Is it really about appearance?

Brian Vinchesi

I visited a golf course irrigation project and came across this sign posted on the bulletin board outside of the pro shop. I thought the wording was odd, but I moved on. Later that day, I looked at it again and asked the superintendent who had posted the sign. Apparently, it was the irrigation contractor installing the new system.

I’ve been to hundreds of system installations, but I’d never seen a sign worded this way. I’ve seen posted signs during irrigation construction addressing closed holes where the contractor was working that day. Perplexed, I went back and photographed the sign.

Over the next week, I thought about the poster. What bothered me was the word “appearance.” Had it said “inconvenience” or “disruption,” I would not have given it a second look. My problem is an irrigation system installation should never affect the appearance of the course. It might cause disruption in play and/or inconvenience to the golfers due to the loss of a hole, but not the appearance. The irrigation system should be installed neatly and efficiently at all times with minimal changes to course appearance. The fact the contractor apologized was not a good thing – or so I thought.

Why should an irrigation system not affect course appearance? If the course is new or a renovation is taking place, the irrigation work will be mostly on bare ground, so the appearance will be about the construction, not irrigation. On existing courses during the irrigation system installation, all the sod for trenches and sprinkler and valve box installations is usually cut, lifted and replaced after the equipment is installed. Where pipe is not trenched, the pipe is pulled and as long as the pull lines are tamped back down with the right equipment, there isn’t an issue. An irrigation system should be installed in an area or on a feature and when the work is complete, it should not be apparent the irrigation was ever installed. If it is obvious, you’re using the wrong contractor.

Back to the course with the posted sign. The contractor did in fact need to apologize for the appearance. In the late fall/early winter, the contractor cut the frozen sod and lifted it off the main line trenches and did not put it back. They attempted to put it back this spring once it thawed out. However, it was a very late spring. Result: Most of the sod was toast and the trench line is brown or a mixture of green and brown. If the sod had not gone off in color, it had fallen apart and the trench was a patch work quilt of soil and poor quality turf. Instead of being hard to see, the trenches stick out like a sore thumb. And because the trenches were bare from the sod being lifted, the melting snow and spring rains eroded the main line trenches. Those are now restored, but without any sod available they were loamed, seeded and covered with straw mats to stop erosion. As someone plays the course, they keep coming across these haphazard areas of brown strips or straw matting. Not good for appearances.

If the contractor needs to apologize for the appearance of a system installation, then that is probably just one of many things that are going wrong or are wrong with the installation. You need to take a good look at all of the irrigation system work, especially the work that is being buried and you cannot see. Poor performance at grade most likely means poor performance below grade too. Take immediate steps to fix the issues and make sure you have a specification and contract that allows you to require work to be redone that is not correct before the irrigation project even starts.

Brian Vinchesi, the 2009 EPA WaterSense Irrigation Partner of the Year, is president of Irrigation Consulting Inc., a golf course irrigation design and consulting firm headquartered in Pepperell, Mass., that designs irrigation systems throughout the world. He can be reached at bvinchesi@irrigationconsulting.com or 978/433-8972.