24 SportsTurf | August 2014 www.sportsturfonline.com
Field Science | By Natasha Restuccia
W
hile most turf managers would
prefer having a sand-based field,
a University of Missouri survey
found around 80% of sports
fields are native soil based com-
pared to 20% being sand-based. Sand-based fields can
have many benefits but unfortunately the cost of instal-
lation can be prohibitive. Regardless of the soil type, it
is important to know what you are working with and
how it will affect the way the field is managed.
First, let's look at what native soil and sand-based
systems are and what makes them different. A native
system is an unaltered soil that was at the site before
the field was built. It is usually a mixture of silt, clay,
and sand. A sand-based system is typically 80-100%
pure sand. The difference in soil particle sizes can
cause native systems to be more prone to compaction,
while sand-based systems have better resistance to
compaction. Due to having higher nutrient and water
holding capacity, native systems might have inadequate
drainage while sand-based systems, with their higher
infiltration rates, provide adequate drainage.
Florida/Georgia
football game on sand-
based system at Everbank
Field. Image courtesy of
Natasha Restuccia.
Maintenance of
naTive Soil compared
to Sand-baSed FieldS