Previous Next

In this section, Carson pivots to more in-depth examples that contrast safe and effective pest control methods with dangerous ones. In Chapter 8, she sharply juxtaposes Dutch elm spraying in Illinois and other Midwestern states with non-spraying methods employed in New York. The aerial spraying used in the Midwest killed disturbing numbers of birds, including 86–88 percent of the robin population in one area and up to 90 percent of nesting birds in other places. Tragically, the spraying not only decimates the local birds but does little to stem the beetle-borne fungal disease that is destroying Dutch elm trees. In fact, spraying pesticides seems to accelerate the rate of tree death. In a further irony, the loss of so many birds leads to a significant reduction in natural insect control since birds themselves are predators that can help protect trees from insect infestations. New York, meanwhile, has had great success with a non-spraying method that instead relies on removing diseased trees before the fungus can spread and replanting with European elms that are naturally immune to the disease.

Read an explanation of an important quote in Chapter 8 about the effects that pesticides have on insects and birds.

In these chapters, Carson also records the disturbing effects that chemical pesticides have on the reproductive systems of numerous species. Birds and fish both show signs of sterility after pesticide poisoning. As a result, entire generations of salmon are lost when the rivers and streams where they hatch are sprayed, and the fate of bird species may be imperiled by inability to lay eggs as well. Even the very symbol of the United States, the bald eagle, is not immune, and Carson presents research suggesting that pesticide spraying threatens bald eagle populations in numerous states. Species that still manage to reproduce offspring aren’t safe either, for their young are especially vulnerable to the effects of chemical pesticides. Since many marine animals use sheltered inshore areas to protect their young, pesticide spraying in tidal areas across the East Coast dangerously impacts young fish, shrimp, oysters, and clams. The toxicity of pesticides is most noticeable when they outright kill animals, but the effect they have on breeding suggests they also threaten future generations of wildlife.

According to Carson, the dangerous mass pesticide sprayings and the bureaucracy that enables them are built on fallacies and absurd logic, which emphasizes that their implementation is as useless as it is dangerous. For example, the pesticides purported to eradicate Japanese beetles and gypsy moths must be repeatedly applied because they fail to have the desired effect. Carson also questions why urban areas like New York City spray for gypsy moths when they are forest dwellers, unlikely to cause issues in a large metropolitan area. She further questions why the government establishes safe levels for toxic pesticide use, given that these guidelines are often retracted when the chemicals are shown to be dangerous even in small amounts. 

In chronicling the effects of pesticides, Carson especially calls out the United States government in this section. She notes that local wildlife experts and residents often vigorously argue against the necessity of these pest control measures, but the government sanctions spraying anyway. In spite of evidence showing the dangers of pesticides, federal agencies—especially the Department of Agriculture—continue to deny research findings and advocate for their use. The disconnect between the government and local land management is so stark that states ranging from Texas to Alabama refuse further extensive pesticide initiatives targeting fire ants, even those that would have no cost to them, because they do not believe that they are safe or effective. Carson contends that the government refuses to heed these warnings because it receives massive amounts of money from the chemical industry. She argues that the government, therefore, has no vested interest in protecting people or the environment and would rather sacrifice safety for profit.

According to Carson, better public awareness of the dangers of pesticides—particularly the knowledge that they are, in fact, poisons—is crucial. She argues that, because toxic chemicals have become an everyday part of life, they no longer receive the caution that people once accorded poisons. The book even evokes the acts of the Borgias, history’s most infamous family of poisoners, and concludes that people exposed to pesticides are in little better position than the Borgias’ targets. The government so minimizes the dangers of pesticides that they even directly drop them on people in populated areas. However, Carson asserts that the refusal to name toxic pesticides as poisons extends far beyond these mass sprayings. Dangerous poisons that were once restricted have become commercially available and sit in homes, kitchens, and yards across the country in the form of pest-control products. These small-scale exposures may seem minute when compared to mass sprayings, but they are arguably more dangerous due to their sheer cumulative effects and the potential harms of long-term exposure.

Read about Main Idea #2 about the true cost of toxic pesticide usage being incalculable.

Previous section Section 2: Chapters 4-6 Next section Section 4: Chapters 12-14

Take a Study Break