Conservation and complete environmental records offer different kinds of information. These ten courses featured by LINKS Magazine help us explore how published records can support informed conversations among neighbors, grounds teams and club families.
Conservation initiatives and supporting records
Each course now has a dated comparison with official club material and municipal, county, state, regional or appropriate tribal records. We distinguish what those sources actually publish from proposed practices, permit requirements and information we could not verify. Search-index excerpts and blocked documents are clearly marked.
The article-only evidence score remains 0 / 100; the course information status is YELLOW, Not yet assessed from this article alone. A separate located-record evidence rating credits qualifying documents found in the wider cross-check. Neither is a comprehensive course audit, a toxicity rating or proof of safety. These reviews do not automatically change the Club Database ratings.
Zero means no qualifying documentation supplied in this article. It does not mean no testing exists, no records are published elsewhere, a course refused disclosure, or anyone has been harmed. Conservation awards, organic-maintenance claims and resource savings do not substitute for a pesticide inventory. No toxicity or safety rating is assigned.
Full pesticide inventory: 30 points. Independent water testing: 25. Air / drift monitoring: 20. Documented responses to information requests: 15. Public Form 990 disclosure: 10.
Information GREEN requires complete public application records and monitoring results. Information YELLOW means partial, on-request or fragmented records. Information RED means no public information, labeled “No information.” Unassessed records remain YELLOW, “Not yet assessed.” These information colors do not convert the disclosure-points total into a site score. Points credit documented publications in the reviewed record. Conservation awards and easements do not substitute for chemical disclosure. These are editorial disclosure ratings, not exposure measurements.
The article-only point breakdown
Full pesticide inventory
0 / 30
Independent water testing
0 / 25
Air / drift monitoring
0 / 20
Responds to information requests
0 / 15
Form 990 disclosure
0 / 10
The article’s descriptions of testing and water improvements are reported claims, not linked independent laboratory results. No Form 990 filings or qualifying responses to information requests are supplied. No points are awarded without supporting records.
1. Edgartown, Massachusetts
Vineyard Golf Club
Article-only evidence rating
0 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
Wider source comparison below
What the article celebrates
The article describes an organic-maintenance requirement, biological treatments and composted fertilizers instead of traditional pesticides.
Records that would add understanding
A meaningful operational claim, but the article supplies neither the permit conditions nor a current inventory of every product applied. Organic maintenance is not itself a complete chemical disclosure.
For families, in plain words
What the sources document
A public tax filing shows the club’s finances. Search previews of the club’s website mention organic pesticides, which still count as pesticides; the full pages could not be opened.
What we still do not know
We could not verify a current list of everything applied or independent water and air test results. A partly accessible 2007 draft cannot tell us what happens today.
These ratings describe the evidence we could check, not whether a place is safe or unsafe. Missing information does not mean someone has been harmed.
Club website and public-record cross-check
Located-record evidence rating
10 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
The club’s indexed sustainability text describes organic pesticides, not a pesticide-free operation. A historical regional-government draft raises questions about the definition of organic and unidentified inert ingredients. That is a reason to seek current records, not a finding about present compliance.
Reviewed October 18, 2026. Public-record jurisdiction: Edgartown and the Martha’s Vineyard Commission, Massachusetts.
Undated; search-index text reviewed, direct access blocked · Source content unavailable
Indexed official text describes bio-stimulants, composted fertilizers and organic pesticide on greens. No complete current application inventory or independent monitoring package was verified.
December 12, 2007; historical draft, indexed excerpts only · Source content unavailable
Indexed excerpts describe uncertainty about inert ingredients and a committee allowance for non-organic fertilizer on greens. The full attachment could not be retrieved. A draft from 2007 is not a current enforcement determination or evidence of 2026 practices.
The official indexed catalog identifies the original decision. The decision attachment was not read; approval conditions alone would not establish current compliance.
Fiscal year ending December 2024; filing index reviewed
Public financial filings identify Vineyard Golf Club’s nonprofit entity. Hosted by ProPublica, not the club. Financial availability qualifies for 10 points, not chemical or exposure verification.
Full pesticide inventory
0 / 30
Independent water testing
0 / 25
Air / drift monitoring
0 / 20
Responds to information requests
0 / 15
Form 990 disclosure
10 / 10
Club and MVC content was available only through indexed excerpts; direct retrieval was blocked or failed certificate validation. No current committee approvals, application logs or independent monitoring results were verified. No records requests were submitted. The historical draft must not be treated as a complete inventory or current finding.
This score covers qualifying documents located in this cross-check, not a complete course audit. Zero points means no qualifying record was located for that criterion, not proof of refusal, contamination or unsafe conditions. Permit requirements and promised monitoring are not published results.
2. University Place, Washington
Chambers Bay
Article-only evidence rating
0 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
Wider source comparison below
What the article celebrates
Audubon recognition, reclaimed mine land, biosolid fertilizer and approximately 20% lower water use.
Records that would add understanding
Habitat restoration and water savings do not disclose pesticide use. The article provides no baseline water-use records, complete application inventory or contaminant testing for the biosolid fertilizer.
For families, in plain words
What the sources document
The course website describes turning former mine land into a golf course. A staff job description includes applying chemicals, but does not name the products.
What we still do not know
We did not locate a complete chemical-use list or independent water and air test results. Reusing land is a conservation feature, not proof about chemical exposure.
These ratings describe the evidence we could check, not whether a place is safe or unsafe. Missing information does not mean someone has been harmed.
Club website and public-record cross-check
Located-record evidence rating
0 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
The operator confirms reclaimed mine land and environmental stewardship. Its published greenkeeper job description includes chemical-application duties. County procurement and recognition documents support ownership and conservation claims, but not a published pesticide inventory or analytical test results.
Reviewed October 18, 2026. Public-record jurisdiction: Pierce County, Washington.
Upload path: April 2025; document issue date not specified
The operator’s PDF lists fertilizer and chemical application among job duties. It does not establish specific products, application dates, amounts or exposure outcomes.
July 18, 2016; indexed text, full document blocked · Source content unavailable
Identifies Chambers Bay as a county municipal facility. Procurement is not an environmental monitoring report or a response to a pesticide-records request.
Undated; indexed county description reviewed · Source content unavailable
Places the golf course within the regional park. General park information adds ownership context, not pesticide-use or water-chemistry evidence.
Full pesticide inventory
0 / 30
Independent water testing
0 / 25
Air / drift monitoring
0 / 20
Responds to information requests
0 / 15
Form 990 disclosure
0 / 10
County full-text access was blocked. No complete application inventory, independent laboratory water results or air/drift results were located in the reviewed material. A standalone course Form 990 is not applicable to a county facility on the evidence reviewed; the fixed rubric still uses a 100-point denominator. County budgets and operating contracts are the appropriate financial records to seek. No requests were submitted.
This score covers qualifying documents located in this cross-check, not a complete course audit. Zero points means no qualifying record was located for that criterion, not proof of refusal, contamination or unsafe conditions. Permit requirements and promised monitoring are not published results.
3. Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
Saucon Valley Country Club
Article-only evidence rating
0 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
Wider source comparison below
What the article celebrates
Environmental awards, a sanctuary committee, creek restoration, cleaner outgoing water and GPS-guided fertilizer reductions.
Records that would add understanding
The cleaner-water claim needs paired measurements, testing panels and detection limits. Fertilizer savings and awards do not establish pesticide disclosure. No laboratory reports are linked in the article.
For families, in plain words
What the sources document
The club describes protecting wildlife. A government permit lists water-use amounts and rules, and a public tax filing shows finances.
What we still do not know
The permit is not a water test. We did not obtain laboratory reports comparing water entering and leaving the course, so the cleaner-water claim remains unverified.
These ratings describe the evidence we could check, not whether a place is safe or unsafe. Missing information does not mean someone has been harmed.
Club website and public-record cross-check
Located-record evidence rating
10 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
The club publishes certification and habitat-stewardship claims. The public water-withdrawal docket adds specific irrigation demand, allocations and reporting conditions. It does not substantiate the article’s cleaner-outgoing-water claim with paired pesticide laboratory results.
Reviewed October 18, 2026. Public-record jurisdiction: Upper Saucon Township, Lower Saucon Township, Pennsylvania DEP and Delaware River Basin Commission.
Describes Audubon sanctuary status, a sanctuary committee, bird counts and habitat activities. No complete pesticide inventory or independent analytical water package was linked in the retrieved page.
Approved September 7, 2023; expires September 7, 2033
The government PDF reports about 521 irrigated acres, average daily demand of 0.335 million gallons and estimated 90% consumptive use. It imposes metering, withdrawal reporting and low-flow conditions. These are authorization terms and reported demand, not pesticide testing results or proof of compliance.
Fiscal year ending December 2024; filing index reviewed
Public nonprofit filings qualify for financial-disclosure points. This is an external IRS-origin filing index, not a club-hosted environmental disclosure.
Full pesticide inventory
0 / 30
Independent water testing
0 / 25
Air / drift monitoring
0 / 20
Responds to information requests
0 / 15
Form 990 disclosure
10 / 10
The DRBC docket was read, but actual withdrawal submissions and independent course-water laboratory reports were not obtained. Pennsylvania DEP’s search interface could not be retrieved; no facility-specific DEP result was verified. Municipal land-use search results were unrelated to chemical monitoring. No records requests were submitted.
This score covers qualifying documents located in this cross-check, not a complete course audit. Zero points means no qualifying record was located for that criterion, not proof of refusal, contamination or unsafe conditions. Permit requirements and promised monitoring are not published results.
4. Naples, Florida
Collier’s Reserve Country Club
Article-only evidence rating
0 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
Wider source comparison below
What the article celebrates
Audubon designation, native planting, paspalum turf and effluent-water irrigation.
Records that would add understanding
These practices may conserve resources, but the article provides no chemical inventory or monitoring results. Reclaimed-water irrigation alone does not establish the quality of that water or absence of contaminants.
For families, in plain words
What the sources document
A government report measures chloride, a part of salt, in two wells named for the course. Search previews of the club’s pages describe wildlife and conservation awards.
What we still do not know
Those salt measurements do not test for pesticides or show why levels changed. We could not verify a complete chemical-use list or independent pesticide test reports.
These ratings describe the evidence we could check, not whether a place is safe or unsafe. Missing information does not mean someone has been harmed.
Club website and public-record cross-check
Located-record evidence rating
0 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
The club’s indexed pages describe sanctuary certification and biodiversity. Government data adds real, course-named chloride measurements, but those measurements address groundwater salinity, not pesticide residues or proof of golf-course causation.
Reviewed October 18, 2026. Public-record jurisdiction: Collier County, South Florida Water Management District and Florida DEP.
Undated; indexed text only, direct access blocked · Source content unavailable
Claims Signature Sanctuary certification in 1994 and Gold certification in 2017. Certification and habitat management do not supply a pesticide inventory or laboratory results.
Names Colliers Reserve wells A and B. Chloride values for 2019/2024 are 57/242 mg/L and 92/299 mg/L respectively. This is limited salinity data, not pesticide testing, a complete independent laboratory package or evidence that the course caused the changes.
Full pesticide inventory
0 / 30
Independent water testing
0 / 25
Air / drift monitoring
0 / 20
Responds to information requests
0 / 15
Form 990 disclosure
0 / 10
Club pages were blocked; available wording came from search-index text. Florida DEP’s portal timed out, so no facility-specific compliance file was recovered. No qualifying inventory, pesticide laboratory package or air/drift results were verified. Form 990 applicability was not established. No records requests were submitted.
This score covers qualifying documents located in this cross-check, not a complete course audit. Zero points means no qualifying record was located for that criterion, not proof of refusal, contamination or unsafe conditions. Permit requirements and promised monitoring are not published results.
5. Rye, New York
Westchester Country Club
Article-only evidence rating
0 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
Wider source comparison below
What the article celebrates
Geothermal heating and cooling, rainwater storage, naturalized areas and fish reportedly replacing copper-based pond treatments.
Records that would add understanding
Energy savings are separate from pesticide exposure. The copper-replacement claim needs dated treatment records and current product inventories. The article does not establish whether copper use ended everywhere or whether other treatments continued.
For families, in plain words
What the sources document
The club website identifies separate golf and beach locations. A public tax filing shows finances; the government planning document we found concerns the beach site.
What we still do not know
A beach document cannot explain chemical use on the golf grounds. We did not verify a complete chemical-use list or independent water and air test results for the course.
These ratings describe the evidence we could check, not whether a place is safe or unsafe. Missing information does not mean someone has been harmed.
Club website and public-record cross-check
Located-record evidence rating
10 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
Official pages establish the club’s facilities, not the article’s geothermal, copper-replacement or pesticide claims. The municipal planning record found concerns the separate Beach Annex and cannot validate conditions on the inland golf grounds. An applicable public tax filing supports financial points only.
Reviewed October 18, 2026. Public-record jurisdiction: Harrison, City of Rye and New York DEC; inland golf grounds and Beach Club are distinct sites.
Identifies the Biltmore Avenue golf grounds and a Beach Club about three miles away. No complete pesticide inventory or measured water/drift outcomes were verified on this page.
Original program adopted June 19, 1991; historical municipal planning record
Identifies the Westchester Country Club Beach Annex and waterfront land-use context. It does not cover the inland course’s pesticide use or establish current environmental performance.
Fiscal year ending December 2023; full filing accessible
Applicable public financial return, hosted by ProPublica rather than the club. It qualifies for 10 financial-disclosure points, not environmental verification.
Full pesticide inventory
0 / 30
Independent water testing
0 / 25
Air / drift monitoring
0 / 20
Responds to information requests
0 / 15
Form 990 disclosure
10 / 10
Targeted Harrison and New York DEC searches did not yield an attributable course environmental measurement file. That is not proof no file exists. No complete inventory, independent water package or air/drift results were verified. No requests were submitted. The Beach Annex record must not be used as a proxy for the golf grounds.
This score covers qualifying documents located in this cross-check, not a complete course audit. Zero points means no qualifying record was located for that criterion, not proof of refusal, contamination or unsafe conditions. Permit requirements and promised monitoring are not published results.
6. Oregon City, Oregon
Stone Creek Golf Club
Article-only evidence rating
0 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
Wider source comparison below
What the article celebrates
Wildlife corridors, integrated pest management, buffered lakes and annual water testing for pesticides and fertilizers.
Records that would add understanding
Annual testing is a useful lead, but the article does not identify laboratory independence, chemicals tested, detection limits or published results. “Uses pesticides sparingly” needs application quantities and dates to be evaluated.
For families, in plain words
What the sources document
County meeting notes record irrigation design work. A former superintendent wrote in 2014 that water was tested twice a year, but did not link the laboratory reports.
What we still do not know
We cannot check which chemicals were tested, how small an amount the tests could detect, or current results. The old account is a claim, not a verified picture of today’s water.
These ratings describe the evidence we could check, not whether a place is safe or unsafe. Missing information does not mean someone has been harmed.
Club website and public-record cross-check
Located-record evidence rating
0 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
A former superintendent’s detailed 2014 account describes twice-yearly third-party testing, but the underlying laboratory reports were not supplied. County minutes confirm irrigation-project activity, not measured savings or chemical outcomes. Historical assertions of “no detections” remain attributed claims.
Reviewed October 18, 2026. Public-record jurisdiction: Clackamas County and Oregon DEQ.
Undated; readable homepage returned with restricted-access response · Source content unavailable
County-linked official domain describes the course, trees and lakes. No inventory or laboratory-report link appeared in the returned homepage text; the restricted response prevents a complete site review.
May 13, 2014; former superintendent’s industry blog, not current club disclosure
Describes spring/fall sampling for nutrients and recently applied pesticides, spending near $100,000 over 12 years, and claimed years of no detections. No underlying course-identifiable laboratory sheets, analyte lists or reporting limits were linked in the reviewed account.
Published minutes report irrigation design work and GPS mapping. They are actual public records, but do not provide pesticide logs, independent water results or measured water savings.
Links the official Stone Creek .net domain and establishes county course context. Ownership information is not chemical disclosure.
Full pesticide inventory
0 / 30
Independent water testing
0 / 25
Air / drift monitoring
0 / 20
Responds to information requests
0 / 15
Form 990 disclosure
0 / 10
The industry account is included as a historical lead, not an official current club or government finding. No attributable Oregon DEQ result set was extracted; anonymous regional study cases were not assigned to Stone Creek. The county-owned course’s standalone Form 990 obligation was not established. No requests were submitted.
This score covers qualifying documents located in this cross-check, not a complete course audit. Zero points means no qualifying record was located for that criterion, not proof of refusal, contamination or unsafe conditions. Permit requirements and promised monitoring are not published results.
7. Pebble Beach, California
Pebble Beach Golf Links
Article-only evidence rating
0 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
Wider source comparison below
What the article celebrates
Recycled irrigation water, organic and slow-release fertilizers, hand weeding, integrated pest management, recycling and habitat protection.
Records that would add understanding
Integrated pest management can include pesticides. The article does not provide a complete product list, application amounts or independent water and drift results. Recycling totals do not answer those disclosure questions.
For families, in plain words
What the sources document
Search previews of the operator’s pages describe reused irrigation water and targeted spraying. County guidance explains pesticide reporting, and state records link older regulatory letters.
What we still do not know
Reporting rules and letters are not a chemical-use list or test results. We did not verify a complete inventory or independent laboratory reports specifically for Golf Links.
These ratings describe the evidence we could check, not whether a place is safe or unsafe. Missing information does not mean someone has been harmed.
Club website and public-record cross-check
Located-record evidence rating
0 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
Operator claims describe reclaimed irrigation water and integrated pest management across multiple courses. County rules establish a pesticide-reporting pathway, and state files link historical regulatory correspondence. Neither is a complete Golf Links inventory or a verified course-specific laboratory package.
Reviewed October 18, 2026. Public-record jurisdiction: Monterey County Agricultural Commissioner and California Water Boards.
Search metadata: June 15, 2016; revision date unknown, direct access blocked · Source content unavailable
Indexed text claims reclaimed-water irrigation and potable-water savings across Del Monte Forest golf courses. Multi-course operator claims are not an independently audited water balance or course-specific contaminant results.
Undated; official indexed guidance reviewed · Source content unavailable
Includes golf courses in pesticide-use reporting requirements. This is a route to seek records, not a page publishing Pebble Beach’s complete application reports.
Actual agency document links provide historical regulatory context. Regulatory letters are not independent laboratory reports or replies to a public disclosure request; company-wide scope is broader than Golf Links.
Full pesticide inventory
0 / 30
Independent water testing
0 / 25
Air / drift monitoring
0 / 20
Responds to information requests
0 / 15
Form 990 disclosure
0 / 10
Operator pages were blocked. A regional 2013–2016 ASBS monitoring report was identified but not fully matched to Golf Links outfalls and laboratory appendices, so water evidence remains unverified rather than declared nonexistent. State nonagricultural pesticide aggregates cannot establish an individual course inventory. Form 990 applicability was not established; no requests were submitted.
This score covers qualifying documents located in this cross-check, not a complete course audit. Zero points means no qualifying record was located for that criterion, not proof of refusal, contamination or unsafe conditions. Permit requirements and promised monitoring are not published results.
8. Bandon, Oregon
Bandon Dunes Golf Resort
Article-only evidence rating
0 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
Wider source comparison below
What the article celebrates
Walking golf, solar panels, habitat protection and a less-is-better approach to fertilizing, mowing and watering.
Records that would add understanding
A maintenance philosophy is not a quantified chemical-use record. The article provides no pesticide inventory or exposure monitoring. The article dates from March 2012; its reference to a forthcoming Bandon Preserve opening reflects that age, since the Preserve opened in 2012. Nothing here verifies current practice.
For families, in plain words
What the sources document
The resort describes saving water and protecting habitat. A county approval requires pesticide-management plans and record keeping.
What we still do not know
Rules say what must be done, not what was actually done. We did not verify chemical-use logs or independent tests supporting the claim that fertilizer does not wash into water.
These ratings describe the evidence we could check, not whether a place is safe or unsafe. Missing information does not mean someone has been harmed.
Club website and public-record cross-check
Located-record evidence rating
0 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
The operator publishes quantitative conservation claims, many with historical benchmarks. A county decision contains pesticide-management and record-keeping requirements. Requirements do not demonstrate actual applications or validate the operator’s assertion that spoon-feeding fertilizer eliminates runoff and leaching.
Reviewed October 18, 2026. Public-record jurisdiction: Coos County and Oregon environmental/drinking-water agencies.
Undated; contains benchmarks through 2020/March 2021
Describes irrigated acreage, recycled wastewater, habitat and low-rate fertilizer practices. No complete pesticide inventory or independent analytical water package was linked in the inspected content. Historical figures are not 2026 measurements.
Requires environmental-management provisions addressing off-site sediment, nutrients and pesticides, plus storage, handling, disposal and record keeping. This is an approval with conditions, not actual application logs or laboratory results.
Links application, supplemental information and staff decision. Reviewed material did not establish a complete pesticide inventory or independent laboratory package; not every image or attachment was comprehensively audited.
Full pesticide inventory
0 / 30
Independent water testing
0 / 25
Air / drift monitoring
0 / 20
Responds to information requests
0 / 15
Form 990 disclosure
0 / 10
No qualifying independent water results or air/drift measurements were verified. An inactive Red Roof Inn drinking-water record was excluded as a proxy for resort-wide conditions. The foundation’s applicable tax entity/filing was not established. No requests were submitted; additional records may exist offline or in unindexed agency files.
This score covers qualifying documents located in this cross-check, not a complete course audit. Zero points means no qualifying record was located for that criterion, not proof of refusal, contamination or unsafe conditions. Permit requirements and promised monitoring are not published results.
9. Estero, Florida
Old Corkscrew Golf Club
Article-only evidence rating
0 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
Wider source comparison below
What the article celebrates
A small irrigated turf footprint, conservation acreage, native planting and invasive-plant removal.
Records that would add understanding
A smaller maintained footprint may reduce resource demand, but it does not establish the products or quantities used on that turf. The article supplies no pesticide application records or independent monitoring results.
For families, in plain words
What the sources document
The operator says daily golf operations have ended and the property is becoming Pandion Club. A 2024 state database review found no potential contamination sources within its search scope.
What we still do not know
That database review was not a water test. Older environmental claims do not tell us about the new operation; we did not verify its chemical-use list or independent test results.
These ratings describe the evidence we could check, not whether a place is safe or unsafe. Missing information does not mean someone has been harmed.
Club website and public-record cross-check
Located-record evidence rating
0 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
The operator now says daily golf operations have concluded and the property is transforming into Pandion Club. Historical eco-course claims cannot be carried forward automatically. Florida’s published source-water assessment is a database-based susceptibility assessment, not measured proof of chemical absence.
Reviewed October 18, 2026. Public-record jurisdiction: Lee County and Florida DEP.
Announces the conclusion of daily golf operations and transition to Pandion Club. This is an important status change, not evidence about the new operation’s chemical practices.
Identifies groundwater system 5364158 and a 270-foot well. Its database search found no potential contamination sources within the assessment scope. This is not a laboratory test, complete chemical inventory or proof that water contains no contaminants.
Indexed case table includes approval April 29, 2026 · Source content unavailable
Indexed records describe course reconfiguration. Planning approvals do not establish measured environmental performance; a withdrawn older case is not proof the entire property is withdrawn.
Full pesticide inventory
0 / 30
Independent water testing
0 / 25
Air / drift monitoring
0 / 20
Responds to information requests
0 / 15
Form 990 disclosure
0 / 10
The former course-details page returned 404; its historical certification claim remains unverified as a current disclosure. No inventory, independent water laboratory package or drift results were verified. Form 990 applicability was not established. Do not confuse the club with similarly named plantation/development projects. No requests were submitted.
This score covers qualifying documents located in this cross-check, not a complete course audit. Zero points means no qualifying record was located for that criterion, not proof of refusal, contamination or unsafe conditions. Permit requirements and promised monitoring are not published results.
10. Lakeside, California
Barona Creek Golf Club
Article-only evidence rating
0 / 100
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
Wider source comparison below
What the article celebrates
Audubon recognition, native oak restoration, wildlife corridors, irrigation habitat and increased bird diversity.
Records that would add understanding
Biodiversity is a separate environmental outcome, not a substitute for chemical disclosure. The article provides no complete pesticide inventory, laboratory reports or air and drift monitoring.
For families, in plain words
What the sources document
Search previews describe water reuse and awards. Barona is on tribal land, with its own government; nearby county rules cannot simply be assumed to apply.
What we still do not know
Key pages and documents could not be opened, so this comparison remains YELLOW, Not yet assessed. We could not verify course-specific chemical-use records or independent water and air tests.
These ratings describe the evidence we could check, not whether a place is safe or unsafe. Missing information does not mean someone has been harmed.
Club website and public-record cross-check
Located-record evidence rating
Score not assessed
YELLOWIn the zone of concern
Not yet assessed
A proximity and transparency rating, not a safety verdict. This display concerns information only, not a home or school site score.
Operator statements describe water recovery and awards. Public water-infrastructure records concern proposed supply and environmental planning, not verified course-specific pesticide or water outcomes. Barona is on tribal land, so county reporting assumptions used for other California courses cannot simply be applied here.
Reviewed October 18, 2026. Public-record jurisdiction: Barona tribal government and applicable federal agencies; water district/off-reservation records only within their actual scope.
Undated; indexed text, direct access blocked · Source content unavailable
Claims an award-winning water-treatment facility and water recovery. No complete course chemical inventory or analytical laboratory package was verified.
Undated; official indexed description reviewed · Source content unavailable
Identifies the federally recognized sovereign tribal nation and its government. Geographic proximity to Lakeside does not establish county authority over tribal course operations.
Final June 2025; indexed text only, PDF access blocked · Source content unavailable
Describes potable/recycled-water infrastructure and different on-reservation/off-reservation environmental-review responsibilities. Inaccessible attachments were not counted as verified laboratory evidence.
September 20, 2024; indexed text, direct access denied · Source content unavailable
Describes groundwater and casino recycled-water use and proposed irrigation supply. Project intent is not proof of completed delivery or tested course water.
Key operator pages and the environmental assessment were inaccessible, so the information rating remains YELLOW, Not yet assessed. No comprehensive tribal inventory, independent golf-water laboratory package or air/drift results were verified. Tribal government/enterprise status must not be treated as an ordinary nonprofit Form 990 obligation. No requests were submitted.
This score covers qualifying documents located in this cross-check, not a complete course audit. Zero points means no qualifying record was located for that criterion, not proof of refusal, contamination or unsafe conditions. Permit requirements and promised monitoring are not published results.
Records for a fuller shared picture
Publish a complete application inventory, independent laboratory water results, air and drift monitoring, substantive responses to records requests and applicable public Form 990 filings. Dated source records can support a broader course review under the same fixed rubric.
