Carson discusses the spraying of regions in order to control insect pests without the knowledge of the general public. "Acting under the Michigan pest control law which allows the state to spray indiscriminately without notifying or gaining permission of individual landowners, the low-lying planes began to fly over the Detroit area." (p.89) I remember the spraying for Gypsy moth control that was done when I was younger growing up in Connecticut, obviously change had occurred after the publication of this book since there was clear warning of the spraying in advance. Is it important for the public to be aware of spraying, could farmers and animal owners been able to protect their pets and livestock from unnecessary poisoning?
She also begins to introduce the concept of invasive species of insects that have arrived on our shores. With that she discusses the use of bacterial infections to control Japanese beetles. This method may be slow to act but less damaging to the environment than the use of chemicals. The big question is: are we willing to wait or must we have the quick fix?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
22 comments:
Personally, I'd say we need a quick fix. Invasive species, such as the Japanese beetles Carson discusses, are more harmful if not fixed immediately. I'd rather make a sacrifice and damage the environment and wipe out the invasive species than use a slower method which will in the end cause more damage than using chemicals anyway. An environment can recover from chemicals but not thousands of invasive species.
In chapter 7, Carson dwells longest on a particular case of needless destruction by chemical insecticides. The case of the state of Michigan’s attack on the Japanese beetle in the late 1950s demonstrates all of Carson’s earlier points: that following the advice of chemical companies results in widespread and needless destruction, that the alternative course of using natural enemies of particular insects is a cheaper and longer-lasting solution, which is also entirely safe to other forms of life, and that the mass destruction of life hurts the dignity of humanity.
First off, it is very important that the public are aware of spraying because farmers and animal owners could figure out ways to protect their livestock from harm. The concept of using bacterial infections instead of chemicals to control Japanese beetles is a much better idea. Even though this could take a long time, it would be less damaging to the enviroment which is extremely important. The results would show less damage and the farmers would still have their livestock without any poisoning.
While I was reading chapter 7 it reminded me of a chapter earlier in the book of when people were disappointed from people spraying stuff because it was killing the flowers and such. But in this case in order to get ride of all of the invasive Japanese beetles I believe that it would be right to use chemicals to wipe them all out. The beetles will cause alot damage to our plants. Also parts of the environment will be significantly destroyed because of all the chemicals put out to kill the beetles.
Anything that has even a possibility of harming the public should be made aware to as many people as possible before the event of spraying should take place. In regards to whether or not the farmers would be able to protect their livestock, it all comes down to the amount of information known about the effects of the spray on the environment; Obviously the results aren’t good based on the publication of Silent Spring and the harm it has done to inhabitants.
We all are aware that the government tends to make decisions and perform actions before they announce this information to the public. So I presume that they probably don’t want to wait, they want results quickly. However, given the history of chemicals on nature, we should wait because it is for our own safety as well.
I think it's extremely important for people to be aware of what is being sprayed on their food because we should have the right to know what is going into our bodies and how it could harm us. The sooner this can be fixed the better. If it isn't fixed soon, more and more of the environment and animal species will continue to be harmed. Even if it's slow progress to fix these chemicals, it's better than no progress.
Carson may only be describing the environment in some areas of the world, but if little is done to help salvage the ecosystem, then we will start to feel the effects as well. Carson wants to make everyone aware of the damage that is surrounding us today, and share the truth that many people seem to be uninformed about. It was horrible to read about the effect the poisons had on animals such as the meadowlark; in which “’they lacked muscular coordination and could not fly or stand, it continued to beat its wings and clutch with its toes while lying on its side. Its beak was held open and breathing was labored’” (page99). It is important to make the public aware of the destruction these chemicals have on our surroundings.
"Among the mammals ground squirrels were...after the spraying was it was gone" (93). Human's uses of such a large amount of chemicals has killed off animals like buffalos and birds. The chemicals from land have seeped into water such as the ocean and ponds/lakes, killing fish and insects. Carson urges for people to see the negative effects for themselves.
It is so very important and completely necessary to notify the public of spraying. If we are aware than we can protect our pets, our livestock, and ourselves. Thankfully Carson made it clear that this "spraying" effects so much more than just pesty insects. Obviously spraying is not all that great, putting unearthly chemicals into the soil and atmosphere; sadly when us humans want something, we want it immediately. Personally, I would be willing to wait because as of right now I haven't experienced overwhelming insects (except maybe stinkbugs) so I could wait for the less damaging solution. Most people are not like me, and want things immediately, so sadly we must have the quick fix.
"Acting under the Michigan pest control law which allows the state to spray indiscriminately without notifying or gaining permission of individual landowners... (Carson, 89)."
I think we must review why/how these laws are being passed in the first place. While I'm sure most of us would agree that anything that has the potential of harming the public should be made aware to the public, clearly those who the decision was up to did not. Is this abuse of power? While the majority of us might have the best intentions and want to do what's right, we are not always given the opportunity to. I do think it is important for the public to be aware of spraying, so that they can act accordingly and make their own decisions on what's best; however, I don't believe that will happen until those holding higher and more influential positions change first. Only then can we be inspired to have a change of heart ourselves. As with all things, the solution depends on the problem being faced; it is circumstantial. We can't expect waiting to always be the best option, but the same goes for using a quick fix. It's up to us to determine if the end justifies the means.
Response to Jess Ciarcia's post,
I agree, the sooner more of us know the better. These chemicals are most likely still around today, as Carson has claimed in earlier chapters. They live in plant, animal, and our own tissues already. Over time our bodies may have found a way to cope with these chemicals enough to continue to survive, but that doesn’t mean we should continue spraying with them. The damage has been done, so now we must fix it.
"For more than thirty years....in Detroit." (87)
I think this quote is a perfect example answering the question. If the need to eliminate certain insects isn't majorly effecting us then there's no need for a quick fix solution. We need to wait and find a more beneficial way to get rid of them, if they actually become a huge problem. IF we are fully prepared, when the time comes that it's urgent, we'll be ready with something that's proven to work, and won't affect the population or the enviornment.
I remember watching a movie in history class on the planes sweeping towns and neighborhoods spraying copious amounts of insecticides, and people didn't think twice of it. It's crazy that back then, people allowed that to happen. Of course any chemical coating all of nature to eliminate the unwanted is going to have its side effects, and I think it's extremely naive for people to allow it to happen without being informed by the government when its their lives at risk. When it comes to the invasive beetles Carson discusses, it's tough to decide what's better in the long run. I think, as John also said, the environment would be more mendable after chemicals rather than an enemy species
In response to Jackie Arnolds:
I agree completely, the more the public is informed, the better we can prepare, protect and prevent. It's not okay for our lives to be affected tremendously from the government's actions. Although it is trying to relieve a current problem, it causes much larger scaled ones down the road
I think it is important that the public be aware of what is going on in their community and what will happen to their livestock. This would allow them to protect their animals from harmful chemicals. I believe that instead of using harmful chemicals to control pests, such as the Japanese beetles, we should wait for nature to run its course and if then there is a major outbreak to then use the chemicals.
"Little need was...in numbers" (87). Nickell said that there was no drastic increase in the number of beetles so there was no real need for the chemicals. If the government had just waited instead, they may not have even needed to use the chemicals and place livestock at risk.
"The question is whether any civilization can wage relentless war on life without destroying itself, and without losing the right to be called civilized." (99)
I believe that we can't just rely on quick fixes. The long process to get rid of the invasive species would be better than destroying our environment that we need to continue to grow and prosper. But what I noticed in this chapter was the lack of recompense for the dying animals and insects. Is it truly humane to be destroying these species just for our own benefit. Invasive species, yes I understand why we would be making an effort to get rid of them, but these chemicals we use touch every part of our environment. Without giving thought to that aspect, are we essentially allowing the destruction of many different parts of our environment to make life better for ourselves. That doesn't seem right.
"The question is whether any civilization can wage relentless war on life without destroying itself, and without losing the right to be called civilized." (99)
I believe that we can't just rely on quick fixes. The long process to get rid of the invasive species would be better than destroying our environment that we need to continue to grow and prosper. But what I noticed in this chapter was the lack of recompense for the dying animals and insects. Is it truly humane to be destroying these species just for our own benefit. Invasive species, yes I understand why we would be making an effort to get rid of them, but these chemicals we use touch every part of our environment. Without giving thought to that aspect, are we essentially allowing the destruction of many different parts of our environment to make life better for ourselves. That doesn't seem right.
"The question is whether any civilization can wage relentless war on life without destroying itself, and without losing the right to be called civilized." (99)
I believe that we can't just rely on quick fixes. The long process to get rid of the invasive species would be better than destroying our environment that we need to continue to grow and prosper. But what I noticed in this chapter was the lack of recompense for the dying animals and insects. Is it truly humane to be destroying these species just for our own benefit. Invasive species, yes I understand why we would be making an effort to get rid of them, but these chemicals we use touch every part of our environment. Without giving thought to that aspect, are we essentially allowing the destruction of many different parts of our environment to make life better for ourselves. That doesn't seem right.
I agree with Barbie regarding this chapter, I do not think it is right that insecticides are being sprayed without the owner of the land knowing. It is unfair to both the landowner and the animals/insects that inhabit the area. At some point humans need to address the fact that it is not necessary for us to always interfere with mother nature by introducing toxic chemicals harmful to living organisms.
I believe what we need is a quick fix not only for the benefit and knowledge of our own but for the innocent animals. These animals have no control as to what us humans do, and because we are spraying such large regions, many are affected. Even though there are the Japanese beetles whom are one example of an invasive species, people should be notified of the spraying chemicals and the spraying should be controlled better. Even if the beetles and other species are ruining the plants, the plants are also affected by the chemicals. The least they could do is give notice in advance of the spraying in order to prepare properly.
In response to Mackenzie Riel:
I do agree with this solution as well, due to the fact that the bugs haven become a huge issue yet but when they do, that's when we need to figure out a better more adaptable solution. Testing the waters and experimenting around with various possibilities is the only way to find an probable solution
Are we willing to wait or do a quick fix? Preferably we would like to have a permanent fix to our problems, but these solutions take time and we would have to wait. This has been our problem, we can't wait and we use quick fixes. These quick fixes involve chemicals which solves one problem, but creates more. It might solve the immediate problem we are looking at, but we must be aware of whatever action we do the reaction that comes from it. Quick fixes seem like a good idea if you are looking at one tiny part of the problem, but if you pay attention to the bigger problem, the best path would be to wait and use the alternative methods.
Post a Comment