version 1.51
This manual has been prepared by:
Select technical content contributed by:
and
additional sources as designated in the text.
Project assistance graciously provided by:
This project was originally part of a legislatively funded initiative undertaken by the University of Massachusetts Extension Turf Program in cooperation with the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources and the Massachusetts Farm Bureau Federation.
UMass Extension has recently developed a comprehensive manual of Best Management Practices (BMPs) for lawn and landscape turf, which is available for download by clicking the link to the right. The guide is a detailed collection of economically feasible methods that conserve water and other natural resources, protect environmental quality and contribute to sustainability.
The BMPs detailed in this document are agronomically sound, environmentally sensible strategies and techniques designed with the following objectives:
Residential and commercial lawns and utility-type turf comprise a significant portion of the the landscape in Massachusetts and beyond. These lawns may be at private residences, at business establishments, in industrial developments, on municipal properties, in parks, on public or private school grounds, and along roadsides and other utility areas. Lawns and similar turf areas are key resources, as they contribute to open space, provide recreation, add value to properties, and help to protect the environment. Properly maintained turf provides many functional, recreational, and ornamental benefits, which are summarized below.
Functional | Recreational | Ornamental | |
---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
Adapted from J. B. Beard and R. L. Green, 1994, from The Journal of Environmental Quality, The Role of Turfgrasses in Environmental Protection and Their Benefits to Humans. |
This BMP guide is intended for use in the management of lawn and landscape turf. While many of the practices delineated can be applied to the management of sports turf and other more intensively used turf, it is not the intent of this document to provide the more specialized BMPs that such intensive management systems require.
These BMPs are designed to be used in a wide range of lawn and landscape management situations. Not every BMP will apply to every site. Activities and practices may vary depending on management objectives and site parameters. In addition, there may be a specific practice or practices appropriate for an unusual site that does not appear in this
document.
When instituting a management program based on BMPs, the turf manager must first determine the desired functional quality of the lawn and the management level and resources necessary to achieve it. Various factors will need to be considered including site parameters, level and intent of use, potential for pest infestation, pest action level, and environmental sensitivity of the site.
BMPs for maintenance of lawn and landscape turf areas are most effectively implemented by an educated and experienced turf manager, but can also serve as guidelines for less experienced turf managers and others caring for lawn and landscape turf.
The BMPs in this document are based on the scientific principles and practices of integrated pest management (IPM). IPM is a systems approach that should form the foundation of any type of sound turf management program. This holds true whether the materials being used are organic, organic-based or synthetic. The components of IPM for lawn and landscape turf are detailed below and are described in more detail in pertinent sections of the document.
What is IPM? - Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a systematic approach to problem solving and decision making in turf management. In practicing IPM, the turf manager utilizes information about turf, pests, and environmental conditions in combination with proper cultural practices. Pest populations and possible impacts are monitored in accordance with a pre-determined management plan. Should monitoring indicate that action is justified, appropriate pest control measures are taken to prevent or control unacceptable turf damage. A sound IPM program has the potential to reduce reliance on pesticides because applications are made only when all other options to maintain the quality and integrity of the turf have been exhausted.
The key components of an IPM system for turf can be tailored to fit most management situations. The steps in developing a complete IPM program are as follows:
Residential and commercial lawns and utility-type turf comprise a significant portion of the Massachusetts landscape. These lawns may be at private residences, at business establishments, in industrial developments, on municipal properties, in parks, on public or private school grounds, and along roadsides and other utility areas. Lawns and similar turf areas are key resources, as they contribute to open space, provide recreation, add value to properties, and help to protect the environment.
Properly maintained turf provides many functional, recreational, and ornamental benefits, which are summarized below.
Functional |
Recreational |
Ornamental |
|
---|---|---|---|
Dust and mud control Entrapment of pollutants Environmental protection Fire prevention Glare reduction Ground water recharge Slope stabilization Heat abatement Noise abatement Security-visibility Soil loss and erosion control Protection of underground utility services Greenhouse gas reduction Storm water abatement |
Safe playing surfaces Low cost surfaces Mental health Physical health Entertainment |
Beauty Increased property value Community pride Complements the landscape Mental health |
Adapted from J. B. Beard and R. L. Green, 1994, from The Journal of Environmental Quality, The Role of Turfgrasses in Environmental Protection and Their Benefits to Humans.
Improperly or poorly maintained lawns are less functional in terms of aesthetics and recreation, may result in inefficient use of valuable natural resources such as water, and are more likely to be sources of environmental contamination.
Best Management Practices (BMPs) are intended to maximize the benefits of lawn areas and to minimize the potential for environmental impact that can happen as a result of inefficient, incorrect or irresponsible management practices.
Best Management Practices (BMPs) for lawn and landscape turf are economically feasible methods that conserve water and other natural resources, protect environmental quality and contribute to sustainability.
The BMPs detailed in this document are agronomically sound, environmentally sensible strategies and techniques designed with the following objectives:
The BMPs in this document are based on the scientific principles and practices of integrated pest management (IPM). IPM is a systems approach that should form the foundation of any type of sound turf management program. This holds true whether the materials being used are organic, organic-based or synthetic. The components of IPM for lawn and landscape turf are detailed below and are described in more detail in later pertinent sections of this document.
What is IPM? - Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a systematic approach to problem solving and decision making in turf management. In practicing IPM, the turf manager utilizes information about turf, pests, and environmental conditions in combination with proper cultural practices. Pest populations and possible impacts are monitored in accordance with a pre-determined management plan. Should monitoring indicate that action is justified, appropriate pest control measures are taken to prevent or control unacceptable turf damage. A sound IPM program has the potential to reduce reliance on pesticides because applications are made only when all other options to maintain the quality and integrity of the turf have been exhausted.
The key components of an IPM system for turf can be tailored to fit most management situations. The steps in developing a complete IPM program are as follows:
Assess site conditions and history
Determine client or customer expectations
Determine pest action levels
Establish a monitoring (scouting) program
Identify the pest/problem
Implement a management decision
Keep accurate records and evaluate program
Communicate
These BMPs are intended for use in the management of lawn and landscape turf. While many of the practices delineated can be applied to the management of sports turf and other more intensively used turf, it is not the intent of this document to provide the more specialized BMPs that such intensive management systems require.
These BMPs are designed to be used in a wide range of lawn and landscape management situations. Not every BMP will apply to every site. Activities and practices may vary depending on management objectives and site parameters. In addition, there may be a specific practice or practices appropriate for an unusual site that does not appear in this document.
When instituting a management program based on BMPs, the turf manager must first determine the desired functional quality of the lawn and the management level and resources necessary to achieve it. Various factors will need to be considered including site parameters, level and intent of use, potential for pest infestation, pest action level, and environmental sensitivity of the site.
BMPs for maintenance of lawn and landscape turf areas are most effectively implemented by an educated and experienced turf manager, but can also serve as guidelines for less experienced turf managers and others caring for lawn and landscape turf.
The following describes the manner in which this document is set up:
OBJECTIVE
Each section of this document contains management objectives that lead to overall goals: safety, protection of water and other natural resources; enhancement of environmental quality, sustainability, and economic feasibility.
Following each objective are the BMPs that support and contribute to that particular objective.
reference textbooks (see appendix)
trade journals
pest management guides
university and associated newsletters and e-newsletters
electronic media, websites
management objectives and practices
regulations that impact the particular site, and compliance factors for those regulations
identification of agronomic problems, with a plan for addressing causes:
cultural practices:
scouting timetable and procedures
pest management strategies
For additional, detailed Turfgrass Selection information, including varieties that have performed well in Massachusetts in NTEP trials, see the Turfgrass Selection: Species & Varieties chapter of UMass Extension's Professional Guide for IPM in Turf.
Species |
Wear |
Compaction |
Recovery |
Soil Texture |
Soil pH |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Kentucky bluegrass |
Fair |
Good |
Good |
Well drained |
6.0 to 7.0 |
Perennial ryegrass |
Excellent |
Excellent |
Poor |
Variable |
6.0 to 7.0 |
Fine Fescues (Chewings, creeping red, hard) |
Poor |
Poor |
Fair |
Well drained |
5.5 to 6.5 |
Tall fescue |
Excellent |
Fair |
Poor |
Variable |
5.5 to 6.5 |
Species |
Cold |
Heat |
Drought |
Salinity |
Submersion |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Kentucky bluegrass |
Excellent |
Fair |
Good |
Poor |
Fair |
Perennial ryegrass |
Fair |
Fair |
Good |
Fair |
Fair |
Fine fescues (Chewings, creeping red, hard) |
Good |
Fair |
Good |
Poor |
Poor |
Tall fescue |
Fair |
Good |
Excellent |
Good |
Good |
Species |
Shade |
Fertility * |
Height of Cut |
Mowing Frequency |
Thatch Tendency |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Kentucky Bluegrass |
Poor |
Medium-High |
1.5 to 3.5 inch |
Low-Medium |
Medium |
Perennial Ryegrass |
Poor |
Medium-High |
1.5 to 3.5 inch |
High |
Low |
Fine fescues (Chewings, creeping red, hard) |
Excellent |
Low |
1.5 to 3.5 inch |
Low |
Medium |
Tall Fescue |
Fair |
Medium-High |
1.5 to 3.5 inch |
Medium |
Low |
* Fertility levels, in lbs. N per 1000 sq. ft.: medium-high = 3 to 5; low = 1 to 2.
Use |
Species (% by weight) |
Rate (lbs/1000 ft2) |
---|---|---|
Lawns: sun, med. to high maintenance |
65 to 75% Kentucky bluegrass* 10 to 20% perennial ryegrass* 15% fine fescue** |
3 to 4 |
Lawns: sun, low maintenance |
65% fine fescue* 10-20% perennial ryegrass* remainder Kentucky bluegrass |
4 to 6 |
Lawns: shade |
80 to 90% fine fescue* 10 to 20% perennial ryegrass* |
4 to 6 |
Lawns:well drained |
80% shade tolerant K. bluegrass* 20% perennial ryegrass* |
3 to 4 |
*Two to three improved cultivars recommended. ** One or more improved cultivars recommended. |
|
Turf establishment, by the simplest definition, is the planting of turfgrasses. There are several different types of planting events, ranging from new plantings (i.e. constructing a new turf area where one did not exist before), to renovation or re-construction of an existing turf area, to overseeding or repairs for established turf.
Mature, well-established turf not only the most functional, but also most tolerant of pests, use, cultural practices, and environmental stresses. Well-established turf is also more likely to exhibit a desirable appearance. The goal of most establishment projects, then, is to produce a turf stand that is dense, deeply rooted, and will provide rapid cover and develop to maturity as quickly as possible.
What separates planting and establishment is that planting is an act, but establishment is a process. Turf establishment includes not only the act of planting, but also encompasses the period of time between planting and the point at which the turf reaches a certain level of maturity and appearance. This is commonly referred to as the establishment period. Specialized attention and practices are required during this period to help ensure a successful planting project. The length of the establishment period can vary considerably depending on many factors including site conditions, weather conditions, time of year, and turfgrass species/cultivars used.
A solid plan for any establishment project is critical. After a thorough site assessment and following proper turfgrass selection principles to match appropriate turfgrass species and cultivars to site conditions, user expectations, and resources for management, turf establishment has three general phases:
Factors |
Spring |
Late Summer |
---|---|---|
Timing: * |
Best approach is to plant as early as possible, but opportunity varies based on winter/spring transition. |
Best planting window approximately 3rd week of August to 3rd week of September, on average. |
Growth period exposure: |
Only one brief favorable growth period before the first onset of summer stress. |
Two favorable periods before first onset of summer stress. |
Soil moisture: |
Typically wetter soils (more difficult to prepare). Less initial need for irrigation. |
Typically drier soils (easier to prepare). More need for irrigation, particularly during early establishment. |
Soil temperature: |
Cooler soil temperatures. |
Warmer soil temperatures. |
Precipitation and evaporative demand: |
Decreasing precipitation, on average, and increasing evaporation. |
Increasing precipitation, on average, and decreasing evaporation. |
Weed competition: |
Increasing competition from annual, warm-season weeds, in particular crabgrass (herbicides normally required for control). |
Little competition from germinating weeds (herbicides not typically necessary). Only winter annual weeds germinate in the fall. |
Herbicide conflicts: |
Seeding not compatible with applications of several common preemergence herbicides. |
Preemergence herbicides not commonly applied/necessary during this period. |
Cultivation: |
Cultivation required for planting can stir the soil seed bank during the period of maximum annual weed seed germination. |
Most appropriate time for annual cultivation practices, often performed in conjunction with planting. |
Deciduous trees: |
Deciduous trees leafing out = increasing shade. |
Deciduous trees soon to drop leaves = decreasing shade. Must account for leaf drop on tiny seedlings. |
*In Massachusetts, the best windows for establishment may vary on parts of Cape Cod and on the islands that warm later in the spring and stay warmer later into the fall.
In general, an establishment rate comparison by cool-season turfgrass species is as follows:
Dormant Seeding Pros |
Dormant Seeding Cons |
---|---|
|
|
To inform and protect the buyer, certain information must be listed on the seed label:
For more information, refer to our Understanding a Turfgrass Seed Label fact sheet.
Proper seeding rate is critical to achieving a functional turfgrass stand that will develop to maturity as quickly as possible.
Turfgrass plants compete for space and resources with each other and with potential invaders (weeds).
Lower than optimum seeding rate = |
Higher than optimum seeding rate* = |
---|---|
An open stand of low shoot density which is less functional and encourages weed invasion. |
A stand composed of many small plants that are slow to mature and less tolerant of stress. |
* Please note that high rate overseeding and repairs, when done properly, is an accepted and successful practice in many sports fields management programs.
Factors or conditions that contribute to poor germination and seedling survival include:
For specific seeding rate guidelines for turfgrass species and recommended mixtures, refer to the Turfgrass Selection: Species and Varieties chapter of UMass Extension’s Professional Guide for IPM in Turf for Massachusetts.
Consider the use of hydroseeding on large or hard to access areas.
Hydroseeding Pros |
Hydroseeding Cons |
---|---|
|
|
Thinner sod = lower cost = lower initial stability = faster establishment
Thicker sod = higher cost = higher initial stability = slower establishment
Mulch types | Features |
---|---|
Loose ‘straw’ mulches |
Seek out ‘clean’ straw such as oat or barley. Avoid local ‘hay’ due to high potential for undesirable weed seeds. |
Straw and wood-fiber netting: |
Fast, uniform coverage, but higher cost than loose straw options. Very good erosion control. Most are bio-degradable, leave-in-place systems. |
PennMulch or similar products: |
Made from recycled newspaper and include water-holding polymers, similar to hydroseeding mulch. |
There are two general categories of re-planting:
After tillage and eradication of existing turf, the steps for re-construction are identical to the practices for new establishment outlined in the first part of this chapter.
Example: on average, research has demonstrated that one mature oak tree can have water requirements equivalent to 1800 ft2 of turf. This in large part is due to the greater leaf canopy surface area that is exposed to atmospheric (evaporative) demand.
Example: On average, a Kentucky bluegrass turf will lose approximately 1.4 inches of water per week as ET during the irrigation season (July and August).
Example: Using the chart above, one inch of water (indicated by the dashed line) applied to a clay soil would wet the soil to field capacity to a depth of approximately 5 inches; a loam to a depth of approximately 7 inches; and a sand to a depth of approximately 15 inches. Equivalently, to wet a soil to a depth of 12 inches (indicated by the dotted line) 0.75 inches of water is needed for sands; 1.5 inches of water for loams; and 2.5 inches of water for clays. Hence, it takes more than 3 times as much water to recharge a clay soil to field capacity to a 12-inch depth compared to sands as a result of the greater soil moisture-holding capacity associated with fine textured soils.
Note: The following irrigation system BMPs are adapted with permission from BMPs for Turf and Landscape published by the Irrigation Association (IA). A detailed and complete version of the document including associated Practice Guidelines is available on the IA website at: http://www.irrigation.org/
Guidelines for irrigation system design, installation and management:
Development and implementation of a soil and nutrient management plan is critical to the proper turf management that prioritizes environmental protection and enhancement. The term ‘nutrient management’ infers a responsibility, common to all turf practitioners, that goes beyond simple additions of fertilizer intend to positively influence plant growth. In the interest of environmental protection, natural resource preservation, and economic viability, modern fertility programs necessitate custodial responsibility for the fate of applied nutrients in the environment and complementary practices designed to enhance nutrient efficiency.
Although the focus of the following text is lawn and landscape turf, much of the included information is also applicable to the management of turf in other settings, ranging from very low maintenance turf areas to high-value playing surfaces.
Nutrient management for turf involves:
Nutrient management planning must consider not only protection and enhancement of natural resources and the environment, but also sound agronomic practices that maximize the use and function of the turf. UMass Extension’s Elements of a Nutrient Management Plan for Turf provides the framework for the development of an effective nutrient management plan (NMP). This text can be found in Appendix C of this document
The individual elements of a NMP are explained in greater detail in the rest of this chapter on soil and nutrient management.
Soil Chemical Properties |
Soil Physical Properties |
---|---|
Ex. pH, fertility, nutrient reserves, heavy metals |
Ex. texture, particle size distribution, percent organic matter |
- Provides information about the growing conditions provided by the soil - Informs additions of fertilizer and liming materials |
- Provides information about behavior of the soil - Helps in assessment of drainage characteristics and compatibility of amendments with existing soil |
categories | interpretation |
---|---|
Very Low |
Soil test level is well below optimum. Very high probability of plant response to additional nutrients. Substantial amounts of additional nutrients are required to achieve optimum growth. Recommended fertilizer rates are based on plant response and are designed to gradually increase soil nutrient levels to the Optimum range over a period of several years. |
Low |
Soil test level is below optimum. High probability of plant response to addition of nutrients.
Moderate amounts of additional nutrients needed to achieve optimum growth. Recommendations are based on plant response and are intended to gradually increase soil nutrient levels to the Optimum range. |
Optimum |
For most plants, low probability of response to addition of the nutrient. Most desirable soil test range on economic and environmental basis.
To maintain this range for successive years, nutrients must be retained in the system, or those nutrients removed by plants or lost to the environment must be replaced. |
Above Optimum |
The nutrient is considered more than adequate and will not limit plant performance or quality. At the top end of this range, there is the possibility of a negative impact on the turf (as well as adverse economic and environmental impacts) if nutrients are added.
Additional nutrient applications are not recommended. |
Excessive | This soil test level is independent of plant response and, due to environmental concerns, is only defined for soil test phosphorus (P). This P concentration is associated with elevated risk of P loss in leachate and runoff at concentrations high enough to impair surface water quality. No P should be applied and steps should be taken to minimize losses from leaching and runoff. |
The modified Morgan extractable nutrient values associated with each of the soil test categories for Massachusetts are summarized in Table 7. These values, derived from the results of regional soil test calibration research, are used to determine fertilizer needs for turfgrass. Notice that N is not included in Table 7. Soil testing is of limited value for determining N needs due to the dynamic behavior of soil nitrogen (N) in the humid Northeastern US. Soil testing is most useful for determining fertilizer phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) needs, as well as other nutrients such as calcium (Ca) and magnesium (Mg).
Very low | low | optimum | above optimum | excessive | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
P, ppma |
0-1.9 | 2-3.9 | 4-14 | 14-40 | >40 |
K, ppm | 0-49 | 50-99 | 100-160 | >160 | - |
Ca, ppm | 0-499 | 500-999 | 1000-1500 | >1500 | - |
mg, ppm | 0-24 | 25-49 | 50-120 | >120 | - |
Sandy soils | loamy soils |
---|---|
- low nutrient reserve - poor nutrient and moisture retention - potential for high nutrient losses via leaching |
- generally more fertile - good nutrient and moisture retention - potential for significant content of unavailable nutrients |
Table 3 lists the most common WSN sources used by turf managers. Of these fertilizers listed, urea is the most commonly used source of N in most complete fertilizers. Calcium ammonium nitrate, ammonium sulfate, and potassium nitrate have a higher salt index and are more likely to burn the turf than urea. Mono- and diammonium phosphate are used in fertilizers when phosphorus input is also desired.
Fertilizer | analysis (N-P-K) | salt indexa | CaCO3 Equiv.b | Lbs. needed to supply 1 lb. N |
---|---|---|---|---|
Urea | 46-0-0 | 1.7 | 71 | 2.2 |
Ammonium sulfate | 21-0-0 | 3.3 | 110 | 4.8 |
Calcium ammonium nitrate | 20-0-0 | 3.2 | -4c | 5.0 |
Potassium nitrate | 13-0-44 | 5.3 | -23 | 7.7 |
Monoammonium phosphate | 11-4-0 | 2.7 | 58 | 9.1 |
Diammonium phosphate | 21-53-0 | 1.7 | 75 |
4.8 |
Typical slow release N sources classified as WIN include: ureaformaldehyde products (UF), isobutylidene diurea (IBDU), and products derived from natural organic materials such as seed meals, feather meal, activated sewage sludge, seaweed, and other plant and animal residues. Ureaformaldehyde (UF) fertilizers (38%N) depend upon microbial activity to release N from complex mixtures of short, intermediate and long chain organic carbon polymers. Thus, factors which favor microbial activity will also favor N release. These conditions are: soil temperatures higher than 55°F, adequate moisture, adequate aeration, and pH between 6.0 and 7.0. UF fertilizers are less effective in late fall and early spring because of unfavorable temperatures (cold soils) for N release.
Methyleneurea (MU) fertilizers are similar to UF but are composed of shorter length carbon chains. MU fertilizers are less sensitive to cold temperatures compared to UF products.
Isobutylidene diurea (IBDU, 31% N) is a material which releases N as a result of very slow solubility in water. The physical process is essentially similar to dissolving of sugar or some other soluble product only at a much reduced rate. Finer particle size products are available for use on low cut areas or where a more rapid response is desired. Because moisture is necessary for release, IBDU is not a good choice for non-irrigated turf areas. Conditions that are not 12 favorable for moisture retention such as excessive thatch will be less favorable for N release from IBDU. In addition, IBDU will not release as effectively on alkaline soil with pH above 7.7. Because release is not affected by temperature, IBDU is a good choice for early spring when adequate natural rainfall is usually plentiful. IBDU is not commonly found as the nitrogen component in most complete fertilizers.
Natural organic fertilizers vary in composition depending upon what source of nitrogen is used. N release from natural organic fertilizers is much like that of UF fertilizer. Release depends upon microbial activity and is temperature dependent (i.e. needs warm soils). Therefore, developing a fertility program utilizing natural N sources can pose a unique challenge as N from natural organic sources will be more available during periods of warmer temperatures (when less fertility is generally needed), and less available during periods of cooler temperatures favorable for turfgrass growth. See Table 5 for information on some natural organic fertilizer materials.
Slow release nitrogen (SRN) technologies
In addition to WIN sources, coated technologies are available including sulfur coated urea (SCU), polymer (plastic) coated urea (PCU) and double coated technologies (Polymer-S), which combine both sulfur and polymer coatings in the same N source. These coated technologies are SRN sources that have similar strengths and weaknesses to those exhibited by WIN fertilizers. N release from SCU can be less consistent and less efficient compared to Polymer-S and PCU sources.
Sulfur Coated Urea (SCU, 32-36% N) and plastic coated urea (PCU) products release N slowly because the urea pellet (prill) is covered with a coating of sulfur, plastic or both. Thus, N leaks through the pores at a slow rate compared to uncoated urea. Prills which have an incomplete or cracked coating will behave like WSN. Thinly coated prills will release N more rapidly than thickly coated prills. Adequate moisture and warm soil temperatures (warmer than 55°F) are factors favoring release of N from SCU and other coated urea fertilizer products. Table 4 lists the most common synthetic WIN and SRN sources used by turf managers.
Table 4 lists the most common synthetic WIN and SRN sources used by turf managers.
Fertilizer | analysis | salt indexa | CACO3 equiv.b | Lbs. needed to supply 1 lb. N |
---|---|---|---|---|
Ureaformaldehyde and Methyleneurea | 38-0-0 | 0.3 |
68 |
2.6 |
Isobutylidene diurea | 31-0-0 | 0.2 | 57 | 3.2 |
Sulfur coated urea | 32-0-0 | 0.7 | varies | 3.1 |
a. Relative burn potential compared to sodium nitrate. (>2.5 = high, 2.5 -1.0 = moderate, <1.0 = low). b. Lbs. of CaCO3 (limestone) needed to neutralize the acidity of 100 lbs. of applied fertilizer. |
Materials | Total N (%) | C:N ratio | Fraction of organic N made available first season | P2O5 (%) | K2O (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Plant residues | |||||
Alfalfa meal | 3-4 | 18 | 0.3-0.5 | 0.5 | 2.5 |
Cottonseed meal | 6 | 5 | 0.6-038 | 2 | 2 |
Seaweed | 0 | - | - | 0 | 1 |
Soybean meal | 7 | 5 | 0.6-0.8 | 2 | 2 |
Corn gluten meal | 9 | 4 | 0.6-0.8 | 0 | 0 |
Animal products | |||||
Dried blood | 12 | 3 | 0.7-0.9 | 1 | 0.5 |
Bone meal (steamed) | 3 | 4 | 0.5-0.7 | 15 | 0 |
Feather meal | 13 | 4 | 0.7-0.9 | 0 | 0 |
Fish emulsion | 4 | 3 | 0.7-0.9 | 2 | 0 |
Fish meal | 9-12 | 4 | 0.7-0.9 | 7 | 0 |
Poultry litter | 3-4 | 15 | 0.4-0.6 | 3 | 3 |
Compost (mature) | |||||
Manure | 1.5-2 | 20-25 | 0.1-0.15 | 2 | 1 |
Yard waste | 0.5-1 | 20-25 | 0.1-0.2 | 1 | 1 |
Mineral materials | |||||
Potassium sulfate | 0 | - | - | 0 | 50 |
Sul-Po-Mag | 0 | - | - | 0 | 21 |
Wood ash | 0 | - | - | 1 | 10 |
Collodial rock phosphate | 0 | - | - | 25 | 0 |
Rock phosphate | 0 | - | - | 20-32 | 0 |
Granite dust | 0 | - | - | 0 | 3-5 |
Greensand | 0 | - | - | 1 | 4-9 |
a. Nutrient concentration of organic materials is inherently variable. Estimated values are provided for reference only. It is best to have materials tested in order to determine appropriate application rates.
b. To estimate the quantity of total N expected to become plant available in the first season following application, multiply by the appropriate coefficient.
c. Corn gluten meal inhibits germination of some small seed plants and has been promoted as a natural pre-emergent herbicide. Avoid using where turfgrass has been recently seeded or where overseeding is imminent.
d. Compost and poultry litter also contain varying quantities of NH4, which is immediately plant available; however, NH4 is subject to volatilization losses if material is not immediately incorporated.
e. Relative nutrient availability of nutrients from rock powders varies with origin of material, soil pH, and depends largely on fineness of grind.
f. These values represent total K2O and P2O5. These materials are extremely insoluble therefore available K2O and P2O5 from these materials will be much lower.
Characteristics of readily-available (WSN) N sources: | charcteristics of slowly-available (SRN) N sources: |
---|---|
- provide a rapid increase in both color and growth rate - release of N is relatively independent of temperature, so can be used throughout most of the growing season with acceptable response - relatively rapid plant response rate - relatively short period of plant response (residual of 4 to 6 weeks at normal rates) - potential for surge shoot growth - can be applied in either granular or liquid form - high foliar burn potential (salt index) when applied at excessive rates or during periods of high temperature - greater potential for loss via leaching or volatility (gaseous losses) - generally less expensive per unit N when compared to many SRN sources |
- release N slowly over a longer period of time than readilyavailable N sources - some sources are temperature dependent and do not release N in cold soils (< 55 °F) - in moist, warm summers nutrient release may be more rapid - low potential for foliar burn (salt index) - do not result in flushes of rapid growth (surge growth) - provide a longer residual plant response - potential carryover of N into the following growing season(s) - lower potential for gaseous loss and loss via leaching - relatively slow color response - generally cost more per unit of N when compared to WSN sources |
See Table 10 for information on natural organic fertility sources.
Current fertilizer guidelines may call for as much as 4 lbs. N per 1000 sq. feet per season for the turfgrass species present on a site. Guidelines for N input to turf are exactly that: guidelines. If turf of acceptable quality can be maintained at a rate lower than 4 lbs. N per 1000 sq. feet per season, then reducing the rate is justified and helps to reduce labor, fertilizer cost, and the potential for excess nutrients in the system.
Lower N rates may be possible where:
fertile loam soils are present
traffic is not intensive
higher height of cut is practiced
grass clippings are returned
turf is under shade
turf is not irrigated
turf is older and well-established
Kentucky bluegrass | Perennial ryegrass | Tall fescue | Fine fescues | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Fertility level | med - high | med - high | med - high | low - med |
Lbs. N per 1000 sq ft per season | 2-4 | 2-4 | 2-4 | 0-2 |
Time of year | Number of N applications | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1x/yr | 2x/yr | 3x/yr | 4x/yrc | 4x/yrc | |
Spring (after ~50% green-up) |
50-100% SRN 1.0 - 1.5 lbs N/M |
25-50% SRN 0.75 - 1.0 lbs N/M |
25-50% SRN 0.75 - 1.0 lbs N/M |
||
Late spring/ early summer |
50-75% SRN 0.75 - 1.0 lbs N/M |
25-50% SRN 0.75 - 1.0 lbs N/M |
25-50% SRN 0.75 - 1.0 lbs N/M |
||
Summer (irrigated turf only) | 50-75% SRN 0.75 - 1.0 lbs N/M |
50-75% SRN 0.75 - 1.0 lbs N/M |
|||
Late summer/ early fall (~Labor Day) | 75-100% SRN 1.0-2.0 lbs N/M |
50-100% SRN 1.0 - 1.5 lbs N/M |
25-50% SRN 1.0 - 1.5 lbs N/M |
25-50% SRN |
25-50% SRN 0.75 - 1.0 lbs N/M |
Late fall (late season) d |
25-50% SRN 0.75 - 1.0 lbs N/M |
||||
TOTAL ANNUAL N | 1.0 - 2.0 lbs N/M | 2.0 - 3.0 lbs N/M | 2.5 - 3.5 lbs N/M | 3.0 - 4.0 lbs N/M | 3.0 - 4.0 lbs N/M |
a. Ranges for slow-release nitrogen (% SRN) content are approximate guidelines. Specific SRN percentages may vary from commercially available products by as much as 5% (plus or minus). Use higher SRN content when available, and especially on sandy root zones or during stress and pre-stress periods.
b. Specific N rates may vary based on several factors including turfgrasses present, management, and turf use. For predominately fine fescue turf or shaded sites use lower listed N rates.
c. Programs utilizing 4 or more N applications per year are best suited for intensively used, high-value turf.
d. Final application made after last mowing while grass is still green. As noted in the text, not necessary for most lawns and not appropriate for environmentally sensitive sites.
Fertilizer | analysis | saLt indexa | CaCO3 Equivalentb | Lbs. needed to supply 1 lb. P2O5 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Mono-ammonium phosphate | 11-52-0 | 2.7 | 58 | 1.9 (also supplies 0.2 lbs. N) |
Di-ammonium phosphate | 18-46-0 | 1.7 | 75 | 2.2 (also supplies 0.4 lbs. N) |
Super-phosphate | 0-20-20 | 0.4 | 0 | 5.0 |
Very Low | Low | Optimum | Above Optimum | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Turf Establishment | 2.0-2.5 | 1.0-2.0 | 0.5-1.0 | 0 |
Turf Maintenance | 1.5-2.0 | 0.5-1.5 | 0-0.5 | 0 |
See Table 10 for a listing of natural organic nutrient sources containing P.
fertilizer | analysis | salt index a | Caco3 equivalent b | Lbs. needed to supply 1lb. k2o |
---|---|---|---|---|
Muriate of potash (KCl) | 0-0-60 | 1.9 | 0 | 1.7 |
Sulfate of potash (K2SO4) | 0-0-50 | 0.9 | 0 | 2.0 |
Potassium nitrate (KNO3) | 13-0-44 | 5.3 | -23 | 2.3 |
Management Level | Soil test potassium level | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Very low | Low | Optimum | Above optimum | |
lbs K2O / 1000 sf/ year | ||||
Normal | 3-4 | 2-3 | 1-2 | 0 |
Intensive | 4-5 | 2-4 | 1-2 | 0 |
See Table 10 for a listing of natural organic nutrient sources containing K.
Fertilization and supplemental irrigation are important in many turf management scenarios for the maintenance of an acceptable level of turf performance. Water, in particular, is an especially important consideration for effective nutrient management. Adequate moisture is critical for efficient uptake and use of nutrients, while excess moisture can lead to undesirable movement of nutrients in the environment. To protect precious environmental resources and to minimize maintenance costs, water and fertilizer inputs need to be kept to their lowest possible levels. This lower input can be accomplished in part by eliminating wasteful use and taking action to promote the retention of water and nutrients within the plant-soil system. Furthermore, by eliminating waste the turf practitioner can help to minimize the potential impact of nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrogen on surface and ground water quality. This can be done by enhancing the ability of turfgrass plants to acquire water and nutrients or equivalently, improving the nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) and water use efficiency (WUE) of the turfgrass system. Increased NUE and WUE helps to sustain greater turf quality and function under reduced water and fertilizer input.
Although NUE does not directly account for relationships involving other essential plant nutrients (such as P and K), NUE is an effective metric for evaluating the efficiency of various plant nutrients within a turf system. Remember that N forms the foundation of any fertility program for turf, therefore steps to improve N use efficiency by optimizing inputs and reducing waste will in turn promote efficient use and retention of other essential nutrients.
Application location
Presence of and distance to surface water, wellheads or other environmentally sensitive areas
Soil-type
Date of most recent soil test
Product or material applied
Nutrient analysis of material
% slowly-available N (SRN as WIN or CRN)
Amount of material used and timing
Application equipment used (drop, rotary, spray)
Application rates used for N, P2O5 and K2O
Wind speed at application
Rainfall amounts 24 to 48 hours before/after application
Magnitude and length of slope of fertilized area
Total annual N used
Total annual P used
Total annual K used
Other comments/notes
Example: if a lawn is being mown at 2½ inches, it should not be allowed to grow higher than about 3½ inches before the next mowing.
perennial ryegrass = tall fescue > Kentucky bluegrass > bentgrass = fine fescue > annual and rough bluegrass
Example: 1,000 square feet of turf after a single aeration event using a ¾ inch diameter tine, spaced two inches on center, with a tine penetration depth of 2 inches, would be equivalent to 2180 square feet of surface area.
Method |
Loosens thatch |
Reduction of soil compaction |
Promotes seed/soil contact |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
None |
Some |
Significant |
|||
Power raking |
♦ | ♦ |
|
|
♣ |
Vertical cutting |
♦ | ♦ |
|
|
♣ |
Slicing |
|
|
|
|
|
Spiking |
|
|
|
|
♣ |
Hollow tine coring |
|
|
|
♦ | ♠ |
Grooving |
♦ |
|
|
♦ | ♠ |
Solid tine coring |
|
|
♦ |
|
♣ |
Example: a moderate infestation of broadleaf weeds may be allowable on a seldom used residential lawn area but unacceptable on a high-profile commercial lawn.
insect | Approximate threshold per sq. ft. |
---|---|
Japanese beetle | 8 - 15 larvae |
Oriental beetle | 8 - 15 larvae |
Masked chafer | 6 - 15 larvae |
European chafer | 3 - 8 larvae |
Asiatic garden beetle | 12 - 20 larvae |
May beetle (phyllophaga) | 2 - 4 larvae |
Black turfgrass ataenius | 15 - 80 larvae |
Annual bluegrass weevil | 10 - 80 larvae |
Bluegrass billbug | No good estimate available |
Chinch bug | 30 - 50 nymphs |
Sod webworm, cutworm | No good estimate available |
INSECT |
TURF AREAS TO MONITOR |
WHEN TO MONITOR |
SAMPLING TECHNIQUES* |
---|---|---|---|
White grubs |
All turf |
Adults - mid-June to September Larvae - March to May, July to December |
Adults - pheromone traps (oriental beetle, Japanese beetle) ** Larvae - soil sample |
Ants |
All turf |
Adults - late April to late September |
Adults - count active mounds per unit area |
Billbugs |
All turf, especially Kentucky bluegrass |
Adults - May to early June Larvae - June to August |
Adults - soapy flush Larvae - core float |
Chinch Bugs |
All turf; especially sunny, drought stressed areas and areas with thick thatch and sandy root zones. |
Adults - June to late July |
Adults - can float, visual inspection of soil/thatch interface |
Cutworms |
All turf, especially closely mown areas |
Adults - May to September Larvae - late May to September |
Adults - blacklight trap Larvae - soapy flush |
Sod Webworms | All turf, especially sunny areas, steep slopes & dry banks |
Adults - late June - late August Larvae - Late April - early June |
Adults - visual observation at twilight, blacklight trap Larvae – soapy flush |
* Refer to the table, ‘Insect sampling techniques’ below.
** Use pheromone traps with care. They are useful for determining when beetle adults begin to fly, but can also potentially attract more damaging insects into an area.
Technique |
Description |
---|---|
Soil sample |
Dig three sides of a square, 6 inches on a side (=0.25 sq. ft.) and 4-6 inches deep. Flip upside down on flat surface, e.g., a plywood board. Use a trowel to beat soil and roots on bottom of sod in order to dislodge larvae. Remove larvae and put in a container to count totals. Replace sod, water well, and sod should re-root. Alternatively, use a cup cutter to pull samples (=0.1 sq. ft.). |
Soapy flush |
Add 1 to 2 tablespoons of lemon scented liquid dish detergent to 1 gallon of water; pour over area 2 ft. by 2 ft. Caterpillars, earthworms and adults of some species will be irritated and crawl to the surface within 5 minutes (usually more quickly). Collect caterpillars and/or insect adults and put in a container to count totals. If sampling in mid-summer, rinse the area after counting insects to avoid scalding turf. |
Core float method |
Take a sample with a cup cutter, gently break apart turf and thatch, and look for insects. Place all material in dishpan with lukewarm water. Insects will float to surface. |
Can float method |
Remove the ends from 3 or 4 coffee cans. Pound empty cylinders (wet soil to soften) 2 to 3 inches into ground, fill with water, and wait 5 minutes to count insects floating to the surface. |
DISEASE |
TURF AREAS TO MONITOR |
WHEN TO MONITOR |
---|---|---|
Gray Snow Mold |
All turf. |
Jan-Apr, 32-45F. Prevalent after prolonged snow cover. |
Pink Snow Mold |
All turf. |
Jan-May & Oct-Nov, 32-45F. Active anytime during prolonged, cool weather. Requires no snow or other cover for disease. |
Leaf Spots/Blights/ Melting Out |
All turf, especially Kentucky bluegrass and fine fescues. More common in areas with high nitrogen fertility. |
Apr-Oct, 45-75F, especially AprilOct whenever prolonged leaf wetness results from rain, dew or irrigation. |
Rusts |
All turf, especially Kentucky bluegrass. More common in low mown areas and areas with compacted soil. |
Jul-Oct, 45-75F. Most common when turf is slow growing and/or droughty. |
Red Thread/Pink Patch |
All turf, especially perennial ryegrasses and fine fescues. More common on nutrient deficient turf.
|
Apr-Oct, 45-75F, especially during prolonged periods of cool, wet weather with heavy dew and light rain and fog. |
Dollar Spot |
All turf. More common on dry, nutrientdeficient soils. |
Jun-Sept, 45-80F, especially during warm, humid weather with cool nights and heavy dews. |
Summer Patch |
All turf, especially annual bluegrass, Kentucky bluegrass, and creeping red fescue, and/or with excess thatch. |
Jul-Sept, over 75F, especially when soil temperatures are high. Symptoms often appear after a heavy rain. |
Brown Patch |
All turf, especially perennial ryegrass and tall fescue. |
July-Sept, over 75F, when days are hot, humid with warm nights, especially following rain. |
Fairy Ring |
All turf |
April-Oct, 45-75F. Puffballs and mushrooms occur most often after rain. |
When NOT to water turf.
Problem | What to look for |
---|---|
Winter desiccation |
Large areas of straw-colored grass especially where exposed to wind with little snow cover. |
Spring frost damage |
New growth killed back. |
Water and ice damage |
Straw-colored or rotted grass, especially where water collects on frozen soil. |
Salt damage |
Dead or yellowed grass along sidewalks, driveways, or roads where salt has been applied. |
Compaction |
Soil is hard. Turf is thin. Rooting is poor. |
Acid or alkaline soil |
Overall poor growth. Soil test indicates inappropriate pH for grass growth. |
Nutrient deficiency |
Yellowing or other discoloration; generally poor growth. |
Over-fertilization |
Exaggerated turf color, along with rapid growth rate; tissues succulent. |
Fertilizer misapplication |
Browned streaks lined with extra green growth can occur in areas of application overlap. Yellowed, nutrient deficient streaks may occur in missed areas. |
Wilt, drought or moisture stress |
Turf loses its luster, appears slightly off-color and ‘foot printing’ occurs. |
Overwatering |
Soil is saturated; grass is overly lush and may mat down easily. |
Poor drainage |
Waterlogged soil, puddling. |
Scalping |
Mowing height excessively low, especially on uneven terrain. |
Dull mower injury |
Turf develops grayish or brownish cast, close inspection reveals shredded leaf tips. |
Shade |
Turf is thin; leaves may appear elongated and succulent. |
Poor air circulation |
Increased leaf wetness duration, increased disease incidence. |
Excess thatch |
‘Spongy’ turf surface, water infiltration problems, thick layer of matter at soil interface. |
Excess traffic and wear |
Bruising and crushing injury to turf, compacted areas, loss of stand density. |
Animal urine damage |
Spots of browned or yellowed turf, perhaps with extra green growth around them. |
Foreign chemical (gas, oil, hydraulic fluid) damage | Sudden scorched areas of turf. |
Refer to Appendix B, ‘Calendar for Cultural Practices and Related Activities’.
Note: Information on characteristics of particular pesticides can be found on the pesticide label, the MSDS sheet, or in informational databases such as EXTOXNET (http://extoxnet.orst.edu).
Example: A decision to make an application of a preemergence herbicide for the control of crabgrass and other annual grassy weeds should be based on scouting and records from the previous growing season. Though there may be no actual crabgrass plants present at the time of herbicide application, the documentation of the previous season’s infestation and the knowledge of the life cycle of the plant would lead to a justifiable decision to use a preemergence herbicide.
Example: In the management of white grubs there are few cultural practices or effective biological materials available. In Massachusetts, the use of the most effective curative material, trichlorfon, is not allowed on school properties as specified in the Children and Families Protection Act. The only option for effective management of damaging levels of grubs in this circumstance is preventive application. Therefore, effective management of white grubs may require the use of a preventive pesticide application. It must, however, be based on scouting or determination and documentation of potential for damaging insect population levels from the previous season or seasons.
date and time of application
product brand name
active ingredient
formulation
amount used
application equipment used
application rate
target pest
growth stage of pest
treatment location
temperature at application
wind speed at application
rainfall before/after application
pH of water used to apply materials
efficacy of application
pesticide material on board
driver’s name and license number
daily weather conditions (windy, rain, overcast, sunny etc.)
if liquid, who filled the truck
how many gallons of product in each tank
what and how much of each granular product was loaded daily
how much product was used for daily work
This chart indicates when peak periods of damage are most likely to occur in the case of diseases and insects, and when seed will begin to germinate in the case of weeds. It is intended for use as a guide for monitoring pest activity and for pinpointing time periods when pest damage may occur. Please refer to the monitoring guides that follow for further information. This chart is NOT intended to indicate when applications of pesticides should be made, if at all.
Weeds | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | may | jun | jul | aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Weed Scouting Period | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Most weeds are large enough for easy identification. | ||||
Crabgrass and other Annual Grasses | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Period of peak germination. | ||||||||
Annual Bluegrass | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Period of peak germination. May develop seed heads earlier in season if weather is favorable. | ||||||||
Yellow Nutsedge | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Sedges have triangular, solid stems, in contrast to the round, hollow ones of grasses. | |||||||||
Winter Annual Broadleaves | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Period of peak germination. | ||||||||
Summer Annual Broadleaves | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Period of peak germination. | ||||||
Perennial Broadleaves | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Period of peak germination. |
insects | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | may | jun | jul | aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | Comments | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
White Grubs | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Turf appears to suffer drought stress. Skunks, raccoons, and crows may tear up the turf. Turf may pull up “carpet like.” | |||||||||||
Ants | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Mounds in turf. Mound activity begins in mid-April to mid-May. | |||||||||||||
Billbugs | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Areas wilt and do not respond to watering. Sawdust-like material in thatch. Turf is easily tugged loose. Adults active in late May – mid June. | ||||||||||||||||
Chinchbugs | ✓ | ✓ | Wilted or browned areas, most severe in sunny or sandy areas. | |||||||||||||||||
Cutworms | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Burrows surrounded by brown patches, green frass may be present | ||||||||||||||||
European Cranefly | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Larvae normally feed in the top inch of the soil, and can be found even in the winter months. Pupae may be seen in late Aug.-Sept., and adults emerge in September. | |||||||||||||
Common (Marsh) Cranefly | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Two generations each year, with new adults emerging in late April or early May. Second generation adults emerge in September. | ||||||||||||||||
Sod Webworm | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Discrete browned areas which coalesce later. Most common in sunny areas. May cause damage in late spring. |
Diseases | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | may | jun | jul | aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gray Snow Mold | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Matted grass covered with white-gray mycelium. Small reddish, brown, or yellow sclerotia present. | ||||||||
Pink Snow Mold | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Small orange brown to tan spots. Under humid conditions white to pink mycelium at margins. | |||||||
Leaf Spots/Blights/Melting Out | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Oval or eye-shaped, dark bordered spots; dark specks (fruiting bodies) may be present in older diseased tissue. | |||||
Rusts | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Irregular pattern of bright orange, yellow, reddishbrown pustules on the grass blades. Powdery orange spores. | ||||||||
Red Thread/Pink Patch | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Pink-red, often gelatinous mycelium on leaves when moist. Tiny pink cotton candy-like puffs of spores. | |||||
Dollar Spot | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Straw-colored silver dollarsized spots. Leaf bands with brown or reddish-brown borders. White mycelium when wet. | ||||||||
Summer Patch | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Circular patches or rings of straw-colored grass 6-8 inches across. Center may be green. Common in annual bluegrass. | |||||||||
Brown Patch | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 1'-3' patches of light brown grass. Gray to white (smoke ring) mycelium at edge of patch may be present in moist conditions. | ||||||||
Fairy Ring | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Rings or arcs up to 15' across often with outer ring of dark green grass. Mushrooms may be present in ring. |
This chart summarizes when turf management practices are most effective as to timing of fertilization, mowing, irrigation, liming, soil testing, cultivation, and planting activities. These dates are only guidelines and are not intended to indicate absolute start and end dates for all regions of Massachusetts. Consult the appropriate pest sections in this guide for cultural practices recommended for pest management.
Weeds | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | may | jun | jul | aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | Comments | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Cultivation (aeration, dethatching) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Practice during peak shoot growth; terminate 2 weeks before low or high temperature stress. Fall cultivation is often preferable due to annual grass weed pressure in spring. | ||||||||||||||||
Fertilization | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | If 1 time per year, apply in early fall. If 2 times per year, apply in spring and early fall, If 3 times per year, apply in spring followed by early fall and late fall. | ||||||||||||||
Irrigation | ✓ | ✓ | Irrigate at leaf roll/fold (mild stress), avoid over-watering. | |||||||||||||||||||
Liming | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Apply any time the ground is not frozen, more effective with aeration. | |||||||||||||
Mowing | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Continue to mow using the ‘⅓ Rule’ until shoot growth ceases. | ||||||||||||||
Planting (seeding, overseeding) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Late summer - early fall plantings are preferred followed by spring. Avoid early summer and midsummer plantings. | |||||||||||||||
Soil testing | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Sample anytime the ground is not frozen; avoid recently fertilized and limed areas. |
Development and implementation of a nutrient management plan (NMP) are critical to the proper management of the turf with environmental protection and enhancement as priorities. A nutrient management plan should address not only sound agronomic practices as they relate to the function of the turf, but also the protection of natural resources, particularly water. The following guidelines outline the components of a nutrient management plan, and are adaptable to a wide variety of turf management systems.
In the case of lawn turf management, the components of an NMP are covered in greater detail in Section 7 of UMass Extension’s Best Management Practices for Lawn & Landscape Turf manual. This manual can be accessed online at http://extension.umass.edu/turf/publications-resources/best-management-p.... Although the focus of the manual is lawn and landscape turf, much of the included information is also applicable to the management of other types of turf such as high value playing surfaces or very low maintenance turf areas.
A complete NMP should include:
www.umassturf.org
Mary Owen
Extension Specialist and Team Leader, Turf
800 Pleasant Street Rochdale, MA 01542
tel 508-892-0382, fax 508-892-4218
mowen@umext.umass.edu
Jason Lanier
Extension Educator
308 French Hall
University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003-9316 tel 413-545-2965, fax 413-545-3075
jdlanier@umext.umass.edu
251 Causeway Street Boston, MA 02114
tel: 617- 626-1700, fax: 617-626-1850
www.mfbf.net
466 Chestnut Street Ashland, MA 01721-2205
tel 508-881-4766
A reference library should have a selection of materials that cover the fundamentals of turf and pest management. Following are some suggested reference materials for use in developing and implementing IPM-based BMPs for lawn and landscape turf. For a more in-depth listing, visit the UMass Turf Program website, http://www.umassturf.org.
Bureau of Materials Management & Compliance Assurance, Pesticide Management Program
79 Elm St.
Hartford, CT 06106-5127
Phone: 860-424-3369
To search for pesticide products registered in Connecticut: http://www.kellysolutions.com/ct
Board of Pesticides Control
28 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04333-0028
Phone: 207-287-2731
Web: http://www.maine.gov/agriculture/pesticides
To search for pesticide products registered in Maine: http://state.ceris.purdue.edu/htm/me.htm
Pesticide Division
251 Causeway St.
Suite 500
Boston, MA 02114
Phone: 617-626-1778
Web: http://www.mass.gov/agr/pesticides
To search for pesticide products registered in Massachusetts: http://www.kellysolutions.com/ma
Division of Pesticide Control
PO Box 2042
Concord, NH 03302
Phone: 603-271-3550
Web: http://www.nh.gov/agric/divisions/pesticide_control
To search for pesticide products registered in New Hampshire: http://state.ceris.purdue.edu/htm/nh.htm
Pesticide Control Program
PO Box 402
Trenton, NJ 08625-0402
Phone: 609-530-4070
Web: http://www.nj.gov/dep/enforcement/pcp
To search for pesticide products registered in New Jersey: http://www.kellysolutions.com/nj
Division of Solid & Hazardous Materials, Bureau of Pesticides Management
625 Broadway
Albany, NY 12233-7254
Phone: 518-402-8748
Web: http://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/298.html
To search for pesticide products registered in New York: http://www.kellysolutions.com/ny
Division of Agriculture, Pesticide Unit 235 Promenade St.
Providence, RI 02908-5767
Phone: 401-222-2781
Web: http://www.dem.ri.gov/programs/bnatres/agricult
To search for pesticide products registered in Rhode Island: http://www.dem.ri.gov/programs/bnatres/agricult/pesticide.htm
Division of Agricultural Resource Management & Environmental Stewardship,
Agrichemical Management Section
116 State St
Drawer 20
Montpelier, VT 05620 Phone: 802-828-2431
http://www.vermontagriculture.com/ARMES/pest.htm
To search for pesticide products registered in Vermont: http://www.kellysolutions.com/vt
1-800-222-1222
(emergency hotline)
The Regional Center for Poison Control and Prevention
Children’s Hospital Boston
300 Longwood Avenue
IC Smith Building
Boston, MA 02115
Administrative phone: 1-617-335-6609
Administrative fax: 1-617-730-0521