conservation news

Widening their turf: Sod growers tout water conservation

By MAC CARRAWAY

President, SMR Farms, Bradenton

Special to the Tampa Tribune

July 26 - For Florida's sod growers, this is one of the most challenging periods our industry has ever seen.

Farmers across the state, already greatly affected by the economic downturn, are confronting a new threat: local ordinances and state laws that see limiting turf grass as the quickest answer to Florida's long-term water supply concerns.

There are ways to protect Florida's resources and preserve one of the state's leading economic engines. But what's needed is more education and a commitment to conservation, not new rules, however well-intentioned they may be.

The turf experts at the Florida Sod Growers Cooperative, representing 130 farms and businesses across the state, have been educating homeowners, businesses and elected officials through the association's new Lawns Make Our World Greener campaign and our www.floridalawn.com Web site.

Agriculture, as an industry, has invested a great deal of effort into development of best-management practices to prevent wasted water. For us, turf grass is not just a lawn. It's our livelihood. The Florida sod industry contributes more than $1 billion annually to the state's economy and provides more than 5,500 jobs.

Farmers, by definition, are water managers. We've had to be proactive in protecting nature to continue what, for many like my SMR Farms, is a family tradition of farming.

To stay in business, we put into practice expertise that comes from decades of innovation. Every day, Florida's sod growers practice water conservation - in the fields and in neighborhoods where installers are helping homeowners learn how to care for their lawns responsibly.

Environmental stewardship brings innovation

One innovation that has gained the attention of state managers and the investment of new communities is the use of reclaimed water.

Sod farmers were among the first to put reclaimed water to the test. We started more than two decades ago at SMR Farms to cultivate sod with reclaimed water and now use it across the farm and at our tree nursery.

Reclaimed water has become a natural for turf - a way to save money and groundwater during the production of the many varieties we grow.

If there's a silver bullet in the arsenal of water-management weapons, it will be the beneficial use of reclaimed water. It's a proven resource that will enable communities to enjoy the benefits of lawns and landscapes while eliminating effluent disposal in our waterways and offsetting the use of groundwater, thus extending the drinking water supply far into the future.

Beyond reclaimed water, innovation in sod farming and landscape management has taken off in the last decade at a fast pace. We are constantly investing in research to grow new varieties that require less water and less fertilizer and that are more resistant to disease and pests.

One of the latest advances is a new St. Augustine grass called Captiva. It has the added feature of being chinch bug-resistant and grows more slowly, requiring less mowing.

As a business, these efforts help deliver sod that can be managed efficiently with minimal costs while providing customers with a lawn that suits their lifestyle needs.

Turf often overwatered

As an industry, we are working collaboratively with regulatory agencies to find sustainable solutions. I've been fortunate to be part of the dialogue as an appointee to the Southwest Florida Water Management District's Manasota Basin board, and I serve as the vice chairman of Swiftmud's agricultural advisory committee.

Taking innovations from the farm to the home, sod growers are working to teach Floridians how they can make a significant impact in conserving water. We're also working to set the record straight on some of the myths about sod. One myth is that sod, and St. Augustine in particular, needs vast amounts of water to survive. That's not what we experience in the field. To the contrary, as the turf experts at the University of Florida state in their research: "The scientific evidence seems to point to human behavior with regard to over-irrigation, not particular plants in the landscape, as the reason for much wasted irrigation water."

As well, new research continues to provide scientific understanding of the water needs of turf grass. One groundbreaking Texas study on the effects of drought on several varieties of sod has reached this conclusion: Turf grass can survive drought conditions and still recover. This includes the widely used St. Augustine, which requires about the same amount of irrigation as most other types of turf.

Another myth is that Florida-friendly landscaping principles mean "no turf." In fact, a healthy lawn, whether it's Bahia, Zoysia, Bermuda or St. Augustine, can be a vital part of a Florida-friendly landscape, preventing erosion, producing oxygen and reducing carbon in the atmosphere. And nothing beats turf grass for capturing and filtering rainwater as it returns to Florida's aquifers.

Less is best

Knowing all this, we encourage consumers to conserve year-round. In the winter, when plants and grass need much less water, homeowners skipping a week of irrigation can achieve a 50 percent savings per month. In other seasons, we advise customers to skip an irrigation cycle and turn off their automatic systems during rainy periods.

If you apply these practices, there can be enormous savings; some studies indicate as much as 30 percent or more. These are easy steps that produce huge savings, which should offset the temptation to arbitrarily reduce turf in the urban landscape.

In addition to these basic and immediate conservation practices, irrigation technology is yielding more cost-effective opportunities to save water, such as soil-moisture sensors and smarter irrigation controllers.

Implementing such improvements, as was done with low-flow toilets and showers, will take some time. But these efforts combine to reinforce and educate this critical message: By maintaining and using irrigation systems responsibly, homeowners can have healthier, better-looking lawns and conserve enormous amounts of water.

And in the meantime, Florida's sod farms, a cornerstone of the state's $9 billion green industry, will continue to do their part as stewards of the state's resources and key contributors to the economy.

Will WaterSense Make Good Sense?

Landscaping? Read this Message First

Letter to the Editor

Tallahassee Democrat, July 13, 2009

James W. Maulden, McCall Sod Farm

The federal Environmental Protection Agency is proposing guidelines that will impact what homeowners can choose in designing their yards. It's part of the "Outdoor Water-Efficiency Criteria" of the WaterSense program, which aims to add a landscaping component that limits how much grass can be planted.

As a sod producer and a business owner, I am concerned about the devastating impact these caps could have on our farms, which contribute hundreds of millions to the state economy and employ more than 5,000 Floridians.

Our association, the Florida Sod Growers Cooperative, is deeply committed to the wise use of water. Our Lawns Make Our World Greener (www.floridalawn.com) program was launched to teach homeowners how to use less water and still maintain healthy turf in their Florida-friendly landscapes.

We would like to support the EPA's voluntary WaterSense program. However, we feel there is still work needed and questions left unanswered.

Does it take into account new research that shows grass needs much less water than homeowners typically apply? Are severe limits on landscapes needed before current rules and education targeting overwatering are given a chance?

We're concerned that setting a blanket cap on the percentage of grass allowed in a landscape is arbitrary, is not based on science and sends a resoundingly negative - and undeserved - message about turf that will impact an industry already suffering under the current economy.

We urge Floridians and our representatives in Washington to challenge the EPA to weight these questions fully. Together, we can find a sustainable solution.

Texas A&M Reports Findings from SAWS-TPT 60-Day Turfgrass Drought Study

Texas A&M University researchers recently reported their findings from a two year study designed to determine which turfgrasses could recover most effectively from a 60-day imposed drought.

The study, which was commissioned by the San Antonio Water System (SAWS) and the Turfgrass Producers of Texas and conducted under the direction of Dr. David Chalmers, compared 25 turfgrass varieties, including several types of St. Augustine grass, Bermudagrass, zoysiagrass, and buffalograss. The study resulted in part from a proposal by SAWS to ban the use of St. Augustinegrass, which they categorized as a "high water user".

The grasses in the study were planted in plots which could be rapidly covered by a mobile rainout shelter whenever precipitation was detected by sensors.

The grasses were subjected to 60 days without any supplemental irrigation, after which irrigation was resumed and recovery monitored. The study was replicated in year two. Drought Study Test Plots

The results? All grasses in both years survived the enforced period of drought and eventually recovered when planted on soil with an unrestricted depth.

Read the full report and see the list of turfgrasses and their performance on the Texas A&M website here: Final SAWS Report to Cooperators.

Photo Courtesy of Texas A&M University.

UF / IFAS Publications Address Common Landscape Questions

Published in December 2008, these University of Florida / IFAS publications answer common landscaping questions such as:

Does Florida-Friendly landscaping mean "no turf"?
What's the best way to fertilize my lawn?
Does using native plants or changing turf types automatically guarantee water savings?

Lawn Care

Find out more from the experts on Florida landscapes!

Frequently Asked Questions about Florida-Friendly Landscaping

Frequently Asked Questions about Landscape Irrigation for Florida-Friendly Landscaping Ordinances

Frequently Asked Questions about Landscape Fertilization for Florida-Friendly Landscaping Ordinances

Study Shows That Responsibly Managed Lawns Can Reduce Your Carbon Footprint

A new study conducted by Dr. Ranajit (Ron) Sahu, an independent environmental and energy expert and University instructor, shows that responsibly managed lawns sequester, or store, significant amounts of carbon, capturing four times more carbon from the air than is produced by the engine of today’s lawnmowers. The findings are based on several peer-reviewed, scientific studies and models where carbon sequestration had been measured in managed and unmanaged turfgrass.

The study goes on to report that to maximize carbon intake benefits, lawns and other turfgrass areas must be managed by cutting grass, leaving grass clippings, and responsible watering.

Read more here: http://www.opei.org/carbonreport/.

Is "Cash for Grass" the Way to Go?

The following is taken from "Cash for Grass" - A Cost Effective Method to Conserve Landscape Water? by Sylvan Addink, PhD, Certified Professional Agronomist, originally published in the Jan/Feb 2005 Turf News, a publication of Turfgrass Producers International. The full article with a list of references can be seen at http://ucrturf.ucr.edu/topics/Cash-for-Grass.pdf.

Water districts, municipalities, and states are increasingly confronted with the challenge of finding enough water to sustain their growing and thirsty populations. In the midst of a drought, the importance of allocating and saving water is of even greater importance. In the search for methods to achieve this goal, a variety of alternatives have been pursued, some more successfully than others.

One of the methods used has been “Cash for Grass” programs. Four of these programs were conducted in North Marin, CA; Las Vegas, NV; Albuquerque, NM, and El Paso, TX. In examining these programs, the following observations were noted:

The average calculated cost per acre foot of water saved was $899. This was based on a 15 year life and a 25% erosion factor. As indicated below, the 25% erosion factor is likely to be higher, causing an increase in the cost for each acre foot saved.

Each program required the installation of xeriscape plant material, which is generally watered with a drip irrigation system. A newly installed drip irrigation system can use 20% less water than an in-ground sprinkler system. However, after several years, the drip irrigation system will lose some of its efficiency advantage over the sprinkler system. In Arizona, a check of several older drip systems revealed an average uniformity of less than 20%. The short-term results reported for the “Cash for Grass” programs did not consider this factor.

The programs required xeriscape density of 50% at maturity. The coverage and water needs of the xeriscape canopy would increase over time as the plants matured, resulting in further erosion of water savings. The short-term results reported for the “Cash for Grass” programs did not consider these factors.

In addition, visual observations at some sites revealed that the early xeriscape plant coverage was 10% or less and would never achieve 50% coverage by maturity. This increased the early reported water savings at the expense of visually unappealing neighborhoods and golf courses.

Three of the programs required installation of a new irrigation system to qualify for the rebate while the El Paso program did not. The higher cost per acre foot of water saved for the El Paso program ($1,834) is an indicator that much of the water savings can be attributed to the installation of more efficient irrigation systems, not the removal of turf.

Based on water application rates on tall fescue plantings in Las Vegas, a water savings of 28% could have been achieved by applying only the amount of water required by the tall fescue plants. The Southern Nevada Water authority, in their summer 2004 Waterwise publication, stated that, “On average, residents use 40 percent more water on their grass than most turf requires.”

The conclusion that the majority of savings came from emphasis on proper irrigation rather than conversion of turf to xeriscape is supported by a water conservation program established by the Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD). There was a 50% reduction in water use on non-residential landscapes and “most of the reductions in water use were attributable to improvements in irrigation technology and management, rather than changes in landscape composition.”

Conclusions from examination of “Cash for Grass” Programs:

There is doubt about the cost effectiveness of “Cash for Grass” programs due to the high cost per acre foot of water saved and low acceptance rate among consumers.

The reported short-term results of the programs did not consider important long-term factors such as decreasing efficiency of drip systems over time and higher water use due to growth of the xeriscape plant material.

Three of the programs examined did not separate the water savings for the irrigation system change from the water savings due to conversion of turf to xeriscape. This critical oversight can only be addressed with additional research in order to conclude the relative water saving benefits of each component.

Good landscape water management is more important than plant material change. Dr. Welsh, past president of the National Xeriscape Council, stated that, “The type of plant materials or irrigation system in the landscape has much less effect on water consumption than the human factor of good landscape water management.”