Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: JC Jones on May 14, 2015, 09:16:40 AM
-
Everyone I know that has played NGLA both a) loves it and b) talks about the turf.
I've either heard or read on this site that the turf at NGLA is great and that the soils there are/were perfect for golf. So, I was confused while reading the current NGLA routing thread when I read that he thought the land was not good and had to bring in 10,000 truckloads of dirt.
Although my first question was, how did he get all that dirt out there with no roads leading to the site (which leads me to believe Mucci is on to something about the road that leads out to the site being passable by auto).
My second question was, why did he have to bring so much dirt out there to essentially cap the site if the site was supposedly the best land/soil (later, turf) for the playing of golf?
-
I'm speculating, but maybe there were multiple soil profiles and one needed supplementation. Or maybe the soil was too sandy/pebbley and needed organic mixed in.
-
Probably for elevation and flood prevention?...the course is surrounded by water (ocean, ponds, etc.)...
Also, 10,000 "truckloads" may seem like a lot of dirt, but I suspect it's not as much as you might think at first.
-
Some of those truckloads went to filling low areas which held as much as 4 feet of water.
Jim Kennedy calculated that 10,000 of those trucks could have capped the entire 200 acres with 2 inches of soil. Based on that math, those same 10,000 truckloads would fill 8.33 acres at 4 feet depth...so that means nobody on this site has any idea where the soil went or what the primary need was...
-
Everyone I know that has played NGLA both a) loves it and b) talks about the turf.
I've either heard or read on this site that the turf at NGLA is great and that the soils there are/were perfect for golf. So, I was confused while reading the current NGLA routing thread when I read that he thought the land was not good and had to bring in 10,000 truckloads of dirt.
Although my first question was, how did he get all that dirt out there with no roads leading to the site (which leads me to believe Mucci is on to something about the road that leads out to the site being passable by auto).
(http://assets.blog.hemmings.com/wp-content/uploads//2014/05/MackAB_2500.jpg)
My second question was, why did he have to bring so much dirt out there to essentially cap the site if the site was supposedly the best land/soil (later, turf) for the playing of golf?
JC,
I think you have to read "Scotland's Gift" where CBM and HJW first examined the site.
He claimed it was rife with swamps and bogs, hardly the ideal turf for golf.
The site has it's highs and it's lows and I suspect that the 10,000 truckloads was for some of the low areas.
The 1928 schematic reveals where some of those low and/or bog/swamp areas might have been
I suspect that the 10,000 truckloads of soil was for the remediation of those areas, making them suitable for golf
-
Some of those truckloads went to filling low areas which held as much as 4 feet of water.
Jim Kennedy calculated that 10,000 of those trucks could have capped the entire 200 acres with 2 inches of soil. Based on that math, those same 10,000 truckloads would fill 8.33 acres at 4 feet depth...so that means nobody on this site has any idea where the soil went or what the primary need was...
Does anyone know how much those trucks actually carried. For example, if it was 500 lbs - which seems close - it could be as few as 50 of todays trucks? That doesn't seem like much.
-
JC,
Vis-a-vis your question about how the trucks got out to and around the site, they probably just drove up one of the dirt tracks in the area and then overland on the property (after it had been cleared). That's how construction is still done today on sites remote from roads. The dirt tracks and the site were probably impassible to even the small trucks of the time when there were rain events or during much of the winter.
I wonder how they got the truckloads into the swamps if they used the dirt to fill them. The bulldozer wasn't invented yet.
Somebody used a lot of dirt to fill the point next to the 18th tee. It doesn't appear to have been there before the course was built.
-
Who said anything about Trucks?
Not Macdonald.
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7668/17020702914_62f1c6a8c7_b.jpg)
-
There is an article written by J. Sutherland for the London Daily News and published in the Boston Evening Transcript, Tuesday, April 12, 1910, p. 18 where he claims there were 5000 navvies (laborers) that helped construct the course along with a supposed "narrow gauge railway, two miles long, with branches on the herring bone principle, was to run through the centre of the course during construction."
Here's a link to the entertaining article, don't know how much is accurate, but entertaining nonetheless.
https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=bKY-AAAAIBAJ&sjid=n1kMAAAAIBAJ&pg=715%2C5876653 (https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=bKY-AAAAIBAJ&sjid=n1kMAAAAIBAJ&pg=715%2C5876653)
-
How do we know these weren't horse drawn cartloads? Anyone?
-
Josh, that is a great article, and much of the information is accurate. Not sure what to think, though, of Sutherland's offhand reference to the report of the narrow guage RR, but Sutherland doesn't seem to take too seriously.
_______________________________________________________________
Jim, JC, and Others,
The ten thousand "loads" (that is a good catch by Mike to notice that CBM didn't say truckloads) were topsoil. So it wasn't used for fill or building elevation. It was used for growing grass.
________________________________________________________________
J.C.
As for the nature of the soil, I believe that the issue was that the soil was mostly pure sand, and lacked the organics necessary to grow turf. Once CBM added the organics (the 10,000 loads of topsoil, I suppose) then the soil was apparently well suited for excellent turf.
-
David and Mike,
Is it possible the 10,000 loads were like mining rail cars on narrow gauge track that could be moved around by hand pump rail cars? I know I'm not helping to solve the problem at this point, but seems plausible.
Josh
-
I'm not sure where Macdonald ever mentioned trucks but here's a 1907 versions used for hauling.
http://www.google.com/search?q=1907+truck&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&fir=FxldPYbY5m4rkM%253A%252CdNq9W6Cj_XmVWM%252C_%253BWkjOFQM-zHBaEM%253A%252CrieGeKBgbhXnKM%252C_%253BP6WGPrsduiO5pM%253A%252CAHyStjYILjWL9M%252C_%253B_WDvvOTqty9AGM%253A%252CAHyStjYILjWL9M%252C_&usg=__i0ot0GjcNpuGcwJEjrsoWQCrU_M%3D&sa=X&ei=U9JUVar0FeuIsQSh4YHgBA&ved=0CCgQ7Ak
-
Josh,
I guess anything is possible, but I'd need to see more documentation before I bought into the idea that CBM had built a spur RR up the middle of the property. Interesting reference though.
Wouldn't building a temporary spur RR take a lot more effort than just building a road without the rails?
___________________________________________________________________
Not sure what we are supposed to learn from those images, as they show trucks from different eras, including a UPS truck.
Here is a link to a Jan. 1 1909 trade magazine with photos of various commercial trucks for sale at that time.
https://books.google.com/books?id=xq0yAQAAMAAJ&pg=RA2-PA168&dq=dumptruck&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VtJUVc78G4K9ggSbrIKoCw&ved=0CEcQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=dump%20truck&f=false
-
Pretty pricey for a dump truck at 6 Grand...what did Macdonald pay for the 200 acres again? And he didnt have money to build a clubhouse. And there were 10,000 loads...how many trucks do we think that took?
-
Pretty pricey for a dump truck at 6 Grand...what did Macdonald pay for the 200 acres again? And he didnt have money to build a clubhouse. And there were 10,000 loads...how many trucks do we think that took?
The better question is what do you think it cost him to hire the number of trucks they needed for the project? I doubt they went out and bought a new fleet of them just to build one golf course.
-
It also was a complication that motorized dump trucks weren't invented by 1907. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dump_truck
-
The better question is what do you think it cost him to hire the number of trucks they needed for the project? I doubt they went out and bought a new fleet of them just to build one golf course.
But Sven, he said 10,000 loads, so he must have bought 10,000 trucks!
-
It also was a complication that motorized dump trucks weren't invented by 1907. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dump_truck
You're reaching, Mike.
There were trucks that could haul topsoil in existence, whether they had a dump mechanism or not.
-
Of course and they had horse-drawn wagons too which was a far more likely scenario. To paraphrase that coach, "Trucks!? Who said anything about trucks??"
-
A yard of topsoil weighs about 1 ton - a few hundred lbs. less if it's dry, and vice versa.
-
Who cares if it was horse drawn or not? Horse drawn wagons full of topsoil still needed a road. Or a road bed if it was a RR.
-
I'm not sure where Macdonald ever mentioned trucks but here's a 1907 versions used for hauling.
http://www.google.com/search?q=1907+truck&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&fir=FxldPYbY5m4rkM%253A%252CdNq9W6Cj_XmVWM%252C_%253BWkjOFQM-zHBaEM%253A%252CrieGeKBgbhXnKM%252C_%253BP6WGPrsduiO5pM%253A%252CAHyStjYILjWL9M%252C_%253B_WDvvOTqty9AGM%253A%252CAHyStjYILjWL9M%252C_&usg=__i0ot0GjcNpuGcwJEjrsoWQCrU_M%3D&sa=X&ei=U9JUVar0FeuIsQSh4YHgBA&ved=0CCgQ7Ak
Mike could you parse through all those images and identify one or more that were from 1907. The few I looked at were from the teens. I'm thinking horse drawn wagons were just as likely.
David,
Yes, they'd need a road/roads but wouldn't they have been just dirt paths. No need to built an improved road. Any idea on how real roads were built in those time - dozers came later than that didn't they?
-
Most likely all the material was delivered at one time, or in stages, and dropped in one or more areas to be spread where needed later.
-
I get the feeling sometimes that some of you would argue about a stump. In fact, you might argue WITH a stump.
-
David,
Horse drawn carriages and carts crossed and populated our nation but that didn't mean you could drive a automobile across those routes the pioneers travelled.
-
I get the feeling sometimes that some of you would argue about a stump. In fact, you might argue WITH a stump.
You can win an argument with a stump.
-
And some just love to sit here and deliver stump speeches fairly oblivious to all evidence to the contrary. ;)
-
Just leaves me stumped, I guess.
-
I can't believe you guys are forgetting the example from "The Great Escape". Those irrepressible POWs moved tons of dirt dug out from secret tunnels and disposed of it all in little tablespoon-sized portions dropped over and over again from inside their pants, right in front of the unsuspecting Germans! Perhaps you should all go back and read Scotland's Gift a little more carefully, because right in there CBM describes utiliizing the exact same process, except without the Australians...
Peter
-
David,
Yes, they'd need a road/roads but wouldn't they have been just dirt paths. No need to built an improved road. Any idea on how real roads were built in those time - dozers came later than that didn't they?
Bryan, Where I come from there oftentimes wasn't much difference between a dirt path and a road, but weather and soil permitting the dirt paths were still suprisingly functional. I imagine it was the same out there. The road(s) had to have been improved enough to handle 10,000 loads of topsoil (whether by wagon, truck, or railcar) plus any other equipment needed fill and drain, shape, seed, transport workers and supplies, etc.
___________________________________________________________________
David,
Horse drawn carriages and carts crossed and populated our nation but that didn't mean you could drive a automobile across those routes the pioneers travelled.
Mike do you actually consciously consider what you type, or does this nonsense just flow through your fingers spontaneously?
-
I can't believe you guys are forgetting the example from "The Great Escape". Those irrepressible POWs moved tons of dirt dug out from secret tunnels and disposed of it all in little tablespoon-sized portions dropped over and over again from inside their pants, right in front of the unsuspecting Germans! Perhaps you should all go back and read Scotland's Gift a little more carefully, because right in there CBM describes utiliizing the exact same process, except without the Australians...
Peter
The amazing part is that Warden Norton apparently hadn't seen that movie because if he had he wouldn't have been outsmarted by Andy Dufresne.
-
JL - you're right, and I'd never thought of that. But also, maybe Andy didn't see the movie either. He seemed so troubled and uptight through the whole thing that I kept wishing he'd just pick up a baseball and sit down with his back against the wall and be cool....
Peter
-
Could it be possible the topsoil that was imported was specifically for better turf growing conditions? Remember, back then irrigation was difficult at best. Now we herald sandy sites as ideal, but with the caveat that we have limitless amounts of irrigation water that can be distributed at will. That likely wasn't the case back then.
-
Joe,
You keep making critical thinking points. Why all the deviating from the 3 by 5 card of approved GCA talking points??? ;D ;D
-
CBM discussed the importance of the right soil as early as March 1906, before the site had been decided on.
Golf Magazine - March 1906
(http://i1211.photobucket.com/albums/cc435/snilsen7/NGLA%20-%20Golf%20Magazine%20March%201906%201_zpssx52fndg.png)
(http://i1211.photobucket.com/albums/cc435/snilsen7/NGLA%20-%20Golf%20Magazine%20March%201906%202_zpshcogf29w.png)
-
From the horse's mouth, the state of the turf in early 1908 (also some interesting commentary on the playability of the course at that point) -
New York Daily Tribune - Feb. 3, 1908
(http://i1211.photobucket.com/albums/cc435/snilsen7/NGLA%20-%20New%20York%20Daily%20Tribune%20Feb.%203%201908_zps4m5h6qbp.png)
-
Could it be possible the topsoil that was imported was specifically for better turf growing conditions? Remember, back then irrigation was difficult at best. Now we herald sandy sites as ideal, but with the caveat that we have limitless amounts of irrigation water that can be distributed at will. That likely wasn't the case back then.
Joe, That is precisely what the topsoil and manure were for. CBM had said the land was impoverished in places and had to be top dressed, and the 10,000 loads were "good soil, including manure."
__________________________________________________________
Joe,
You keep making critical thinking points. Why all the deviating from the 3 by 5 card of approved GCA talking points???
Ben Cowan, Maybe if you had actually read the posts before getting snarky you'd realize that I already addressed Joe's point in post 10.
______________________________________________________________________
Sven,
Thanks for posting that article, and the one on the other thread. The other one mentions irrigation as if it had just been added. I wonder if the delay with the grow in over the next year was because of lack of moisture?
-
How long did it take to deliver the 10,000 loads of soil? If a year, and they worked 300 days, that averages around 30 loads per day. Does that sound reasonable, given the state of the roads and trucks (if they used trucks)?
Also, I wonder where the soil came from, whether it was close by or not.
-
I doubt a load of dirt at tthat time was more than 5 cubic yards at best. So let's say he brought in 50,000 cubic yards. If the land was 150 acres he would have approx 6,750,000 sq ft to cap. My calculation says he could have placed 2.5 inches of soil on the land. I would bet some soil was brought in in smaller loads and used in a greens mixture etc....JMO
-
Sven,
Thanks for posting that article, and the one on the other thread. The other one mentions irrigation as if it had just been added. I wonder if the delay with the grow in over the next year was because of lack of moisture?
David:
There were reports of a drought that hampered the process, among other factors.
Sven
Brooklyn Daily Eagle - Aug. 15, 1909
(http://i1211.photobucket.com/albums/cc435/snilsen7/NGLA%20-%20Brooklyn%20Daily%20Eagle%20Aug.%209%201909_zpsz5mks9co.png)
-
Copied from the other thread for those who are only following this discussion;
As regards the extended grow-in period, and what at least some of the imported soil was used for, I decided to go to the CBM "Bible", none of than Uncle George Bahto and Gib Papazian's "The Evangelist of Golf".
From pages 66-67, entitled "Disaster on the Greens" 1907-1908", I've posted relevant paragraphs below;
When Charles Macdonald began building the course in 1907, little was known about proper seed mixtures on putting greens - in particular about growing fine grass on the sandy soil such as at Southampton....
...Seed merchants at that time went by the principle that if many types of grass seed were incorporated into the blend, something was sure to grow. Consequently, the putting mixtures of the day were a blend of "every sort of seed, from fine fescue to rank meadow grass." Naturally, the coarsest grasses germinated first, eventually turning the planted areas into ugly, unmanageable clumps.
Macdonald, trusting the knowledge of the seed merchant, used this mixture for the first seeding - with disastrous results. Robert White, the eminent golf course architect and close friend of Macdonald wrote in 1914:
"At the end of the year's time the greens resembled cabbage patches. What grasses they contained grew in thick tufts with bare spaces between. Most of the National's greens had to be made all over again. Those that were not ploughed up had bad grass in them for several years afterward.
As a result of this debacle, according to White, the opening of the National was thrown back 18 months. Macdonald was flabbergasted. During the ensuing months, he initiated a thorough study and established an extensive turf nursery....
...He discovered there was far less loam in the sandy soil of Long Island than there was in similarly situated areas in Scotland and England....
...He reached two conclusions...
...First the soil had to be properly prepared. In order to preserve moisture in the turf, he had blocks of "meadow sod" turned into the ground. Limestone, with a quantity of sandy loam, was added to sweeten the soil....
...Because not all greens needed to be plowed under, there were originally several varieties of grass on some of the greens....
...After a year of battling the porous soil of Long Island, it was evident that a complete watering system would be needed. Out of this necessity, Macdonald designed and installed America's first golf course irrigation system; one capable of delivering 300 gallons per minute to the putting greens and approach areas. The gravity fed water was delivered from a tower between the 2nd and 16th greens - now the site of the landmark windmill.
In January of 1910, this snippet from a Harper's Weekly article talks more about the irrigation system and how the greens were finally prepared;
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8767/17493620628_86bfd41ecb_b.jpg)
-
How long did it take to deliver the 10,000 loads of soil? If a year, and they worked 300 days, that averages around 30 loads per day. Does that sound reasonable, given the state of the roads and trucks (if they used trucks)?
Also, I wonder where the soil came from, whether it was close by or not.
I don't know where it came from, but my guess would be that it came in bulk by train. There were two stations very close to the course, so the round trip for trucks or wagon (or a short spur, as one article suggested) would have been only a few miles.
-
???
A modern tandem dump holds approximately 22-23 tons of dirt . Have to think the trucks of that era wouldn't have carried more than 10 tons per load. This would be a paltry 100,000 tons , hardly enough to change the profile dramatically .
Maybe I'm missing something here , it wouldn't the the first time !
-
Your estimate on truck capacity might be on the high side. Manhattan's (Mack) largest dump truck was a 5-ton.
The loads were topsoil and manure, for growing grass in places where grass would not grow.
-
8) 8)
Figured I'd go high , seems that six tons may have been norm in 1905. The premise stated that it wasn't enough to change the nature of the sites soils seems logical. You would have to bring in a lot more fill and then integrate it somehow to accomplish a real change.
-
CBM wrote about them using 140 tons of compost per acre for the fairways (at a depth of 1 inch). Add in what they were using for the greens, and whatever other materials were needed and it seems about right.
-
Based upon the weight of a ton of soil, those "loads" whether delivered by horse drawn wagons or trucks would have to use a very stable, solid surface and not just a dirt path as Bryan suggests.
Those vehicles made 20,000 trips to and from NGLA, with 10,000 of those trips being with heavily weighted vehicles.
DMoriarty,
I would seriously doubt if the soil was brought in by train.
That would be expensive.
My guess is that it was brought in "locally"
I would also doubt that significant quantities of soil were required for the higher holes.
My theory on the 8th green is that the excavation of the left side of the 9th fairway area and perhaps to the right of # 8 green produced the necessary soil