Eyes in the sky

“It’s a bird, it’s a plane, no, it’s our super, man.”

That dialogue could be taking place on a slowly growing number of golf courses where superintendents are taking to the skies by proxy with the aid of remote-controlled quadcopters, more familiarly but also more controversially known as drones. As the technology continues to improve, the uses these fascinating devices can be put to on a golf course are limited only by the imagination of the course superintendent. Well, there are a couple of other small considerations, namely the initial cost and what figure to be a growing number of pesky regulations regulating use of the devices, but those are not insurmountable in many cases.

Nearly every superintendent and researcher interviewed had a specific application in mind for their drone when they purchased it. However, after gaining a better idea of what the devices can do, most users have already figured out other ways to use them to help with course maintenance issues. Those range from discovery of turf and irrigation problems or patterns that are harder to detect at ground level to course flyover photography for use in club marketing materials or websites.

Rick Tegtmeier, director of grounds at the Des Moines Country Club in Iowa, experienced his “Aha!” moment when he saw a video posted on the website of California Golf Club of San Francisco superintendent Thomas Bastis. The video showed some of the ways Bastis was putting his DJI Phantom II drone to work at his course. Tegtmeier immediately realized that he had the perfect justification for purchasing a similar device. His club, which will host the 2017 Solheim Cup competition, was in the early stages of a redesign/renovation of its 36 holes, doing nine holes a year. That added up to a lot of site visits by Indiana-based golf course architect Tim Liddy, a Pete Dye Design senior associate who is spearheading the design and construction work on the two Pete Dye-designed layouts.

“We do flyovers of the golf course and then put together a movie of the work as it progresses with both the ground view and the aerial view, and upload it to our blog page,” Tegtmeier says. “That way, our architect in Indiana can see what we’re doing and make suggestions or changes without having to be here. That’s the main reason I purchased (the drone), but it also enables us to see wear patterns from carts on the course. I thought we could also use it to see irrigation stresses, but it rained all summer, so that wasn’t an issue.”

Bastis, whose video ignited Tegtmeier’s interest, got his own inspiration from a YouTube video of a surfing contest taken by a drone above the Steamers Lane surf break in Santa Cruz, Calif.

“When I saw that, I said, ‘That’s ridiculous, it would awesome on a golf course,’” Bastis says. “I had a little slush money in the budget from selling a couple of pieces of equipment, so I bought one.”

Bastis, who started with the DJI Phantom I model and later upgraded to the Phantom II, uses his drone for a variety of tasks. Bastis and his staff maintain as many as 48 different plots of turf for research on the California Golf Club of San Francisco property, and the Phantom gives them a better perspective for judging which ones are doing the best.

“When you’re walking the course and looking at the turf from 6 feet above it, it’s hard to see how the various plots rank and evaluate each product to see which is working best,” Bastis says. “It’s a lot easier to see from the air. There are lots of other uses, too. Is there a problem of patterning with your irrigation system? How far did the cattails move in the ponds from year to year? Is your fertilizer evenly distributed? How’s the roof on the clubhouse holding up? You can find out all those things with a drone.”

In addition to research applications, Bastis uses the Phantom to take pictures of various issues on the course or various projects his crew is working on to share with the club’s general manager. “My boss appreciates it,” Bastis says with a laugh, “because this way he doesn’t have to look at all those graphs and numbers, he can see a picture of what we're doing.”

Adam Garr, superintendent at Plum Hollow Country Club in Southfield, Mich., had also seen some drone views incorporated on other club websites and superintendent blogs, and felt it was time to catch up.

“I originally wanted to add spice to my videos because I was a little jealous of some of the things I was seeing in other places,” Garr admits. “I got a DJI Phantom I last winter and kind of worked the kinks out in February and March while we were still closed. Since I started using it, I see it as having a lot more applications than making movies.

“It’s really helpful in seeing shade issues on greens,” Garr continues. “There are a lot of things you can’t see when you’re walking the greens but you really can (see) from overhead. I can show that certain trees are creating problems and killing turf on greens, which helps me to convince members that we need to take some of the problem trees out. You can also look at winterkill aspects and see how much of a problem it was. We take aerials of all the greens to show to the greens committee and the board. Another thing I use it for is after a heavy rain, I’ll send it up and take pictures of the course and the wet spots. That way when members show up and want to take carts out, I can tweet out the pictures or put ‘em on my blog and it gets people off my back.”

Golf course superintendents are not the only ones using drones to monitor turf conditions. The Turf and Landscapes Research Center at Cornell University in Ithaca, N.Y., documents virtually all of its research with a Phantom II, according to field supervisor Brett Welch.

“We can change the lens angle, record in full HD, and the camera is really stable in the air,” Welch says. “The pictures are incredibly clear. We use it to evaluate equipment, record chemical treatment studies, look at disease pressure. There’s really kind of no limit on how you can use (drones)."

All of the people we talked with in the golf and turf industries are using the DJI Phantom quadcopter models, either the Phantom I or the more advanced Phantom II models, although there are numerous other models and types of similar devices on the market, whether they’re called quadcopters, drones or “recreational hobbycraft.” Prices vary, but the Phantom I typically runs just under $500, while the more versatile Phantom II is around $1,500. The GoPro camera mounted on the bottom of the device is extra. Once the device is purchased, the only additional expense is batteries. It may be worth pointing out that several of the superintendents we talked with felt that they might have jumped at the less expensive Phantom I model prematurely, and that the additional features and technology of the Phantom II would have been a better fit for their needs, so it’s probably a good idea to see if the basic model will work for you, or if the Phantom II is a better fit.

While the capabilities of “drones” vary greatly, as Taliban, Al-Qaeda and now ISIS fighters have discovered, the Phantom models used by the superintendents and researchers we talked with typically fly up to 20 mph and are controlled by hand-held remotes with joysticks. While everyone we talked with admitted to having crashed the devices or stuck them in a tree from time to time, they all reported that the Phantoms lived to fly another day, which will be good news for superintendents just earning their drone-flying wings.

The increasing popularity of the devices is bound to create a whole new field of laws, regulations and lawsuits. During a recent report by “Entertainment Tonight” on the use of drones by members of the paparazzi to covertly film celebrities, the show cited a statistic that by 2020, there would be as many as 30,000 drones aloft in the U.S. Although “ET” may not be the most authoritative source, the number is a testament to the fact that the drones are relatively easy to operate.

There are, however, already plenty of regulations regarding their use, and superintendents should be aware of those before they send one aloft. There are typically restrictions on how high or how far they can fly, how much they can weigh, and what specific uses they are put to. In many cases, those vary according to the drone user’s proximity to the nearest airport. The Phantom II that Bastis uses at California Golf Club of San Francisco contains software that produces a tone and won't allow the drone to exceed the prescribed altitude ceiling.

While Bastis was initially concerned that other members of the club staff or even club members might see the Phantom drone as a toy or something to play with, the device has proven so helpful that others are aware it’s earning its keep and leave it alone. And, as Garr says, “It kind of started as a hobby, but now it’s a tool.”

Jim Dunlap is an Encinitas, Calif.-based writer and frequent GCI contributor.