it costs you $2,000 to complete a sod installation job, and you want a 20 percent profit margin, your price should be at least $2,500. Many business owners make the mistake of only charging enough to cover costs, which can lead to financial stress or burnout down the road. Understand the Market (But Don’t Let It Dictate Your Value) Knowing what competitors charge is important, but it shouldn’t be your only reference point. Pricing strictly to match or undercut the competition can turn into a race to the bottom. Instead, use market research to understand the range of prices in your area, and then position yourself based on the value you provide. If your work is high quality, your team is reliable, and you offer responsive customer service, you don’t need to be the cheapest option. Instead, you can charge what you’re worth and attract customers who recognize and value professionalism. That might mean saying no to some price-sensitive clients, but it will help you build a stronger, more sustainable client base in the long run. Avoid the Temptation of Flat-Rate Guesswork It can be tempting to offer flat-rate pricing to simplify your quotes, but this approach can backfire if it’s not backed by data. Every job is different, and variables like square footage, site conditions, soil prep, and access points can dramatically affect your costs. If you rely on gut instinct or round numbers to quote jobs, you may end up underbidding without realizing it. Instead, develop a pricing model based on per-square-foot or per-hour rates that can be customized to each job. This approach also helps you educate your clients and show transparency in your pricing. Build in a Buffer for Risk and Rework Not every job goes according to plan. Weather delays, equipment breakdowns, and last-minute client changes can eat into your profitability. When calculating your price, include a small buffer to account for the unexpected. This might be an extra percentage added to your labor costs or a built-in contingency fee. Additionally, consider how you’ll handle rework or warranty issues. If you offer a guarantee on sod establishment or turf health, make sure that’s reflected in your pricing structure. It’s better to plan for these scenarios than to absorb the cost later. Your pricing shouldn’t be static. Costs increase over time, and so should your rates. Review your pricing annually (or more frequently if you experience major changes in labor or material costs). Communicate price increases clearly and professionally with clients and reinforce the value they receive. Most customers understand that inflation and industry dynamics affect pricing, especially if they trust the quality of your work. Regular reviews can also help you identify services that may no longer be profitable, or spot opportunities to package offerings in a way that increases revenue. Package and Upsell Strategically One way to boost profitability is by offering bundled services or strategic upsells. For example, if you’re installing sod, you could offer irrigation system checks, soil testing, or seasonal fertilization packages. These added services not only increase the overall value of a job, but they also help position your business as a comprehensive turf solution provider. Clients often appreciate a “one-stop shop” approach, especially when it simplifies their to-do list and increases the success of their lawn or landscape investment. Know When to Walk Away Finally, remember that not every job is the right fit. If a prospective client pressures you to lower your price or match a competitor’s rate without understanding the difference in service quality, it may be best to politely walk away. Saying no to low-margin work frees up your time and resources for jobs that are actually profitable. It takes confidence and discipline, but walking away from the wrong clients is just as important to your bottom line as securing the right ones. Pricing Done Right Pricing is one of the most important decisions you make as a turfgrass professional and business owner. It requires a clear understanding of your costs, an honest evaluation of your value, and the willingness to protect your profit margins. When done right, pricing becomes more than a number on a quote—it becomes a reflection of your professionalism and the foundation of a thriving business. By taking a thoughtful, data-driven approach to pricing, you’ll not only ensure the health of your business but also earn the trust and loyalty of clients who see the value in what you do. You have been listening to The Turf Zone Podcast. Follow The Turf Zone on X, Facebook and LinkedIn for all things turfgrass, featuring podcasts, magazines, events and more. Visit www.theturfzone.com for more. The post How to Price Your Services for Profit appeared first on The Turf Zone.

    8 min

  9. May 11

    Minimizing Spring Dead Spot

    Welcome to The Turf Zone podcast. This episode features the article “Minimizing Spring Dead Spot” written by M. Aaron Tucker, Assistant Professor, Auburn University and Wendell J. Hutchens, Assistant Professor, University of Arkansas. Introduction Spring Dead Spot (SDS) is one of the most persistent and damaging diseases affecting warm-season turfgrasses that undergo winter dormancy. First documented in 1954 on a bermudagrass lawn in Stillwater, Oklahoma, SDS continues to challenge turf managers across the southern and transition zone of the United States (Wadsworth & Young, 1960; Tredway, 2009). This article outlines the biology of the disease, key infection periods, and the latest cultural and chemical strategies for effective management. Pathogen Biology SDS is caused by soil-borne fungi in the genus Ophiosphaerella, specifically O. herpotricha, O. korrae, and O. narmari. These pathogens differ in geographic distribution and turfgrass host preference. In Alabama, O. korrae is likely the most prevalent species (Hutchens et al., 2025). Disease Cycle and Symptoms The fungi that cause Spring Dead Spot are ectotrophic root-infecting pathogens, colonizing the outer surfaces of roots, rhizomes, and stolons, leading to necrosis. This damage predisposes turfgrass to winter injury, with symptoms emerging in spring due to the combined effects of fall infection and harsh winter conditions. SDS is a monocyclic disease, with a single infection cycle per year. Infection occurs in late summer to early fall, when evening temperatures cool and soil temperatures drop consistently below 70°F. Symptoms appear in spring as circular or semi-circular patches of dead turf, ranging from six inches to several feet in diameter. Severe outbreaks can result in large, coalesced areas of turf loss, with recovery taking two to three months after green-up—making proactive management essential. Cultural Management Strategies Effective cultural management hinges on understanding the disease’s biology. Thatch and organic matter serve as reservoirs for pathogen survival. Practices such as core aerification, verticutting, and fraze mowing during the summer remove thatch and dilute organic matter, thereby reducing inoculum and mitigating spring symptoms (Hutchens et al., 2025). Conversely, cultural practices such as verticutting and aerification on symptomatic turf in spring can actually hinder recovery. Mechanical stress on already damaged turf slows regrowth, so spring cultivation should be avoided. Proper fertilization, particularly nitrogen applications in late summer/fall and spring, supports plant health and recovery (Tredway, 2021; Hutchens et al., 2022). Ammonium sulfate has shown efficacy against O. herpotricha, while calcium nitrate is more effective against O. korrae—highlighting the importance of pathogen identification (Tredway, 2021). Chemical Management Strategies Chemical control with fungicides is most effective when timed correctly. Applications should occur during fall as soil temperatures drop consistently between 65-55°F. Current research is refining this window using the Battaglia-Hutchens cooling degree-day model to optimize timing (Battaglia et al., 2024). The modern demethylation-inhibiting (DMI) fungicide mefentrifluconazole offers strong SDS suppression, while older DMIs like propiconazole and tebuconazole provide moderate efficacy (Clarke et al., 2020). Select succinate dehydrogenase-inhibiting (SDHI) fungicides—like isofetamid, penthiopyrad, and pydiflumetofen—also provide excellent control but carry a higher risk of resistance. Rotating SDHIs with DMIs is recommended to preserve efficacy. Precision Application Technologies Advancements in GPS-guided sprayers allow for targeted fungicide applications. Mapping disease areas in spring and early summer enables precise fall fungicide treatments, reducing both cost and environmental impact (Booth et al., 2021; Henderson et al., 2025). Conclusion Understanding pathogen biology, the disease cycle, and optimal application timing is essential for managing SDS. Continued research is uncovering pathogen-specific responses to cultural and chemical strategies, offering promising avenues for more refined and effective control. Literature Cited Battaglia, M., Hutchens, W. J., & Roberson, T. (2024, November). Development of a Fungicide Application Timing Model for Spring Dead Spot Using Cooling Degree-Days. In ASA, CSSA, SSSA International Annual Meeting. ASA-CSSA-SSSA. Booth, J. C., Sullivan, D., Askew, S. A., Kochersberger, K., & McCall, D. S. (2021). Investigating targeted spring dead spot management via aerial mapping and precision-guided fungicide applications. Crop Science, 61(5), 3134-3144. Clarke, B. B., Vincelli, P., Koch, P., & Chou, M. Y. (2020). Chemical control of turfgrass diseases 2024. Henderson, C., Haak, D., Mehl, H., Shafian, S., & McCall, D. (2025). Precision mapping and treatment of spring dead spot in bermudagrass using unmanned aerial vehicles and global navigation satellite systems sprayer technology. Precision Agriculture, 26(2), 38. Hutchens, W. J., Booth, J. C., Goatley, J. M., & McCall, D. S. (2022). Cultivation and Fertility Practices Influence Hybrid Bermudagrass Recovery from Spring Dead Spot Damage. HortScience, 57(2), 332-336. Hutchens, W. J., Anders, J. K., Butler, E. L., Kerns, J. P., McCall, D. S., Miller, G. L., & Walker, N. R. (2025). Fifteen years of findings: Advancements in spring dead spot research from 2009 to 2024. Crop Science, 65(1), e21367. Tredway, L. P., Tomaso-Peterson, M., Perry, H., & Walker, N. R. (2009). Spring dead spot of bermudagrass: A challenge for researchers and turfgrass managers. Plant Health Progress, 10(1), 32. Tredway, L. P., Soika, M. D., Butler, E. L., & Kerns, J. P. (2021). Impact of nitrogen source, fall fertilizers, and preventive fungicides on spring dead spot caused by Ophiosphaerella korrae and O. herpotricha. Crop Science, 61(5), 3187-3196. Wadsworth, D. F., & Young, H. C. (1960). Spring dead spot of bermudagrass. Plant Dis. Rep, 44, 516-518. You have been listening to The Turf Zone Podcast. Follow The Turf Zone on X, Facebook and LinkedIn for all things turfgrass, featuring podcasts, magazines, events and more. Visit www.theturfzone.com for more. The post Minimizing Spring Dead Spot appeared first on The Turf Zone.

    5 min

  10. May 8

    NE-SFMA Member Spotlight on Ryan Restivo

    Welcome to The Turf Zone podcast. This episode spotlights New England Sports Field Management Association member Ryan Restivo – Parks Superintendent for the Town of New Canaan Parks Department in New Canaan, Connecticut. Read from New England Blade magazine. How did you get your start in the sports field industry? I’ve always had a passion for sports, the outdoors, and hard work. During high school and the early part of my collegiate career, I worked at a renowned golf course in Darien, Connecticut—Weeburn Country Club. I later joined Superintendent Doug Drugo and his grounds crew, where I gained hands-on experience maintaining high-level playing surfaces. That opportunity, combined with my love for sports, ultimately kickstarted my path into the turfgrass and sports field industry. Where did you go from there? That passion led me to earn a degree in Plant Sciences with a concentration in Turfgrass Management, along with a minor in General Business, from the University of Rhode Island. Along the way, I had the opportunity to work with outstanding teams, including the Weeburn Country Club grounds crew, the Gillette Stadium field crew, and the USGA at both the 2019 U.S. Junior Amateur and the 2024 U.S. Senior Open Championships. Those experiences helped shape my approach to turf management and Parks and Recreation operations. Today, I serve as the Superintendent for the Town of New Canaan Parks Department. Who was your mentor when you were first starting out in the industry, and why? Other than my family and the work ethic they instilled in me, one of my most influential mentors was—and still is—Joshua Bergeron. Josh, who is three years older than me, was a fellow URI Turfgrass Management student and followed a very similar career path in both golf course and sports field management. After graduating, Josh found success on the Gillette Stadium Field Crew before moving on to a different career path. Along with Field Crew Superintendent Jon Bengtson, Josh gave me the opportunity to intern with the Gillette Stadium Field Crew. To my younger self, that opportunity felt like a dream come true; to my adult self, it reinforced the belief that with hard work and the right opportunities, anything is possible. In addition to Josh, I’ve been fortunate to learn from all of my professors at URI, as well as the many golf course and sports field professionals who have guided me throughout my career. What’s the best business advice you’ve ever received? While it’s not strictly business advice, the best guidance I’ve ever received is a saying I try to live by: “Find a job you enjoy doing, and you will never have to work a day in your life.” — Mark Twain What is the next “game-changer” you see on the horizon for the sports turf industry? The next major game-changer in the sports turf industry is the continued advancement of automated and GPS-based technology. Innovations such as automated paint machines and GPS-guided sprayers promote greater precision, reduce misapplications, and allow operators to focus more on detail and quality in their day-to-day work. While skilled labor remains essential and in high demand, advanced technology enables sports turf managers to be more accurate and consistent with field layouts and applications. I’ve had first-hand experience using automated paint machines, and I’ve seen how they improve efficiency and consistency. What’s your favorite / most useful: Equipment? Ventrac 4520 & various attachments Product? Seed Technology? Tiny Mobile Robot Paint Machine What advice would you share with people starting out in sports field management today? My advice is to always ask questions and say yes to opportunities—as long as they’re safe. Don’t be afraid to ask supervisors and peers for clarification and make it a priority to understand the why behind everything you do. Ask yourself questions like, “Why am I applying this product?” “What is its mode of action?” or “Why am I doing it this way—and is there a more efficient approach?” Opportunities often come when you least expect them, and growth happens when you step outside your comfort zone. If you’re hesitant but know the opportunity is safe, go for it. I can promise you that you’ll gain something valuable from the experience. Can you share a bit about your family life and / or what you enjoy doing in your free time? Family is everything to me. I come from a big family and am the youngest of three, and growing up, our lives revolved around sports and work. Those experiences helped shape who I am today. I consider myself a pretty simple guy—I enjoy spending time with my fiancée, Elizabeth, and with our families and friends. I like staying active and competitive, even if it’s through what I jokingly call “old man sports” like golf, cornhole, and pickleball. I also enjoy work-related and at-home projects. I see them as challenges that keep me engaged, help me continue learning, and contribute to improvements I can apply both professionally and in my day-to-day life. What have you enjoyed most / find most beneficial about being a New England Sports Field Management Association member? The most beneficial aspect of being a New England Sports Field Management Association member is the networking opportunities it provides. For newer members—those with five years of experience or less—it opens the door to the knowledge and insight of seasoned industry veterans. We can all admit that we’ve made mistakes and learned through trial and error, and having access to experienced professionals allows us to ask questions, learn more efficient ways to perform tasks and make better-informed decisions. That networking also encourages the exchange of ideas, exposure to new technologies, and honest discussions about what works—and what doesn’t. It’s an invaluable resource that helps professionals at every stage of their career continue to grow and adapt. You have been listening to The Turf Zone Podcast. Follow The Turf Zone on X, Facebook and LinkedIn for all things turfgrass, featuring podcasts, magazines, events and more. Visit www.theturfzone.com for more. The post NE-SFMA Member Spotlight on Ryan Restivo appeared first on The Turf Zone.

    7 min
  • 10 Episodes

Ratings & Reviews

4.3
out of 5
3 Ratings

About

All Your Turf News In One Place

Information

You Might Also Like