This article explains the increasing legal risks Georgia golf courses face from pesticide and herbicide use due to recent state laws like SB 144 and GA Code § 2-7-170. It highlights the health concerns linked to chemical exposure, including Parkinson’s disease, and offers four practical steps golf course operators can take to reduce liability and protect their operations.
Key Takeaways:
Georgia’s picturesque golf courses depend on pristine turf—but lurking beneath that green perfection is a growing liability risk tied to pesticide and herbicide use. Recent shifts in state law, rising health concerns, and landmark litigation have changed the rules for golf course owners and superintendents.
In this article, you’ll discover the legal liabilities tied to chemical use on Georgia golf courses—and what you can do to protect your operations. We’ll break down:
Georgia law provides conditional protection under GA Code § 2-7-170—but only if golf courses strictly follow all labeling, regulatory, and best practice requirements. Even then, it doesn’t shield you from:
Bottom line: You’re not protected unless your records and practices are airtight.
Starting January 1, 2026, SB 144 limits pesticide manufacturer liability in Georgia. If their label complies with EPA standards under FIFRA, they can’t be sued for failure to warn about risks. That liability now flows downstream—to you.
| Law | Protection | Golf Course Risk |
|---|---|---|
| GA Code § 2-7-170 | Conditional immunity from strict liability | Requires full compliance; does not prevent injury or property damage lawsuits |
| SB 144 | Manufacturers shielded if EPA-compliant | Golf courses must bear burden of exposure prevention and employee/public warnings |
A 2025 study from the Parkinson’s Foundation revealed a 126% higher risk of Parkinson’s disease for those living within a mile of golf courses—largely due to chemical runoff. Compounds like paraquat, rotenone, glyphosate, 2,4-D, and dicamba have been flagged as neurological and cancer risks .
Golf course managers must protect not just workers—but also golfers and nearby residents from these exposures.
The 2018 Johnson v. Monsanto case, where a groundskeeper was awarded $289 million for exposure to Roundup, proved manufacturers aren’t untouchable. But under Georgia’s SB 144, plaintiffs may now focus lawsuits on applicators, especially if:
To qualify for legal protection, you need bulletproof records. Key actions include:
Implementing BMPs from the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America (GCSAA) reduces chemical use and legal exposure:
Your employees are your frontline—and your legal risk. You must:
Standard liability insurance won’t cover pollution events. You need:
| Policy Type | Covers |
|---|---|
| Premises Pollution Liability | Onsite chemical spills, runoff, or contamination |
| Contractors Pollution | Third-party pesticide application issues |
| Products Pollution | Risks from products you blend or sell |
| Transportation Pollution | Chemical spills during delivery or waste transport |
After years of traditional turf care practices, many course operators are unaware that the legal landscape has changed under their feet. Today, exposure claims, Parkinson’s research, and limited manufacturer liability have redefined the risk.
Now that you’ve seen the risks—and the clear steps to mitigate them—here’s what to do next:
At the end of the day, every Georgia golf course faces the same challenge: how to keep your turf pristine without putting your business—or your people—at risk. Now that you’ve seen exactly what the liability landscape looks like, it’s time to take action before someone else does.
Want to ensure your golf course is protected from pesticide-related legal exposure? Your next step is to review your insurance coverage and compliance program—or consult a legal expert to audit your operations.