The Right Tool

GCI. I've always said that, with so much emphasis placed on greens and tees, golf course fairways are the superintendents’ forgotten turf. How important is it to make sure your fairways are up to speed regarding their nutrition? 
TONY GOLDSBY. Well, if you look at it from a historical perspective, the budget is really what has driven this mentality among turf managers. Being the highest priority areas for a golf course, the greens and tees just end up taking precedence. When you talk about fairway fertility treatments, one reason people prefer doing granular treatments over liquid, is you can put down more nitrogen per application.  With a liquid program, you are often spoon feeding the turf with a low rate of Nitrogen, and this requires a more frequent application schedule.  Traditionally, labor and having a spray program that wouldn’t interfere with play really pushed granule use on fairways. 

Now it seems like that pendulum has swung in the other direction, and superintendents are doing more liquid applications on fairways due to the drastic improvements in sprayer technology.  Data from university studies has shown the use of both liquid and granular fertility products is the best choice for overall turf growth.  So, again, the driving factor for the decision is going to be course budget and available application equipment.  

The idea of the right tool for the right job with regard to liquid vs. granular fertilizers is an interesting point. Give me a scenario where liquid is the right tool for the job compared to a granular application? 
The example that presents itself most often is the ability to tank mix fertilizer with other chemicals.  Quite often, turfgrass managers are making bi-weekly applications of plant growth regulators(PGR’S) on their fairways to control growth.  For them to utilize a granular applied product, it would result in double the labor for coming back to do a second PGR application.  By using a liquid application in this scenario, they can tank mix the two products together and save both time and money on labor cost.  

Keep in mind, there are also cases where a granular fertilizer application on fairways is going to be preferred.  The ability to apply higher rates of fertility during disruptive events(aerification/seeding) make granular fertility an attractive choice.  With a granular applied product there is a wide variety of available technologies with various release rates.    This is the driving reason behind why a liquid program is applied at much smaller spoon-fed rates.

Does the liquid route allow a superintendent to be more proactive? For example, the course has a big tournament coming up, the weather forecast is for hot, humid weather, and they know the fairways are going to get some punishing traffic. In this scenario, am I better off with a liquid?
Hot and humid conditions can drive pathogen development and would certainly be further exacerbated by a high application rate of Nitrogen.  In these cases, spoon feeding or using products with much of the Nitrogen being in slow release form is desirable.  As you get towards tournament time, the playability factor really starts to garner the superintendents focus.  The desire to increase things like ball speed on putting greens, and overall fairway firmness are greatly influenced by fertility, water and topdressing management.  With the frequent, low rate applications of fertility that you get from a liquid fertilizer program, it can allow for precise top growth control.  As I already mentioned many superintendents are also coupling this with a PGR application to dial in the course to their suiting for tournament play.  

What’s a common misconception or myth about using a mixed program?
I think the biggest misconception is it may not be possible to create the perfect fertility program without being 100% liquid or granular.  This is really where the right tool for the right job mentality comes into play.  There are going to be periods of time during the year where turf health, playability and environmental factors dictate which one you’re going to utilize over the other.  The mixed program method is not only university tested but is also used successfully by many superintendents.