Critical Review #2
1. Opposing Viewpoint In context: online resource covering today 's social issues. (website)
2. Marc Ribaudo, Robert Johansson, Jacqueline Langwith writes the article called "Agriculture Threatens Water Quality." Published by Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture in 2010.
3. Mark Ribaudo and Robert Johansson are scientists at the U.S. Department of Agriculture 's Economic Research Service. The authors take the position of arguing that "agricultural operations are one of the biggest threats to water quality in the United States" (Ribaudo, Johansson) The authors also states that controlling agriculture is a difficult, but also significant challenge for states and the federal government because it …show more content…
The primary reason for this that pollution from agriculture is generally non point source water pollution. These non point sources emissions are spread around everywhere. It is expensive to monitor accurate emission levels too. The consequence of this agriculture pollution is water quality laws do not regulate agriculture pollution, but they put responsibility on to the States. It is impossible to reduce amount of agriculture because they support United states food production and it is impossible to eliminated. However, environmental agency and organizations have to protect nature by restrict agriculture. Government relies on voluntary approaches, such as education and financial assistance to encourage farmers to protect water quality. Hence, authors final question is to how much government control of agriculture water pollution because it is difficult, but it can prevent agriculture …show more content…
Evaluation of the article
The authors argument is very strong that agriculture is one of the biggest threats to water quality in the United States. The authors comments that "this makes agriculture the leading source of impairment in the nation 's rivers and lakes, and a major source of impairment in estuaries". The authors back up their argument with several data bases from environment protect agency and organizations to specified agriculture is the major source of pollution.
Their argument and conclusion are very clear that it is government 's challenge to how much they can encourage farmers to take care of water quality. The authors states that they have to introduce new conservation water security programs to educate farmers. However, these solution is not feasible at all. The food production is growing every year and it is necessary for human life. Even they understand they causing water pollution and eventually gives impacts on human health, it is low succession and possibility to prevent water quality. Also, releasing nitrogen and phosphorus is still non point source water pollution. There is many industry and runoff from house and stores that can release nitrogen and phosphorus too. Hence, this is not feasible enough to prevent agriculture
1. Opposing Viewpoint In context: online resource covering today 's social issues. (website)
2. Marc Ribaudo, Robert Johansson, Jacqueline Langwith writes the article called "Agriculture Threatens Water Quality." Published by Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture in 2010.
3. Mark Ribaudo and Robert Johansson are scientists at the U.S. Department of Agriculture 's Economic Research Service. The authors take the position of arguing that "agricultural operations are one of the biggest threats to water quality in the United States" (Ribaudo, Johansson) The authors also states that controlling agriculture is a difficult, but also significant challenge for states and the federal government because it …show more content…
The primary reason for this that pollution from agriculture is generally non point source water pollution. These non point sources emissions are spread around everywhere. It is expensive to monitor accurate emission levels too. The consequence of this agriculture pollution is water quality laws do not regulate agriculture pollution, but they put responsibility on to the States. It is impossible to reduce amount of agriculture because they support United states food production and it is impossible to eliminated. However, environmental agency and organizations have to protect nature by restrict agriculture. Government relies on voluntary approaches, such as education and financial assistance to encourage farmers to protect water quality. Hence, authors final question is to how much government control of agriculture water pollution because it is difficult, but it can prevent agriculture …show more content…
Evaluation of the article
The authors argument is very strong that agriculture is one of the biggest threats to water quality in the United States. The authors comments that "this makes agriculture the leading source of impairment in the nation 's rivers and lakes, and a major source of impairment in estuaries". The authors back up their argument with several data bases from environment protect agency and organizations to specified agriculture is the major source of pollution.
Their argument and conclusion are very clear that it is government 's challenge to how much they can encourage farmers to take care of water quality. The authors states that they have to introduce new conservation water security programs to educate farmers. However, these solution is not feasible at all. The food production is growing every year and it is necessary for human life. Even they understand they causing water pollution and eventually gives impacts on human health, it is low succession and possibility to prevent water quality. Also, releasing nitrogen and phosphorus is still non point source water pollution. There is many industry and runoff from house and stores that can release nitrogen and phosphorus too. Hence, this is not feasible enough to prevent agriculture