A Multiple Index Environmental QualityEvaluation and Management SystemA method that can be applied to a golf course.

by DR. STEVE TIllEN, DR. STEVE STARRETT, DR. ROBERf ROBEL,PATRICK SHEA, DAVE GOURLA~ CAL ROTH

The construction of Colbert Hills Golf Course near Manhattan, Kansas, provided theopportunity for what is perhaps the most extensive environmental research evaluationever conducted on a golf course.

AlMETHOD for evaluating envi-ronmental quality of large-scaleandscapes that bridges scientific

research and public use is in greatdemand. Resource managers, industryand community planners, governmentpolicy makers, and scientists all supportan improved environment, but connec-tions between processes, remediation,and management aren't always readilyavailable or understandable to such adiverse community. This article de-scribes a versatile, simplified, science-based system for making environ-mental quality assessments and linkingoutcomes to remedial management.This complex goal becomes attainableby: establishment and use of appro-priate scientific databanks, determi-nation of targets for acceptable andunacceptable impact on critical eco-system functions, simplified visualintegration of many indicators, andlinkage to management databases. Theprocess is being developed by a multi-disciplinary study of a grassland

12 USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

ecosystem converted for use as a golfcourse. The system can be easilycustomized to local conditions and haswide-range application to many typesof natural and managed ecosystems.

Ecosystems and a NewGolf Course Every Day!

Golf is one of the fastest-growingindustries in the United States, yet itsenvironmental impact is largely un-known. Somewhere in the UnitedStates, on average, more than one newgolf course opens every day (509 newcourses opened in 1999).1 The 26.4million U.S. golfers 1play at more than16,7431courses that occupy well over 3million acres. The annual impact ofthe golf industry on the U.S. economywas estimated at $30. billion in 1998and is growing. 1With the internationalgolfing scene adding significantly tothese numbers, both the golf industryand the public are interested in theimpact of golf on the environment.

Golf courses provide unique settingsfor environmental studies. They typi-cally contain segments progressingfrom high input zones to relatively un-disturbed natural settings. Also, man-agement inputs are commonly welldocumented. Researchers studyinggolf-related environmental issues find areceptive audience of superintendentsthrough avenues like the United StatesGolf Association (USGA) GreenSection Record2 and the publicationsand educational programs of the GolfCourse Superintendents Association ofAmerica (GCSAA).3 Contrary to popu-lar belief, evidence from these sources,and others, is building that golf courses,with their combination of plant com-munities, open expanses and naturalareas, can be an accommodatinghabitat for birds, animals, pollinators,fish, amphibians, and other fauna andflora.4,S,6 There remains, though, a greatneed to translate research into workingmanagement tools for the betterment ofgolf course ecosystems. Golf coursespresent perhaps one of the best livinglaboratories for the systematic studyand monitoring of environmentalquality from which the improvement ofother natural, large-scale ecosystemscan be modeled.

In Quest of QualityBoth the scientific community and

the public support practices that im-prove the environment. Given theworld's collective knowledge, abilities,interests, and support, one could rea-sonably expect our modern society tohave developed a more sustainable andless destructive interaction with itsenvironment. The fact that we haven'tis troubling; however, there is theopportunity for channeling thesemutual interests into a process andresulting solution.

Gifford Pinchoe and Frederick LawOlmstead8, at the end of the 19th cen-tury, championed the systematic andscientific management of large-scale

landscapes. They coupled emergingecological sciences, .l~ke bot~ny ~ndsilviculture, to tradItIonal bIOlogIC~1sciences. By today's standards, theIrtools were primitive, yet they may havetaught us the value of "looking at thewhole forest and not just single trees."

In the modern era of powerfulmolecular-level technology, a casecould be made that the scientific com-munity can describe to the public morethan it wants to know about aparticular tree or molecule of the tree'sgenome. However, the descriptionoften stops short of any effort to ~e-scribe the forest. Large databases eXIstthat describe scientific aspects of ourenvironment, but most await transla-tion into workable management tools.At the beginning of the 21st .cen~ury, aholistic science-based, publIc-friendlymethod for evaluating and managingthe relative health of large-scale land-scapes seems like the missing link inenvironmental improvement.

Government industry, university,and public entities have a continuinginterest in a variety of ecosystems.Frequently, their interest is. in anappropriate ma.nag~ment re~Ime t?establish or mamtain a qualIty enVI-ronment. The phrase "quality environ-ment" is vague and susceptible toconflicting interpretations. Too often,environmental quality is touted as agoal, but one typically .1acl~ing anitinerary, roadmap, or ~estinatIOn and,therefore, of little practIcal use.

Although scientists lean toward char-acterizing the environment throughquantifying and interpreting l~rge num-bers of indicators, the resultIng s.et.ofisolated indices falls short of descnbingthe forest (or the "big picture"),particularly for the non-sci~nti~t. ~ter-natively, condensing many In~Ic~~mtoa single index introduces signIfI~anttheoretical and practical shortcomIngs.This article describes a utilitarianconnection between the evaluative andmanagement segments of environmen-tal quality. The artic~e.suggests how, byappropriately combInIng managementstrategies with environm~ntal data-bases environmental qualIty can bechanged from an empty idea in!o aworkable tool leading to sustainedenvironmental' improvement. This ap-proach might best be viewed as "look-ing at single trees to see the wholeforest." We'll demonstrate this conceptusing a golf course as our livinglaboratory, but the system's versatilityallows its use on practically any eco-system.

Golf on the Grasslandsand Environmental Research

During 1999-2000, Colbert HillsGolf Course was constructed on a312-acre native grassland site nearManhattan Kansas. Soils, water re-sources, fl~ra and fauna on this siterepresent a natural K~nsas tallgrassprairie ecosystem. EnVIronmental r~-searchers at nearby Kansas State UnI-versity were presented .an excellentopportunity to study the Impact ~ golfcourse has on the environment. Prior toconstruction on the site, researcherscollected baseline data on envin;m-mental indicators selected to descnbeoriginal conditions of the native grass-land ecosystem. As architectural planswere being finalized, the course ~uper-intendent assisted in the selectIOn ofresearch sites and indicators. Waterquality, soil quality, turf ~anagement,grassland ecosystems, aVIan e:osys-terns aquatic ecosystems, and Insectecosystems were studied. Subsequentmeasurement of the same indicatorshas progressed through constructionand, now, operation and use of thecourse. This project represents perhapsthe most extensive environmentalresearch evaluatiQn ever conducted ona golf course.

Coupling with the research team,the course superintendent, an agrono-mist from the PGA Tour golf courseproperties, and a scientist from theUnited States Department of theInterior have used the Colbert Hillsproject to develop a multiple indexingsystem to gauge the environmentalquality of the golf course. Named theColbert-Thien (pronounced "teen")Environmental and Evaluation Man-agement system, C!,~EM i~a versatile,informative simplIfIed, sCIence-basedmethod for' identifying environmentalprocesses in need of remediation a~da source of management strategIesto apply toward improving thoseconditions ..

With this research, we're attemptIngto determine the ecological impact ofconverting a native grassland site to agolf course. We also aim to ~evelopguidelines useful to the golfi~g ~ndustryfor minimizing and remedmtIng anynegative environmental impacts of golf.course construction, operation, anduse.

MethodologyAs described earlier, characterizing

ecosystems requires both data and in-terpretation. Using to day's technology,

scientists can measure a large numberof indices - so many, however, that theycan often be confusing to the non-scientist. Alternatively, reducing m~nyindices to a single index has. theor~tI~alshortcomings and practIcal lImItsassociated with oversimplification ofinterpretations.

The CTEEM system overcomes b?thof these limitations by couplIngmultiple indices from. a large-scalelandscape into an easIly understo?dvisual gauge of e~viro~!llet;ltal qualIty.By linking the IdentIficatIon <?f~e-graded processes and remedIatIonguidelines, the CTEEM s¥stem com-prises a complete envIronmentalassessment and management package.

A soon-to-be-developed urban areaadjacent to the golf course will. ad~ anew dimension to our monIt<?nngactivities. The flexibility of the enVI~on-mental evaluation model descnbedhere lends promise to its use .as aprototype for application to practIcallyany size or type of ecosy~tem.

For continued companson of changefrom original grasslan~ conditions, theresearchers have avaIlable some ~n-disturbed sites on the Colbert .HIllsproperty and databat;lks fro~ theKonza Prairie, a NatIonal SCIenceFoundation designated Long- T~r~Ecological Research (NSF- LTER) SIte.Both the Konza Prairie and ColbertHills sites are representative of thenative tallgrass prairie in the Flint Hillsof eastern Kansas and physically existwithin a few miles of each other.

Environmental quality, in its simpl~stform, is an assessment of essentIalecosystem functions. The CT~EMsystem blends existing te~hnoiogies toidentify, monitor, assess, Ill~strate, andoffer management strategIes ~or. anynumber of environmental qualIty IndI-cators in an easy-to-understand forma~.First essential functions and theIrmea~urable indicators are identifiedand monitored. Data from individualindicators are then graphed on controlcharts where sustainable ranges havebeen identified. Next, control :hartindices are logically grouped and Illus-trated in a "spider radar" graph :whereenvironmental indicators outSIde ofsustainable limits are easily dete~ted.Finally, managers can ac~es~ optIOnsfor remediating degraded mdicators.

Steps necessary for implementing theCTEEM system are: .

• Identify critical functIOns of anecosystem. Each ecosystem. can besubdivided into natural functIons (~~-actions, processes, and/or cycles) cntI-

MARCH/APRIL 2001 13

Figure 1. Evaluating environmental quality requires measuring indicators of criticalecological functions over time. These values are modeled onto control charts where testvalues are plotted on a time line. Superimposed on the control chart are upper (VCL) andlower (LCL) control limits based on known or desired tolerances of degradation. Valuesbetween the VCL and LCL would then represent a sustainable condition. Indicators thatfall outside the sustainable range would signal a need for targeted remediation. Eachindicator used for assessing an ecosystem would be modeled onto a control chart.

cal to sustaining that ecosystem. Eco-logical sciences can provide valuableguidance in selecting the functionsmost reflective of the ecosystem understudy. Primary functions in an eco-system can be further broken into sub-systems. For example, in the grass-land/golf turf ecosystem currentlyunder study, soils are assigned criticalfunctions in plant growth, soil tilth,environmental buffering, soil life, andnatural cycling functions.10 Within thenatural cycling category, carbon seques-tration in soil might be one criticalfunction selected for evaluation be-cause of its impact on so many soilproperties.

• Select appropriate indicators toevaluate these functions. Several indi-cators may be necessary to adequatelyassess each function. Then again, oneindicator may be useful in evaluatingseveral functions. The scientific litera-ture provides a wealthy repository ofpotential indicators. The great diversityin golf courses and scope of theevaluation can both be accommodatedin this step by customizing the indicatorselection to local conditions. Careshould be taken to identify a list thatis informative, measurable, and eco-nomically feasible. In keeping with theprevious example, one indicator of

carbon sequestration might be soilorganic matter (SOM) content.

• Measure indicator status. Tech-nology has provided access to rapid andcomprehensive analyses for mostneeds. In some cases, modem or his-toric databases can provide essentialinformation. Measurement frequencywill be indicator dependent. Withsome, annual or seasonal testing will besufficient, while others may be auto-mated to sample on shorter intervals.Some measurements may be linked tomonitor specific episodes (rainfallevents, chemical applications, manage-ment changes, etc.). For this example,commercial testing laboratories rou-tinely provide analysis of soil samplesfor organic matter content.

• Establish control chart indices(Figure 1). Control charts offer an in-formative method of comparing indi-cator measurements to ranges thatdelimit sustainable and degradingconditions.ll The key to using controlcharts lies in setting appropriate andacceptable target boundaries that de-lineate sustain ability and degradation.In some cases only minimum or maxi-mum boundaries may be appropriate.Control limits can be established withthe assistance of state extension ser-vices, literature surveys, management

experience, model predictions, consul-tants, regulations, or other sources. Forthis example, a minimum SOM contentof 1% might be selected as a lowercontrol limit for some soils based ondiminished soil tilth or water-holdingcapacity at lower levels. While highSOM is edaphologically desirable,maintaining organic matter contentabove 3% may prove economicallyunfeasible on many soils and so couldestablish an upper control limit.

• Transform multiple indices into en-vironmental quality evaluation graphs(Figure 2). In this step, indices from anynumber of quality control charts arenormalized onto a "spider radar"graph. This format produces an easy-to-understand visual presentation ofenvironmental quality. A high qualityecosystem exhibits a nearly circular"radar" image with all indicators fallingin the sustainable range. When someindicators fall outside the sustainablerange, the circular "radar" image be-comes skewed. The cause of degrada-tion (i.e., which indicator) and itsseverity (i.e., amount of skewing) arereadily apparent based on irregularity inthe diagram's form. Alternatively, acircular form could denote a severelydegraded environment if all indicatorslie outside the sustainable limits.

Appropriate computerization canrender either an episodic event or beanimated for a systematic view of en-vironmental quality changes over time.The compliance of an individual indexto boundary conditions over time canalso be viewed. This flexibility allowsusers to track the status of either anindividual indicator or an array of in-dicators in response to natural cycles,catastrophic events, or normal man-aged inputs.

• Select appropriate remedial man-agement for degraded indicators. In theCTEEM system, evaluation graphssummarize which indicators (andhence, which ecosystem functions) lieoutside their assigned sustainable limitsand are contributing towards thedegradation of the ecosystem. Theobvious next step is to computerizelinks from these indicators to a re-mediation databank or website whereappropriate management steps forimproving the environment can besuggested. That step is currently indevelopment.

• Monitor indicators over time. Long-term monitoring of essential indicatorswill illustrate how environmentalquality responds to natural disruptiveevents or management programs.

87345 6Sampling Date

21

CI):::::J-

~...(/)

~...o...ca(,).-'tJC-

14 USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

Figure 2. An environmental quality evaluation spider radar graph illustrates how well multiple indices conform to the limits of thatindicator's sustainable range (as identified with control charts like those in Figures 2, 3, and 5). Indices (purple dots) that lie withintheir target range (zone between the red lines) show ecosystem indicators operating in a sustainable mode. Indices lying outside theirtarget range, either too high or too low, represent degradation. Only soil porosity and total nitrogen concentration in water representactual data from this site; the other indices shown in this example do not represent actual data and are for illustrative purposes only.A high-quality ecosystem would show a nearly perfect radar circle (colored area outlined by purple dots) within the sustainable range.Degraded functions lie outside the sustainable range and skew the radar circle. Outer arcs group indicators into management areas(soil, water, fauna, and flora quality).

These seven steps in the CTEEMsystem present a conceptual scheme forimplementing an environmental qualityevaluation and management program.It is currently being applied to a grass-land ecosystem where portions havebeen converted into a golf course, butthe principles are applicable to a hostof ecosystems on practically any scale.Any phase that harbors some shortagesof information, procedures, and/orrecommendations exposes future re-

search needs. Currently, all techologiesnecessary for implementing this pro-gram are available from a variety ofsources. Maximum utility of theCTEEM system will come with futuredevelopment of computer capabilityto mesh input and output infor-mation. We believe the process hasextended application and can have asignificant impact on global environ-mental evaluation, management, andupgrading.

Application of the CTEEMSystem to a Golf Course

The golf course industry seeks tobe environmentally responsible. Theburden of meeting this responsibilityoften falls on golf course superinten-dents, individuals highly skilled in turfmanagement but not typically trainedas ecological scientists. Superinten-dents already evaluate agronomic in-dicators on a regular schedule, soadapting to an environmental monitor

MARCH/APRIL 2001 15

60

Upper Control Value

tAcceptable Range

~-Lower Control Value

f- I

55

50

;;!?0

~"Ci) 450...0Q.

40

35

30Sep-98 Dec-98 Mar-99 Jun-99 Sep-99 Dec-99 Mar-OO Jun-OO

Figure 3. Control chart for soil porosity, an indicator of soil quality. Soil porosity was within the acceptable range prior to construction($ep-98), but fell below acceptability during construction (Oct-99), causing some sod establishment problems. After one winter offreezing-thawing and wetting-drying, porosity returned to the acceptable range (May-DO).

ing program should involve familiarpractices. Some may, however, beserved by technical education and/orconsultation in selecting appropriateevaluation criteria, methods, and targetcontrol levels; meeting local com-pliance requirements; database devel-opment; and matching remediationoptions to environmental indicators.Both the GCSAA and VSGA haveeducational and published resourcesthat can meet that demand. TheCTEEM system provides the frame-work these managers need to makeenvironmental stewardship monitoringjust as routine as their current agro-nomic monitoring. It describes envi-ronmental evaluation as a series ofsteps that are easily customized toindividual courses. By adopting anenvironmental evaluation program,superintendents can identify problemareas, be guided toward remediation,and demonstrate progress towardsustainability.

To illustrate how the CTEEM systemis being applied to Colbert Hills GolfCourse, we have included examplesfrom the soil quality, water quality, andavian ecosystems work in progress.

Soil Quality ExampleMovement of air and water into and

throughout the soil body easily qualifies

16 USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

as one indicator of critical soil functionslike plant growth, optimum microbialactivity, and water cycling, to name afew. Soil porosity, or the non-solidvolumetric percentage, is one measureof this redistributive process. Porositycan be calculated from soil bulk density,or volumetric mass, which is an easilymeasured property.

Bulk density, g cm-3 = oven-drymass, g / sample volume, cm3

Porosity, % = [1- (bulk density /particle density*)] x 100

*Particle density for mostmineral soils is assumed

to be a constant 2.65 g cm-3

The USGA12 recommends that sand-based golf green rootzones have aporosity between 35 and 55 percent.Finer-textured fairway soils typicallyhave a narrower porosity range inwhich plant growth is optimized,making a range of 40 to 50 percentporosity our target LCL and VCL forfairway and rough regions. These latterlimits correspond to values of 1.59 g

cm-3 and 1.33 g cm-3, respectively, on thecontrol chart for bulk density (Figure3). Data show that bulk density waswithin the sustainable range prior toconstruction but rose into the degradedrange during construction (note that arise in bulk density causes a fall inporosity). At this stage, this indicatorwould skew the soil quality segment ofthe spider radar graph (Figure 2) andalert the superintendent to apply somemanagement strategy, perhaps selectingcore aeration based on experience, oraccessing an available database orlinked website for additional options.Further monitoring would determinethe effectiveness of the applied man-agement.

Water Quality ExampleSeveral physical and chemical indi-

cators relate surface-water quality tostream life, biological diversity, andsuitability for conversion to human con-sumption. One indicator monitored inthis study was the total nitrogen con-centration. Nitrogen occurs in variousforms in soil, plant residue, and wildlifeexcrement. It is commonly applied toturfgrass to stimulate growth. Federalregulations are in the planning stage toestablish nutrient criteria in streamsthat would minimize the adverse effects

Figure 4. A graph of the nitrogen concentration of water entering and leaving ColbertHills Golf Course. Water entering the property never exceeded the upper control value,but water leaving the property did exceed the VCL six times, which alerted thesuperintendent to evaluate management activities that might cause the problem.

ConclusionsManaging the environmental quality

of an ecosystem requires considerationof a spectrum of environmental indi-cators. An evaluation program using acustomized set of indicators applied tocontrol charts can establish whetherenvironmental processes are operatingwithin an acceptable range. Presentingseveral indicators on normalized spiderradar graphs allows for a simplified,composite visualization of environ-mental quality. Appropriate linking ofthese evaluation charts to remedialmanagement databases can assist golfcourse superintendents and managersof other lands of any scale, towardestablishing and maintaining a sustain-able ecosystem. These studies on anewly constructed golf course areguiding researchers in the developmentof an environmental evaluation toolwith application to a wide range ofecosystems.

References

INational Golf Foundation, http://www.-ngf.org/faq/#1.

2United States Golf Association, http://-www.usga.org/green/index.html.

• Property Outflow

• Property Inflow

UCL

00) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0)0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0)- - - - - - - - - - - - ?5L{) C") "'=t L{) C\J co '" co 0 T""" 0 C;;- T""" T""" T""" C\J ~ C\J C\J C\J C\J C") T""""'=t - - - - - - - -- - ~ L{) L{) co"'=t "'=t "'=t "'=t "'=t "'=t L{) L{)

Sampling Date

:::J-C)

-S 10c::.2~EQ)uc::o()

Za; 5'0~

15

of site. Suitability of the area for birdswill be judged using the meadow larkor field sparrow HSI model in areasthat are primarily grassland, the downywoodpecker or black -capped chicka-dee model for wooded regions, and abrown thrasher or northern bobwhitequail model for shrub-dominated areas.Mammalian habitat assessment willuse the HSI model for the easterncottontail in grasslands, the fox squirrelin wooded areas, and the bobcat inshrub-dominated sites.

Selecting HSI models most appro-priate for the geographical region andvegetative composition of the ecosys-tem being studied will provide the mostmeaningful assessments. A mix of HSImodels can customize assessment toany local interest. For example, if wet-land sites were included, HSI modelsfor the mink or muskrat could be usedfor mammals and the bullfrog or newtmodels for amphibians.

Generally, an HSI value less than 0.8reflects environmental conditions (foodsources, nesting sites, brood habitat,escape cover, etc.) that will not sustainwildlife populations. Therefore, HSIvalues of 0.8 and 1.0 constitute thelower and upper control values for thisstudy.

on humans, livestock, and aquatic life.13

At this point, we have adopted ourlowest detection level (shown as zeroon graphs) as the LCL and set the totalnitrogen VCL at 3 mg/L for this waterquality indicator.13

,14

Between April and June 1999, sur-face water leaving Colbert Hills GolfCourse exceeded the VCL 6 times(Figure 4). The surface water enteringthe Colbert Hills site did not exceed theVCL (Figure 4). An increasing index, orone that exceeds the VCL, alerts thesuperintendent to evaluate manage-ment activities that might be a con-tributory cause. Suggestions linked toexcessive nitrogen levels may includefertilizer rate adjustment, change infertilizer form, timing of application,widening of buffer zones aroundsurface water bodies, etc. Course con-struction was occurring between Apriland June 1999, so much of the time thesoil surface was bare in preparation forsodding. It is likely that the excessivenitrogen observed in the stream was aproduct of high erosion rates associatedwith the unprotected soil surface. IS

Viewed with other indicators on thecomposite spider radar graph (Figure2), total nitrogen in the surface waterfor this date skews the radar images(Le., lies outside of the sustainablerange) and would need remedial man-agement. Spider radar graphs can alsoshow a time sequence of data for asingle indicator (Figure 5). In this case,some total nitrogen levels in streamwater fall outside of the control zoneand produce some skewing of the radarimage over the times indicated. Thiscondition would signal an indicator inneed of remedial management, and thecause may be linked to other datedepisodes.

Avian and Mammal EcosystemsThe quality of wildlife habitat is

being assessed with Habitat SuitabilityIndex (HSI) models.16 Developed by theV.S. Fish and Wildlife Service andapplied to hundreds of species, HSImodels quantify relationships betweenkey environmental variables and habi-tat suitability for a target species. HSImodels assign values ranging from zero(totally unsuitable) to 1.0 (provides allneeds of the species).

To develop the most meaningfulassessment without indexing all speciesin this complex avian and mammalianecosystem, the study site was firststratified into vegetative communities.Then, key Great Plains Region specieswere selected as indicators of each type

MARCH/APRIL 2001 17

Figure 5. A spider radar graph displaying daily average of total nitrogen concentrations in runoff water on episodic days in April, May,and June, 1999, where Little Kitten Creek exits Colbert Hills Golf Course. The upper control limit (larger red circle) is set at 3 mg L-I andthe lower control limit (smaller red circle) is set at 0 mg VI.

3Golf Course Superintendents Associationof America, http://www.gcsaa.org.4Committed to Green Foundation, http://-www.golfecology.com/.5Igolf,http://www.golfcourse.com/envir/.6Audubon International, http://www.-audubonintl.org/home.htm.7Gifford Pinchot [McGeary, M. Nelson,1960, Gifford Pinchot: Forester-Politician;Pinkett, Harold T., 1970, Gifford Pinchot:Private and Public Forester; Fausold,Martin, 1961, Gifford Pinchot: Bull MooseProgressive. ]8Frederick Law Olmstead [Beveridge,Charles, et aI., 1995, Frederick Law Olm-stead: Designing the American Landscape;Rybczynski, Witold, 1999, A Clearing in theDistance - Frederick Law Olmstead andAmerica in the Nineteenth Century.]9Konza Prairie Long-Term Ecological Re-search (LTER) Program at the Konza PrairieBiological Station, Manhattan, Kansas,USA, http://www.konza.ksu.edu.

18 USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD

l%ien, Steve J. 1998. Soil quality andsustainable turfgrass management. GolfCourse Management. Vol. 66, No.3, March1998. Pages 56-60.llLarson, W E., and F. J. Pierce. 1994. Thedynamics of soil quality as a measure ofsustainable management. Pages 37-51. In J.W Doran, n C. Coleman, n F. Bezdicek,and B. S. Stewart (ed.), Defining SoilQuality for a Sustainable Environment.1994. Soil Science Society of America.Special Publ. No. 35. Madison, Wisconsin.12GreenSection Staff, 1993. USGA Recom-mendations for a method of putting greenconstruction. USGA Green Section Record.March/April. Pages 1-3.13Dodds, W K., and E. B. Welch. 2000.Establishing nutrient criteria in streams. J.N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 19:186-196.14Dodds,W K., J. R. Jones, and E. B. Welch.1997. Suggested Classification of StreamTrophic State: Distributions of TemperateStream Types by Chlorophyll, Total

Nitrogen, and Phosphorus. Wat. Res.32:1455-1462.15Vanoni,V A. 1975. Sedimentation Engi-neering. Page 5. Amer. Soc. Civil Eng., NewYork, N.Y16U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1980.Habitat as a basis for environmentalassessments. 101 ESM. U.S. Fish and Wildl.Serv., Div. Ecol. Serv., Washington, nc.

DR. STEVE THIEN, Professor of SoilScience, Department of Agronomy, KansasState University, Manhattan, Kansas. DR.STEVE STARRETT,Assistant Professor ofCivil Engineering, Kansas State University,Manhattan, Kansas. DR. ROBERI' ROBEL,Professor of Biology, Kansas State Univer-sity, Manhattan, Kansas. PATRICK SHEA,Department of the Interior. DAVEGOURLAY; Director of Golf Operations,Colbert Hills Golf Course, Manhattan,Kansas. CAL ROTH, Agronomist, PGATour Golf Course Operations.