1 / 15

Is Precision Management on Golf Courses Feasible? Phillip Fisher Soil 4213

Is Precision Management on Golf Courses Feasible? Phillip Fisher Soil 4213. The Golf Economy. Generates billions of dollars in national revenues yearly Per capita golf expenditures increased from $354 in 1986 to $776 in 1997 Approximately 30 million golfers in U.S. alone. Industry Growth.

adin
Download Presentation

Is Precision Management on Golf Courses Feasible? Phillip Fisher Soil 4213

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Is Precision Management on Golf Courses Feasible?Phillip Fisher Soil 4213

  2. The Golf Economy • Generates billions of dollars in national revenues yearly • Per capita golf expenditures increased from $354 in 1986 to $776 in 1997 • Approximately 30 million golfers in U.S. alone

  3. Industry Growth • Continuous Growth: 2% annually through 2010 • Courses under development and in planning for construction exceeds 2000 • This year 442 new courses compared to pre-1987 average of 150

  4. Show Me the Money! • U.S. Open at Southern Hills will generate around 60-70 million dollars • New courses being built creates instant money due to housing developments • Many courses have a budget of $1 million due to constant drive for perfection

  5. Why Precision Management? • Perfectionist (Guinea pigs with money) • ENVIRONMENT*Water*Chemicals • Saving costs on the golf course*Cut application rates*Cut labor

  6. Application of Fertilizer • Fertilizers and pesticides are applied on averages • Excess nutrients may leach • Environmental risks and economic loss

  7. How is Turf Quality Evaluated? • Visual Evaluation*Subjective process that requires experience*Rate grass 1-9 • Optical Sensing*Objective and requires less experience*Measures irradiance reflected from turf canopy*NDVI

  8. Research in Precision Management of Turf • Herbicide tolerance of cold-resistant bermuda cultivars • Turf quality evaluated by visual and optical sensing • Two different sensors*OSU*CA

  9. OSU Sensor

  10. CA Sensor

  11. Results • Cultivars were similar in response • V-MOS results matched visual*OKS 91-11: 73 of 80(July) 67 of 80(Sept.)*Midlawn: 65 of 80(July) 70 of 80 (Sept.) • NDVI: 0.547-0.790 (untreated plots) difference %44 where all were given 9’s visually

  12. Evaluating V-MOS • Turf rated monthly for 1 year using VMOS & three human evaluators • VMOS required 2X time than visual • Correlation: Visual & NDVI*Color r^2 = .75(fescue) & .41(bent)*PLC r^2 = .39(fescue) & .34(bent)*Texture r^2 = .01(fescue) & .04(bent)

  13. Consistency of Rating Techniques • NDVI more consistent over time*Coefficients of determination higher in 34 of 36 comparisons with 2 of 3 evaluators • Correlation of evaluator between consecutive days suggest visual inaccuracy • Sensor readings are repeatable with approximately 80% accuracy

  14. Conclusion • Precision management will be the wave of the future in turf • Faster processing of V-MOS needed • Technology advances will decrease price and improve sensors • Precision Management is Feasible!

  15. Questions • References: Dr. Greg Bell et. Al • U.S.G.A. • G.C.S.A.A.

More Related