Understanding the Pesticide Debate

Pesticides are chemicals that target and kill organisms which humans have deemed as harmful. Pesticide is a generalized term for many different types of chemicals including herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides. These chemicals must be registered with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in order to be used. This process entails examining their ingredients, which crop they will be used to protect, amount and frequency of use, and storage and disposal. 

The five major legislations that regulate pesticide use: 

1. The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act: requires all pesticides sold and distributed in the United States (including imported pesticides) to be registered by the EPA.
2. The Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act: requires the EPA to set pesticide tolerances for all pesticides used in or on food or in a manner that will result in a residue in or on food or animal feed. A tolerance is the maximum permissible level for pesticide residues allowed in or on human food and animal feed.
3. Food Quality Protection Act: this act amended both FIFRA and FFDCA. The EPA must find that a pesticide poses a “reasonable certainty of no harm” before it can be registered for use on food or feed. Each pesticide registration must be reviewed at least once every 15 years.
4. Pesticide Registration Improvement Act: companies must pay service fees according to the category of their registration. Shorter decision review periods are provided for reduced-risk registration applications. 
5. The Endangered Species Act: requires federal agencies to ensure that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out, will not likely jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species, or destroy or adversely modify any critical habitat for those species. All pesticide products that EPA determines “may affect” a listed species or its designated critical habitat may be subject to EPA’s Endangered Species Protection Program.

Origins of the Pesticide Debate

The pesticide debate first entered the national consciousness thanks to marine biologist and writer Rachel Carson in 1962, when she published her book Silent Spring that focused on the negative effects of DDT, an insecticide. Attention was drawn to DDT because of its effects on bird populations. DDT disturbed endocrine functions in birds which led to eggshell thinning in impacted birds. DDT also caused adult birds to lose control of their nerves and muscles. Concerns over DDT’s adverse effects on the environment and potential harm to humans led to the EPA banning it in 1972. After the breakout success of Silent Spring, Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas described pesticides as “sinister and little-recognized partners of radiation in changing the very nature of the world.” Carson argued that chemicals “work unknown harm” through their “contamination of air, earth, rivers, and sea with dangerous and even lethal materials”.

A recent study by Pew Research surveyed public opinions on the safety of fruit and vegetables grown with pesticides. Only 26% of those surveyed responded that they believed pesticides were safe, while 48% thought they were unsafe. Those most negatively affected by the effects of pesticide spraying are agricultural workers. On the other hand, produce and chemical industries greatly benefit from the use of pesticides. The process of deciding the risk versus return of using pesticides is a nuanced decision. A complete appraisal of the social costs and benefits needs to be understood to find the largest net gains to society.

In Favor of Strong Pesticide Regulation

Arguments in favor of increasing pesticide regulation cite the negative effects that have been observed on the environment. Pesticides can’t be completely specialized, meaning that they often also have negative effects on non-target organisms. This leads to the removal of species which are beneficial to the crop, which is counter productive towards the goal of increased yield. Pesticides also bioaccumulate and biomagnify which can destabilize the food chain. Bioaccumulation is when the concentration of a toxin accumulates in a species faster than the organism can eliminate it, and biomagnification is the tendency for toxic substances to be found in greater quantities in organisms higher up the food chain as they consume many smaller organisms with small amounts of toxins. The effects of pesticides on many species are prevalent; for example it is estimated that around 10% of birds exposed to pesticides on U.S agricultural lands die from the exposure. A study in the Indian Journal of Microbiology found heavy use of pesticides has also been found to decrease the fertility of soil which can take several years to recover. 

A second key argument in favor of stricter pesticide regulation cites the adverse effects pesticides have on human health. It was found that 98-99% of Americans carried in them residues of dieldrin in low concentration. Similarly to how pesticides bioaccumulate in the food chain, they also accumulate in our bodies. Regular exposure builds up each day which can eventually lead to hospitalization or even death. Some argue that farmers can implement tactics that naturally reduce loss of crops from pests rather than utilizing primarily pesticides. Natural enemies of pests are just as susceptible to pesticides as the target species. By implementing integrated pest management, a mix of biological and chemical controls, target species will be more efficiently removed with less pesticide spray required. For this to work though, understanding the placement of pesticide spray and the susceptible life stages of natural predators is vital. Vertical farming is a new type of farming where crops can be grown in an urban biosecure environment free from pests. This style of farming has zero need for pesticides, reduces water usage, and greenhouse gas emissions. In the future these tactics could be vital to the survival of the agriculture industry.

In Opposition to Stronger Regulation

Those in opposition to stronger pesticide regulation claim that they are the basis of cost-effective farming. The use of herbicides has led to a decrease of manual farm work, reducing labor costs and the overall cost of food for consumers. When used properly, they also improve crop yields, leading to greater accessibility and food security. In the United States, farm production loses the equivalent of thirty percent of sales to pests each year. By reducing the amount of pests that feed on plants, huge quantities of food can be preserved. The growing population of the Earth requires increasing food production, which necessitates the use of pesticides to ensure maximum crop yields. The population of the world doubled from 1950-2000, which meant agriculture had to increase production accordingly. This has led to a rapid increase in pesticide use. Without the use of pesticides it is estimated there would be a 78% loss of fruit production, a 54% loss of vegetable production, and 32% loss of cereal products. Even with the use of pesticides 30% of world-wide yield is still lost.