'Keeping up with the Joneses' not a good reason for switching from turfgrass
4 Sep, 2009 By: Ron Hall Athletic Turf NewsSynthetic turf for sports fields continues to grow in popularity. There doesn't seem to be any reason to believe that its popularity will lessen soon. The majority of athletes (especially school-age athletes) say they like it and athletic directors, park officials and others tasked with scheduling sports events appreciate its ability to provide a stable and safe playing surface regardless of conditions and the number of events played upon it. Add in the “wow” factor of getting a new field, and schools and communities will almost certainly continue to drive installations at a double-digit rate annually into the foreseeable future.
 |
However, even with installs well north of 3,000 this past decade, the total number of synthetic turf fields remains tiny compared to the number of natural grass fields. Synthetic turf manufacturers and marketers (and those that supply products related to its care and maintenance) look at this and lick their chops at the prospect of replacing many of these fields.
Indeed, an announcement that a school or park district is installing a synthetic turf sports facility is cause for celebration within most communities — and envy by other nearby schools or towns.
Such is the case in a town near my own small community when Huron High School installed a synthetic turf field in 2008, the first of its kind in our local 8-school athletic conference. The installation came accompanied by lots of positive press by the local media. And, why not? The field is attractive, the artificial grass a deep green and the colors of the field logs crisp, bright and clean.
The new playing surface is the result of the efforts of an aggressive school booster club and the donations of labor, materials and cash by local businesses, the largest coming from a local waterpark resort, the huge Kalahari Resort. Not surprisingly the field was named Kalahari Field. This will mark the playing surface's second year of use. So far everyone seems to be delighted with its performance.
Whether that installation will spark similar efforts by booster clubs in other local schools to replace their natural turf football fields with synthetic turf is unknown, although it's not likely because of the depressed condition of the local economy. Northwest Ohio is one of the regions within the United States suffering most from the loss of manufacturing jobs.
Also, given our region's primarily rural nature and static population growth, schools and communities here seem to have a sufficient number of safe turfgrass fields for student and local sport. Most are adequately maintained and attractive. Indeed, why raise $500.000 or more (via taxes, donations, fund raisers or otherwise) to replace a turfgrass playing surface with synthetic the reason being mostly “to keep with the Joneses”?
Although marketers of synthetic turf point to substantial savings in maintenance costs — primarily in terms of mowing, fertilization and watering — compared to natural turfgrass fields, these figures are obviously part of the sales process. Synthetic turf fields require substantial maintenance, as well, including the use of specialized equipment.
And when it comes time to replace a worn-out synthetic surface, the cost of replacement may very well absorb any savings that might have been gained by eliminating the turfgrass field. All synthetic turf fields will have to be replaced sooner or later, depending upon the level of maintenance and wear/tear they get.
Yes, there's a definite “wow” factor within a community accompanying the installation of a new synthetic turf field at a local school. That's not to say that the program in Huron didn't need synthetic on their football field; I don't know their situation.
But the "wow" factor shouldn't be the primary reason a school switches from a serviceable and safe turfgrass field to synthetic. This warm and fuzzy feeling will wear off as quickly as the new car smell leaves the vehicle you drove off the showroom floor. There have to be more compelling reasons (and, yes, often there are) for making the switch, and they have to go beyond the debatable long-term financial savings that sythentic turf is often touted as offering.
“Last minute field replacement surprises district,” by Elizabeth Celms, Mercer Island Reporter, Aug. 18
Please send any technical comments or questions to our webmaster.