Pesticide use on BC farms puts seasonal workers at risk

October 24, 2023

(Photo: Dr. Anelyse Weiler works on an orchard thinning apples during fieldwork in 2017)

“If cancer could smell, it would smell like that," says a BC farm worker during an interview on pesticide use on BC farms.

Farmers in BC use a variety of pesticides (organophosphates, neonicotinoids, and pyrethroids, fungicides and carbamates) that are associated with numerous harmful impacts on human and environmental health. Despite these risks, workers seem willing to trade in their health for the freedom and flexibility of seasonal farm work.

UVic sociologist, Anelyse Weiler, wanted to understand how middle-class farm workers in BC perceive and manage the risks associated with pesticide exposures.

“In Canada, the agricultural workers who bear the biggest brunt of pesticide exposure are low-income, racialized, and newcomers from the Global South,” says Weiler.

“But in this study, I was focused on a group of workers who are normally buffered against such toxic harms - people who wouldn't see themselves as vulnerable. Specifically, Canadian citizens who are often white and middle-class, as well as backpackers visiting Canada on a holiday or working visa,” adds Weiler.

Symptoms of pesticide exposure

Farm workers described having rashes, nosebleeds or smelling pesticides in their closes and hair. Washing their close multiple times but unable to get ride of the odour. They explained how they had to rely on informal evidence of exposure because their boss and government offered very little information about the kinds of chemicals they were encountering or how to mitigate potential harm.

In Canada more broadly, Ela Rydz and colleagues estimate that 70-75% of farmworkers who are at risk of exposure were probably or possibly exposed to glyphosate, 2,4-2 and/or chlorothalonil. And new research is suggesting that pesticides like "RoundUp" (glyphostae) might actually be more dangerous than previously believed.

“I interviewed workers in English, French and Spanish and even though they did not consent to the risks, they would often downplay the potential harm,” says Weiler.

According to the study, the workers who were worried about the risks would often bring their own soap, cover their face with a bandana or ‘boycott’ work on non-organic farms.

Price of freedom

Weiler explains how some workers saw the degradation of their body as a reasonable trade-off for the freedom their job provided. Most of the workers interviewed were in their 20s, although their ages ranged from 20 to 57.

"It's pretty much like selling your soul to the devil for a little freedom-I don’t see myself working a 9 to 5. I love my freedom. Having to get exposed to products like that is the huge price I pay for this freedom. The 9 to 5 is such a dreary life," says one worker.

Weiler argues that workers told themselves positive stories about freedom, idealism and youthful adventure to help them feel impervious to any harmful consequences of toxic exposure. Recent pesticide research shows, however, that agrochemical exposure, including low-dose exposures, can have significant consequences that emerge much later in a person's life, or even intergenerational.

“The popular idea that 'the dose makes the poison' isn't always true for pesticides; even low-dose exposures can be harmful, and sometimes harm from exposure is more about timing than dose (e.g., exposure during pregnancy),” says Weiler.

Tighter pesticide regulation

Weiler explains that there is a major opportunity in B.C. for tighter pesticide regulation. She identified the issue of a complaint-based approach; currently take by the B.C. government, instead of proactively investigating pesticide exposure.

“This past summer, scientific advisor Dr. Bruce Lanphear actually resigned from his role as co-chair of the Health Canada scientific advisory committee on pesticides because he had no confidence that the committee could help ensure Canadians are protected from toxic pesticides or improve transparency,” says Weiler.

“BC would benefit from proactive surprise "spot" inspections by dedicated teams to ensure compliance with the rules, bigger penalties for those who break the rules, and clearer channels for workers who want to join a union to do so,” adds Weiler.

Anelyse Weiler, sociology, published in Environmental Sociology