Blog Posts

July 25, 2019 by NYS BMP ·

Our stand alone publication, Best Management Practices for Pollinators on New York State Golf Courses, has been revised and republished, now available for on-line reading as a flip book: https://nysgolfbmp.cals.cornell.edu/nys_pollinator_bmps_2019/.

Over 400 wild species of pollinators inhabit New York State. Golf courses, especially in developed areas, can provide significant areas of habitat to support these species and domesticated honey bees as well. This publication contains the information superintendents need to protect pollinators while responsibly using  pesticides to meet their needs and guidance on providing habitat to support healthy pollinator populations.

June 3, 2019 by NYS BMP

Pest management is a critical component of maintaining a playable and functional golf course. A fully implemented best management practices program demands the highest level of progressive Integrated Pest Management (IPM).

Progressive IPM observes and records pest pressure, uses predictive approaches to assessing injury risk, considers intervention with lowest environmental impact, and assesses performance of intervention for integration in pest management programs. This summer, when you consider intervention to control pests that includes the use of pesticides, consider products with the lowest environmental impact. This idea is identified in the two BMP statements:

• Determine least toxic pest control programs including preventive approaches.
• Recognize environmental fate of pesticides and select pesticides using a selection strategy that includes an evaluation of pesticide characteristics and potential for nontarget effects.

When pesticide use is warranted, the selection of pesticide should include an evaluation of economics, efficacy, and the environment. An additional factor such as application method should be considered as well in those cases where liquid spray is more effective than granular products or has a lower environmental impact.

A simple method to assess the reduction in environmental impact can be performed by simply calculating the pounds of active ingredients of products used and striving each year to reduce those totals. However, this simple method neglects any potential variability in toxicity, which could be accounted for by using a percentage of reduced risk or biological products for pest control.

A number of pesticide risk assessment models are available from a variety of government, university and private sources to use for more precise environmental impact estimations. These models utilize toxicity, exposure, and persistence data to provide a numerical value that integrates a number of human health and environmental impacts. For example, the Quebec Pesticide Risk Indicator (QPRI) has different assessment models for human health (QPRI-Health) and a separate number for environmental impacts (QPRI-Environment). These measure various factors and provide the user information for product selection and cumulative environmental impact during a season.

The Cornell Turfgrass Program uses the Environmental Impact Quotient developed by the NYS IPM Program and adapted for use in turfgrass systems. Like the QPRI, the EIQ assesses the toxicity for the applicator and golfer as well as environmental fate and persistence characteristics. A numerical value is determined for a product, then adjusted for field use rate and finally the treated acreage.

Both these approaches have limitations, however over time regardless of the tool you use, it is critical to attempt to measure and monitor the risk associated with pest management programs.

An excellent example of the risk assessment approach is available in the Case studies section of the NYS Golf BMP website. The golf course management staff at Soaring Eagles Golf Course implemented the EIQ approach over a five-year period to target reducing risk associated with pest management and specifically with dollar spot control.  The case study concluded: “Soaring Eagles quickly adapted the chemical substitutions of lower FUEIQ products with the same or improved efficacies, still considering resistance management. Strategic equipment investment created opportunity for specific cultural operations that directly reduced pest pressure and improve plant vigor. Five years later, there is a 28 percent reduction in the overall FUEIQ –Acres. More significantly, the course has reduced the use of higher FUEIQ-value chemicals by 57%.”

So the good, better, and best practices for reducing risk associated with pest management program are as follows:

A good pest management program:

• establishes non-resource limiting (light, air, drainage, etc.) growing environments as preventative cultural management strategy
• practices good recordkeeping of historical pest populations and impact of pest pressure that notes injury
• monitors existing pest pressure and impact of current and forecasted weather conditions to determine predict risk level and degree of intervention required to maintain visual and functional quality
• implements intervention strategy with understanding of the environmental impact (EPA label) and the potential disruption due to damage associated with pest pressure.
• assesses results of intervention and annually reviews practices and products.

A better pest management program:

• minimizes pest importation by maintaining clean planting material (sod, seed, topsoil, etc.)
• establishes non-resource limiting (light, air, drainage, etc.) growing environments as preventative cultural management strategy
• adapts cultural practices to manage abiotic (temperature, moisture and traffic) stress
• practices good recordkeeping of properly diagnosed historical pest populations and images of impact of pest pressure that notes injury, damage, and objectionable reduction in visual or functional quality
• monitors existing pest pressure and impact of current and forecasted weather conditions to determine degree of intervention required to maintain visual and functional quality
• implements intervention strategy with full understanding of the environmental impact as determined by two sources (EPA, EIQ, QPRI, etc.) and commensurate with the expected level of disruption due to damage associated with pest pressure.
• assesses results of intervention and records a detailed a review of the practices and products.

A best pest management program:

• minimizes pest importation by maintaining clean planting material (sod, seed, topsoil, etc.)
• establishes non-resource limiting (light, air, drainage, etc.) growing environments as preventative cultural management strategy
• adapts cultural practices to manage abiotic (temperature, moisture and traffic) stress
• practices GIS-based recordkeeping of properly diagnosed historical pest populations and GIS-based images of impact of pest pressure that notes injury, damage, and objectionable reduction in visual or functional quality
• monitors existing pest pressure and in combination with weather-based published predictive models, on-line pest population ecology, to determine degree of intervention required to maintain visual and functional quality
• implements intervention strategy with full understanding of the environmental impact as determined by three sources (EPA, EIQ, QPRI, etc.) and commensurate with the expected level of disruption due to damage associated with pest pressure and impact on revenue from documented said conditions
• assesses results of intervention and records a detailed a review of the practices and products including an economic cost analysis that recognizes labor, energy, and facility revenue impacts

May 21, 2019 by NYS BMP ·

New York State’s golf course BMPs were first published in 2014. Now five years later, we are updating the BMPs, in some cases adding new and updated information, including incorporating the pollinator BMPs (published in 2017). We have also incorporated discrete BMP statements to complement the BMP principles we identified in the first edition.

As part of the process of revising and updating, we are seeking input from superintendents across the state and the state’s regulatory agencies to review the draft final version and provide comments to NYGCF. Any superintendent or asst. superintendent in NYS is invited to participate in the review process. Superintendent reviewers should consider the content at three levels: the overall document, chapters, and page-by-page. The following are a few questions you may want to consider when reviewing:

• Are these BMPs something that can be implemented at your facility? How about facilities of varying sizes/budgets?
• Are there any topics that have not been covered in this document that you think should be addressed?
• Are there any topics that are covered, but may need additional detail?
• Is there any information presented that you think needs clarification?

Written comments submitted on or before July 16^th to our project manager using the comment spreadsheet to submit comments. Please note: there are two pages in the spreadsheet – one each for specific comments and one for chapter comments. The superintendents on the NYGCF board and Cornell University scientists will review each comment and document how each comment is addressed in the final version.

NYGCF has undertaken the effort to create a facility BMP template to further implement BMPs across the state and to provide superintendents a process to make this process easy. Besides contributing to natural resources stewardship, additional incentives for golf courses in New York State to create a facility BMP plan and implement BMPs include the following:

• potential for more efficiently allocating resources by identifying management zones
• cost savings associated with applying less fertilizer and pesticide
• cost savings associated with more efficient irrigation and other water conservation efforts
• improving stormwater management efforts as storms in the area become more intense
• improved community relations`
• recognition by club members and the community at large as environmental stewards

We look forward to the input of superintendents across the state in this effort.