Environmental and health impacts of agricultural pesticide use

¶ … Ethics of Pesticides or Insecticides

Agriculture has been the greatest supplier of food both at the subsistence level and the commercial level. Animal husbandry has prompted wide use of pesticides in control of diseases and maintaining the good health of the farm animals. Most of the pesticides are sprayed onto the animals in open fields hence the dripping quantity ends up on the soil ultimately swept to unintended destinations. If not spayed in the open field, the pesticides are used in a dip and the disposal methods after that are wanting. The same case applies to the insecticides that are used on the farms frequently without proper precautions taken.

There is need therefore to ensure the immediate stopping of the rampant use of the chemicals before the damages are more pronounced. The uses of chemicals in agriculture have detrimental effects bearing the introduction of man chemicals in the market some of which are not biodegradable.

The major problems brought about by the use of chemicals in the context of this paper are the environmental harm and the health (human) harm that comes with the use of chemicals. The main reason that leads to these harmful effects of the chemicals is the non-selective nature of the chemicals upon application.

Environmental degradation

Once the chemicals are used, they often end up killing many plants that they touch since most of them have harsh chemicals. This means valuable plants will be lost in the long run hence creating an imbalance in the ecosystem (Demand Media, 2010). The same applies to the native insects who may not be the target of the chemical used yet are exterminated by the chemicals. This offsets the natural balance that there is in the soil since some of these insects are useful in nitrogen fixing in the soil contributing to a healthier ecosystem. The chemicals are known to kill the beneficial species in the soil, the microorganism and the worms that aid in the natural limiting of the pests.

The use of these chemicals also lead to environmental degradation ion the sense that they find their way to water sources which they may render unusable or negatively affect the aquatic life therein. It is also worth noting that with the harmful effects of the chemicals and the harmful ingredients in them have rendered large pieces of land unusable since the yields are compromised due to the destruction of the essential nutrients within the soil for good production.

Opposing view on harmful nature of pesticides

In as much as there are profound evidence as adduced to above to the harmful nature of these chemicals used for agriculture, there are several bodies and people who hold that the benefits outweigh the effects and the use should continue. Indeed Toxic Action Center (2012) indicates that EPA has certified the sale of several pesticides with as many as 70 active ingredients that are known to predispose people to cancer. This happens on the ground that economic, social or environmental benefits are deemed greater than its risks that these chemicals expose the environment and the users to.

The other argument for the chemicals is that they are easy to use and in most cases there are no viable alternatives to these chemicals in the agricultural field. The organic pesticides are deemed too expensive to have meaningful quantity hence many resort to the inorganic chemicals for their agricultural needs.

There is a constant advocacy by the Integrated Pest Management for farmers to exhaust first all the non-chemical pest control mechanism before going for the chemical pest control but this is rarely adhered to as indicated by Master Gardener Foundation (2012).

It is therefore worth noting that the presence of the cancer causing ingredients is enough reason to get everyone worrying since there is no value that can be equated to life. The cycle may not end if the use of non-chemical means is not accepted and practiced since the chemicals will keep causing cancer and the expenses of treating and carrying out research on these cancer types will come back to the same society that claimed the chemical way is the cost effective route to follow.

There is need therefore to implement a judicial use of the pesticides if we have to use them as a consequence of having exhausted all the available non-chemical means to the pest problem. This is lauded by Ecoworld (2004) which further gives some of the qualities that should the pesticide research should strive to achieve in the invention of new pesticides and the manufacturers should implement to help curb the effects of chemicals in our daily application. Some of those qualities are that it should have high toxicity to the targeted pest. It should also bear selective toxicity in a bid to secure the beneficial insects leaving a balance ecosystem. The pesticides should also have low toxicity to plants as well as other non-targeted organisms. There should not be any residues that are harmful to human beings and the environment, it should be affordable to the farmers and safe to manufacture. It should be a chemical that is stable while under storage to avoid waste, should be non-corrosive and the residues that may be should be readily detectable and cheaply so.

These above mentioned qualities are hardly achieved in any chemical used in pest control. Some of the chemicals will meet a few of these qualities but fail to meet some. This gives window of damage that the chemicals end up negatively affecting people.

The use of pesticides has been and still remains to be one of the issue that are highly castigated ethically since their use is driven purely by the ability of the farmers to make good money with least possible spending. The fact that it has been noted to cause health problems and yet still being used under the watch of government agencies is an indicator enough that it is far from being changed. Ethically the use of chemicals create more harm than the profit that it gives the individual farmer.