Legislative Assembly
Inquiry into Sportsground Management in NSW
Submission to the Parliamentary Committee
By Dr James Hull
Independent Turfgrass Consulting
Introduction
Many of the factors that are to be examined by the Legislative Assembly Committee
on Public Works are directly affected by the presence of a living, functional and
uniform coverage of natural turf on the playing or recreational turf surface. A healthy
turf surface provides an aesthetically pleasing, cooling, cushioning surface for the
playing of sports, recreational activities and passive enjoyment. Sportsfields promote
healthy activity, community spirit and a restful environment.
An inadequate or degraded turf surface can lead to environmental pollution, personal
injury, litigation costs and increased insurance costs, and a loss of aesthetic and
recreational pleasure. Therefore, although the primary factor addresses by this
submission is on the environmental impacts of sportsfield and recreational turf
maintenance, it does interact with several other factors included in the terms of
reference.
The major threat to the environment is from poorly maintained turf areas and
therefore the focus of this submission is on the need to establish standards of
construction and maintenance for the sportsgrounds and amenity turfgrass areas in
NSW. By this means access to recreational facilities can be equitably apportioned,
resources can be efficiently allocated and utilised, environmental outcomes can be
positive and injury and litigation can be minimised.
Of particular disappointment is the number of constructions, reconstructions and
renovations that are carried out with either complete ignorance of, or complete
disregard of existing literature and well proven principles. For this reason many
recommendations involve the compilation and dissemination of information and the
establishment of NSW guidelines for construction and maintenance of sportsfields
and amenity turf areas. In this endeavour the participation of the NSW government
would be exceptionally valuable.
Environmental concerns associated with sportsground maintenance
The background document to the current inquiry states that “A recent concern raised
by the media is the progressive deterioration of sportsgrounds caused by lack of water
and reduced maintenance, and exacerbated by overuse”. In many cases this perception
is unfortunately factual and it is evident from a limited number of contacts with
council parks maintenance personnel that they are aware of this and agonise over the
condition of their grounds. It is also true that in recent years there is heightened
awareness – often driven by the constant threat of litigation – of the unacceptability of
ground conditions that may have been ignored in the past. Therefore there are two sets
of factors at work; one being that the lack of water and resources and the amount of
use is leading to the seasonal deterioration of sportsgrounds, and the other is that
grounds are all expected to be in absolutely pristine condition for the entirety of the
year.
The environmental benefits of sportsground and amenity turf areas are thoroughly
addressed in the paper by James B Beard and Robert L Green, ‘The role of turfgrasses
in environmental protection and their benefit to humans’1 and it would be tedious to
reproduce any significant amount of that text again though the paper is commended to
the committee as a scholarly treatment of the subject. It should however be noted that
factors seen as environmentally negative such as increased traffic and noise involved
in the use of turfgrass areas, should be considered in conjunction with the benefits
conferred by a well maintained turfgrass surface. The underlined statement
emphasizes the fact that a poorly conditioned turfgrass surface has its own detrimental
environmental impacts and lacks most of the environmental positives of a functional
turfgrass sward. This submission therefore makes the point that the environmental
impacts of the turfgrass areas are inextricably linked to the maintenance of a cover of
functional healthy turfgrass.
The environmental concerns associated with turfgrass maintenance should be
considered from two perspectives. There are concerns associated with the
maintenance of existing turfgrass areas of reasonable quality and these traditionally
receive the lion’s share of the attention of the press and environmental activists. Then
there are the concerns associated with non-existent and poorly conditioned turfgrass
areas, and these sometimes get very little attention, but do seem to be the concern of
particular interest to this inquiry.
Concerns associated with the maintenance of existing areas include:
 Water usage in maintaining a turfgrass sward;
 Pesticide usage in maintaining a turfgrass sward;
 Nutrient usage and subsequent loss of nutrient from turfgrass area to surface
waterways and groundwater;
 Injury and subsequent litigation resulting from use of turfgrass area;
Concerns associated with the presence of poorly conditioned turfgrass areas include:
 Increased injury and subsequent litigation resulting from use of turfgrass area;
 Dust and erosion loss of topsoil from grounds, with consequent loss of nutrient
and pollution of surface waters;
 Dust pollution of neighbouring areas and irritation of people in vicinity of
grounds;
 Poor public relations resulting from closure of grounds;
 Lack of carbon dioxide fixation and oxygen generation;
 Lack of cooling effect of functioning turfgrass cover.
Concerns associated with non-existence of turfgrass areas:
 Increased surface temperatures in urban areas;
 Increased dust concentration in urban areas due to lack of ‘dust traps’;
 Lack of publicly accessible sport and recreation areas.
1
1994, Journal of Environmental Quality, Vol 23, no.3. This document is available online at the
website of the Turf Producers of Australia, www.turfaustralia.com.au.
It should be noted that the concerns associated with the last group largely apply to
artificial turf surfaces as well. They lack the general transpirational cooling that
turfgrasses provide unless they are constantly wet with irrigation. They also tend to be
expensive installations that seek to recoup the initial cost through the lack of need for
mowing and other regular maintenance. This does mean however that they tend to be
locked away from public access due to the possibility of damage from play and
vandalism.
The concerns associated with poorly conditioned turfgrass cover can be overcome by
a combination of strategies;
1. Quantifying and staying within the range of the carrying capacity of the
ground, ie. prevent overuse;
2. Maximising the carrying capacity through correct grass variety selection and
optimum construction and maintenance practices;
3. Allocating resources according to the requirements of the area;
4. Providing adequate irrigation through the exploration of every option in water
conservation, harvesting, collection, and treatment;
5. Avoiding ‘catastrophic’ events on the surfaces, such as playing matches while
the ground is waterlogged.
The carrying capacity of sportsgrounds has been the subject of some research (eg.
Sports Turf Research Institute (STRI) in the UK) but further investigations involving
the varieties of grass used in NSW and the limitations of the local climates should be
carried out. Once quantified, the carrying capacity of the ground can be used to
program play and allocate numbers of teams that can use grounds.
There has been a significant amount of research on the strengths and weaknesses of
grass varieties, including some ongoing research at the Queensland DPI under Dr Don
Loch. Despite this, many turfgrass establishments fly in the face of published research
and varieties are selected based on sales literature and anecdote, and the results are
less than satisfactory. One example is the use of tall fescue grasses as a perennial
grass cover on pitches without unlimited irrigation. The loss of substantial amounts of
the turf cover in summer results in a hazardously clumpy and bumpy surface that is
not safe for play. The use of cool-season grasses in any sportsfield in NSW should be
mainly confined to providing winter colour to top-ranked over-seeded grounds.
There are some extremely well quantified guidelines for the selection of sportsfield
soils, construction of soil profiles, drainage design and performance testing of existing
soil profiles (eg. publications of Keith McIntyre in the ACT, STRI in the UK, USGA
in the USA). Again the unfortunate fact is that in many cases these are entirely
ignored and utterly preventable problems continue to exist. In addition there are many
systems of construction that can maximise the performance of high-quality fields
through reinforcement of the turf or profile with artificial materials and by modular
replacement of turf areas. The benefits (or lack of benefit) of these systems need to be
quantified and the information distributed.
Resource allocation depends on an assessment of the requirements of the area. Local
municipalities conduct this assessment and many systems of allocation are being used
and developed. An example is the rating of sportsfield into categories such as A, B
and C grade grounds; where A would be professional and high level amateur play, B
might be the bulk of amateur play and C might be unirrigated, low capacity grounds
and amenity areas. This allows a formula to be developed to allocate costs on a per
hectare basis for the differently rated grounds. Unfortunately every council seems to
need to reinvent the wheel and it would be desirable that some statewide guidelines be
developed.
State government run facilities such as schools can also be quantified and the
resources to maintain the recreational areas of the schools could be centrally allocated
to ensure equitable expenditure across the state. Western Australia has a very well
organised system along these lines, where the responsible department has information
on the total hectares of turf and garden areas in the state schools, the location and size
of individual school turf areas, the grass varieties, the soil types and they then allocate
resources such as mowing frequency, water allocation and fertiliser inputs.
Water availability is the current major issue in turf maintenance, both in the area of
supply and quality. Other submissions will probably focus more on this factor and
possible remedies. The supply of water is integral to turf maintenance and all efforts
need to be made to supply water of a suitable quality. The use of potable water should
be largely seen as a thing of the past so options such as stormwater harvesting, treated
waste water re-distribution, sewer mining, bores, and use of poor quality water must
be explored. Grass varieties that can tolerate high levels of salt, especially in sandy
soils, are being developed and released, and their playing characteristics and the
carrying capacity of playing fields grasses with these varieties need to be investigated
for NSW.
Even a well constructed and grassed sportsground can be totally destroyed by play at
inappropriate times, particularly when the soil profile is waterlogged or there is
surface water on the playing surface. Some councils have instituted ground checklists
that must be completed by the club in consultation with the visiting team and referees.
Scores are allocated to such things as surface water, surface levels, grass cover etc,
and an excessive score leads to cancellation of play. Again it is unfortunate that every
council has to go through this individually and again it would be desirable if
guidelines were available, even if the councils adapted a standard set of guidelines to
suit their individual needs. Simple tests to establish the moisture content of a ground
on matchday should be developed.
Recommendations
1. That turfgrass areas be maintained with the highest priority given to the
maintenance of a full cover of grass. This reduces erosion and dust issues,
minimises the possibility of nutrient loss, minimises weed infestation and
consequent herbicide applications, minimises the possibility of player injury,
maximises the transpirational cooling effect of the turf and maximises the
aesthetic and usage appeal of the area.
2. That to achieve recommendation 1 the nutrient status of turfgrass areas should
be monitored. This maximises the effect of water applications and reduces any
potential wastage of water. Adequate nutrition status also maximises carrying
capacity of the turfgrass area and minimises wear and the effects of shade and
heat stress. Monitoring of nutrient status also reduces nutrient pollution by
avoiding over-application of polluting nutrients, particularly phosphorus.
3. That the existing research into irrigation requirements and methodologies such
as that carried out at the University of Western Australia be widely circulated
and the irrigation practices that have been successfully adopted in other states
be adopted in NSW. Particular attention should be paid to deficit irrigation and
efficient irrigation techniques. The existing research from the Queensland
Department of Primary Industries (QDPI) Redlands Research Station
concerning adaptation of turf varieties should also be widely circulated and
resultant efficiencies in water usage, nutrient efficiencies and wear tolerances
should noted and adopted in NSW.
4. That sportsgrounds and other turfgrass areas be prioritised with regard to the
standard of play that takes place and the amount of play expected to take
place. Resources can then be allocated according to the ‘rating’ allocated to
the facility. Government assistance in developing formulae for the rating
system and costing of maintenance would be highly desirable. Capital
allocations can then also be made in an informed manner. State government
administered turfgrass facilities (eg. school recreational and sports turf areas)
should be quantified and similar formulae developed to allocate funding on an
equitable basis.
5. That a series of sportsground design standards be developed for NSW similar
to those under development for the ACT. Minimum soil profile depths and
designed drainage rates should be set to prevent the poor construction
practices that lead to the non-performance of many new constructions.
Minimum soil specifications for the various standards of sportsgrounds should
be adopted to prevent to ‘dumping’ of unsuitable rootzone media onto
unsuspecting customers.
6. That users of sportsgrounds and turfgrass areas be involved in the preservation
of the areas. Some municipalities have instigated ground checklists that are
filled in on sportsdays and signed off by the club officials and referees. Scores
are allocated to such factors as the presence of surface water, bumpiness,
muddiness, surface holes etc, and an excessive score leads to the ground not
being played on that day.
7. That is conjunction with recommendation 6, standards of sportsground playing
characteristics be developed for NSW. Much research has been conducted by
the American Society of Testing and Management, the Sports Turf Research
Institute in the UK and the results published. Additional research has been
conducted by other organisations such as the New Zealand Turf Research
Institute, the Australian Golf Course Superintendents Association, the
Australian Turf Research Institute (now defunct, though the head of the
scientific council, Dr Peter Martin, is currently at the University of Sydney,
Plant Breeding Institute), the QDPI, and others. Many researchers have sought
to benchmark playing characteristics against player satisfaction and this
research should be continued to set standards for NSW conditions.
In addition, simple tests for characteristics such as soil moisture, ground
hardness, bumpiness and soil stability would be desirable to help club officials
to assess the suitability of their grounds for play on a day-to-day basis.
Conclusion
The construction and maintenance of sportsfields and amenity turf areas can no longer
be allowed to continue on an ad-hoc basis. Water is too scarce to waste, the impacts of
poor maintenance are excessive both environmentally and politically, and the
consequences of injury and litigation are threatening the viability of public recreation
areas. Efforts have to be made to quantify inputs and outputs and to set standards of
acceptability in field performance that are relevant to NSW.
Dr Jim Hull
Independent Turfgrass Consulting
itcturf@netspace.net.au
0405 066 600