| Abstract/Contents: | "GCSAA's Golf Course Environmental Profile is a data collection project that provides new insight into the property features, management practices and inputs associated with golf courses across the United States. Pesticide Use Practices on U.S. Golf Courses is the fifth report produced from the project. The first, Property Profile and Environmental Stewardship of Golf Courses, was released in November 2007. The second report, Water Use and Conservation Practices on U.S. Golf Courses, was released in January 2009. The third report was Nutrient Use and Management on U.S. Golf Courses (2009), and the fourth was Energy Use and Conservation Practices on U.S. Golf Courses (2012). The objectives of this survey were to determine pesticide use and investigate pesticide use practices and pest management tactics on golf courses in the U.S. and its agronomic regions. The pesticide use data proved to be too unreliable to confidently report the use of individual pesticide active ingredients by specific components of the golf course (greens, tees, fairways, rough). This report provides an accurate portrayal of pesticide use practices on golf courses in the U.S. including pesticide storage characteristics, pesticide mixing and loading practices, the use of written integrated pest management plans, pesticide application plans, pesticide emergency plans, the incidence of local restrictions to pesticide operations, number of certified pesticide applicators and other pest management tactics. These data establish a baseline that can be compared to data from future surveys to identify change over time. Methodology: Superintendents at all golf facilities (16,194) were invited to participate in a two-part survey. A total of 3,325 completed surveys were returned from 16,194 superintendents, yielding a 20.5% return rate for the first portion of the survey of pesticide use practices. Information on pesticide use was submitted by 1,671 participants. The data collected were not independently validated because of time and resource limitations. The pesticide use data were not reliable enough to confidently report pesticide active ingredients by specific components of the golf course (greens, tees, fairways, roughs). Analysis of the first portion of the surveys indicated a representative sample of the golf facilities in the U.S. was received with the exception of facility type. Responses from private facilities accounted for 41% of the returned surveys but make up 28% of the known population of golf facilities. Therefore, proportions of the collected sample were weighted to resemble the known population. The data were analyzed and compared across facility types, maintenance budgets and agronomic regions. Results: Pest management tactics: Superintendents commonly use multiple tactics to manage pests. The tactics most often used at 18-hole golf facilities were: routine monitoring of weather patterns (97%); use of cultural practices (96%); scouting (95%); recording pest outbreaks (86%); higher tolerance of pest damage (71%). The frequency of use of the multiple management practices listed was higher at facilities with more than nine holes and with an annual maintenance budget greater than $500,000. Public facilities and those with an annual maintenance budget of less than $500,000 were more likely to tolerate a higher level of pest damage. Superintendents in the Northeast most frequently recorded pest outbreaks and used pest-tolerant turfgrass species and predictive models. Superintendents in the Southwest most frequently used biological controls, traps and sensors. Pesticide storage characteristics: Ninety-eight percent of average 18-hole golf facilities stored pesticides at the facility. The most common characteristics of the pesticide storage area were: locked or restricted access (94%); signs indicating pesticide storage (85%); emergency shower or eyewash station nearby (74%); impervious floor (68%); spill kits (67%); floors capable of containing liquid spills (63%); passive venting (58%); separate/dedicated building (54%); impervious shelving (51%); powered venting (50%); explosion-proof fixtures (30%). Pesticide storage facilities at private, 27-hole facilities with higher maintenance budgets were more likely to have the features listed above than were public 18- or 9-hole facilities with maintenance budgets less than $1,000,000. Golf facilities in the Northeast, Southeast, Southwest and Pacific agronomic regions were more likely to have these characteristics than facilities in the North Central, Transition or Upper West/Mountain regions. Mixing and loading characteristics: The most common characteristics of mixing and loading sites were: spill kit located near mix/load area (60%); anti-siphoning device on water line (56%); emergency water shut-off valve (45%); impervious floor (45%); recycling of pesticide containers (36%); tank-filling capacity greater than 50 gallons per minute (36%); floors capable of containing liquid spills (35%); overhead protection from weather (29%); pesticide rinsate collection (27%); stand-alone pesticide mixing tank (15%). Mixing and loading sites at private, 27-hole facilities with higher maintenance budgets were more likely to have the characteristics listed above than public, 18- or 9-hole facilities with maintenance budgets less than $1,000,000. Golf facilities in the North Central, Southeast, and Southwest agronomic regions were significantly more likely to have these characteristics than facilities in the Northeast, Transition, Upper West/Mountain and Pacific regions. Written integrated pest management (IPM) plan: Forty-one percent of average 18-hole golf facilities had a written IPM plan. Written IPM plans were significantly more common on 27-hole (41%) and 18-hole (41%) golf facilities than 9-hole facilities (33%) golf facilities. Private and public golf facilities were equally likely to have a written IPM plan. Written IPM plans were more prevalent at facilities with higher maintenance budgets. Golf facilities in the Pacific and Southwest agronomic regions were significantly more likely to have a written IPM plan than facilities in the other agronomic regions. Voluntary action initiated by the golf facility board, committee, or superintendent (68%) was the most common reason given for adoption of a written IPM plan. The second and third most common reasons given for adopting a written IPM plan were voluntary participation with a non-governmental agency (16%) and requirement of a government or tribal authority (14%). Golf facilities in the Upper West/Mountain (23%) and Pacific (22%) regions were the most likely to adopt a written IPM plan because of voluntary action with a non-governmental agency. Golf facilities in the Pacific (22%) and Southwest (20%) regions were more likely to adopt a written IPM plan because of a requirement by a government or tribal authority. Written pesticide management plan: Sixty-six percent of average 18-hole golf facilities had a written pesticide application plan. The size of the golf facility did not significantly affect the likelihood that it had a written pesticide application plan. Private facilities were more likely to have a written pesticide application plan than public facilities. Facilities with an annual maintenance budget greater than $1,000,000 were more likely to have a written pesticide application plan than facilities with lower maintenance budgets. Golf facilities in the North Central and Transition agronomic regions were more likely to have a written pesticide application plan than facilities in the other agronomic regions. The most common reason given for the adoption of a written pesticide application plan was voluntary action initiated by the golf facility board, committee or superintendent. The next most common reason was a requirement by a government or tribal authority. Written pesticide emergency response plan: Approximately 50% of average 18-hole facilities had a pesticide emergency response plan. Pesticide emergency response plans were more common at 27-hole facilities than facilities with fewer holes. Private golf facilities were more likely than public facilities to have a written pesticide emergency response plan. Golf facilities with an annual maintenance budget greater than $1,000,000 were more likely to have a written pesticide emergency response plan than facilities with lower maintenance budgets. Average 18-hole golf facilities in the Southwest and Pacific regions were significantly more likely to have a written pesticide emergency response plan than facilities in other regions. Certified pesticide applicators: Almost all golf facilities employed one or more certified pesticide applicators. The number of certified pesticide applicators was significantly higher at 27-hole (2.7) and 18-hole (2.1) golf facilities than at 9-hole (1.2) golf facilities. Private golf facilities employed more certified pesticide applicators than public golf facilities. Golf facilities with higher maintenance budgets had a higher number of certified pesticide applicators on staff. Pesticide regulations and restrictions: A large majority of golf facilities were affected by regional or local government regulations in addition to federal and state regulations covering pesticide operations. The most common regulations were: mandated pesticide recordkeeping (79%); pesticide posting/notification (62%); pesticide storage (62%). Additional regulations covering pesticide operations were most common for average 18-hole golf facilities in the Southwest and Pacific regions. For some golf facilities, local governments or tribal authorities also restricted pesticide use. Responses indicated that twenty-six percent of average 18-hole golf facilities had one or more restrictions by local government or tribal authorities. The most common restrictions were: prohibition of a specific pesticide product(s) (72%); limitation on the total amount of a specific product applied (72%); limitation on the amount of a specific product applied per application (57%). Average 18-hole facilities in the Southwest (46%) and Pacific (43%) regions were more likely to have one or more local restrictions on pesticide applications. Trends in pesticide use: Nationally, the use of fungicides, insecticides and herbicides stayed relatively the same in 2007 compared to previous years, but there was moderate change depending on the component of the golf course where the pesticides were applied. The use of plant growth regulators increased relative to typical use in previous years on tees and fairways, and most notably on putting greens. The greatest increase in the use of plant growth regulators was on putting greens: 44% of average 18-hole golf facilities reported an increase in use and 8% reported a decrease. Fungicide use on putting greens increased slightly. The use of fungicides and insecticides on tees decreased slightly. On tees, there was relatively no change in herbicide use, but plant growth regulator use increased. On fairways, fungicide use decreased slightly, insecticide use showed little change, herbicide use increased moderately and plant growth regulator use increased. On roughs, fungicide use decreased and herbicide use increased, but insecticide and plant growth regulator use were relatively unchanged. Recommendations and conclusions: Pesticide storage characteristics: GCSAA recommends that all golf facilities storing pesticides use an area specifically designed for the purpose. All pesticide storage areas should have impervious floors and shelving and have spill kits available in the area. All golf facilities should invest in the proper devices to minimize potential risks from storing pesticides. Pesticide mixing and loading: GCSAA recommends that mixing and loading areas be designed for this purpose and be equipped with appropriate safety devices. Improvement is needed in the following areas: spill kits located near mix/load area; anti-siphoning device on water line; emergency water shut-off valve; impervious floor; recycling of pesticide containers; floors capable of containing liquid spills; overhead protection from weather. Pesticide emergency response plan: GCSAA recommends that all golf facilities have a pesticide emergency response plan to enhance preparedness should an accident occur that involves application or storage of pesticide products. IPM plan and pest management tactics: GCSAA recommends that all golf courses have a written integrated pest management (IPM) plan that incorporates a pesticide application plan. It is also recommended that superintendents continually strive to use innovative practices and technology to strengthen their plant and pest management strategies. This survey indicated that golf course superintendents routinely used multiple tactics to manage pests and followed an integrated approach to pest management, even though less than half of 18-hole facilities had developed a formal, written IPM document." |
|---|
| See Also: | See also related book, Golf Course Environmental Profile: Property Profile and Environmental Stewardship of Golf Courses: Volume I - [Full Report], 2007, R=144966. R=144966
See also related book, Golf Course Environmental Profile: Water Use and Conservation Practices on U.S. Golf Courses: Volume II - [Full Report], 2009, R=144968. R=144968
See also related book, Golf Course Environmental Profile: Nutrient Use and Management on U.S. Golf Courses: Volume III - [Full Report], 2009, R=158563. R=158563
See also related booklet, Golf Course Environmental Profile: Energy Use and Energy Conservation Practices on U.S. Golf Courses: Volume IV, 2012, R=204777. R=204777 |
|---|
