The study has numerous methodology flaws, namely that the research considers a tiny percentage of golf acreage in the U.S. and also that it set out to link golf, as opposed to also considering lawns, parks and open spaces planted in turf, which surpass golf acreage by millions of acres. You can search the peer review suggesting the author’s flawed methodology, which should be updated in your writing. In essence, the researchers followed this logic: At a dinner party they noticed wine stains on the floor and began immediately looking at the catering staff who were of Mexican descent. They found a potential link, but not necessarily the truth of how the wine stains got there. They failed to study other catering staff (non Mexican), the guests, or whether the cups leaked. For that matter, even whether the wine stains were there before the party. I hope you might consider amending your writing. Golf courses do not apply chemicals to any degree compared to the mostly unregulated agricultural land or privately maintained lawns. In fact, golf  courses must follow rigorous training and regulations, which are absent on many private lawn areas in the U.S.  on ag land, many regulations are waived. Also, golf is a business driven by careful profit and loss. We do not apply anything that is excessive or costly. Compared to subsidized government or farming where cost is often not a hurdle.