Drone spraying pesticides 'catastrophic' for humans, agriculture, ecology, wildlife

By Jag Jivan
Narasimha Reddy Donthi, former board member of IFOAM-Asia, which is part of the Germany-based International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), a pioneering organization on organic farming across the world, in a letter to the secretary, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers, taking strong exception to the Standard Operation Procedures (SOPs) released for aerial spraying of pesticides, has said that the move contradicts the Insecticide Act.
Pointing out that he had brought this to the notice of the Central Insecticide Board and Registration Committee (CIBRC), Dhonti says, allowing aerial spraying, using drones and unmanned, remote controlled vehicles can be catastrophic to humans, agriculture, farmers, ecology and wildlife.
Currently adjunct professor, Padala Rama Reddy Law College, and member, Research Advisory Committee, Centre for Economic and Social Studies, Hyderabad, Dhonti insists on the withdrawal of the interim approval for drone application of pesticides, SOP for drone application of pesticides, and blanket approval for drone application of pesticides.
Regretting that his view was ignored, Dhonti says, instead the Ministry has developed an SOP for drone applications of pesticides. He adds, “SOP falls far short of expectations and technical content. Consequently, it lacked imagination on establishing standards. The language is vague and non-binding.” Further, there is a failure to “integrate science, ecological and environmental factors into the SOP.”
Attaching a detailed set of comments along with his letter, Dhonti says, the document allowing aerial spraying of pesticides “seems to have been done in a hurry, without proper assessment of possible impacts and wider consultation”, pointing out, “While CIBRC took more than two years to arrive at this draft, the window period given for public comments was only 30 days.”
Stating that “the industry, which benefits directly from this was made part of the consultation process, from the beginning”, the letter regrets, “Other stakeholders did not get to participate in this process on par with manufacturers of drones and pesticides”, which “violates” the principle of public participation being “part and parcel of public policy making.”

Says Dhonti, “The constant urge to share data from the drone operators, both in the SOP and the interim approval, indicates that this Ministry was not working on field data and practical experiences. Its approvals appear to be ad hoc and unscientific. Alarmingly, these approvals are about aerial spraying of highly hazardous agrochemicals which can be fatal for life, even in minuscule doses.”
He adds, “It appears that the Ministry and CIBRC failed to realise that drones can spray copious amounts of these agrochemicals. Since pesticides are hazardous products, using them aerially should be regulated strictly for public and environment safety. In a further mis-step, the CIBRC has gone ahead with an interim approval of application of pesticide formulations through drones on 12th April, 2022, without referring to a particular legal clause, under which this was given.”
Asserting that pesticide registration is “based on data generated through surface level application”, the letter says, “However, CIBRC extends its approval for usage already approved pesticide formulations for aerial application, based on representation from pesticide industry lobby”, ignoring “detailed, considered, researched approval.” It adds, the approval “is not based on biosafety parameters and also ignores the well laid principle of caution.”

Comments

Stratistics Market Research Consulting Pvt Ltd said…

The data you've given is helpful on the grounds that it gives an abundance of information that will be exceptionally valuable to me. Much thanks to you for sharing that. Keep doing awesome. drone agriculture market

February 20, 2023

From Kerala to Bangladesh: Lynching highlights deep social faultlines

By A Representative The recent incidents of mob lynching—one in Bangladesh involving a Hindu citizen and another in Kerala where a man was killed after being mistaken for a “Bangladeshi”—have sparked outrage and calls for accountability.

Gram sabha as reformer: Mandla’s quiet challenge to the liquor economy

By Raj Kumar Sinha* This year, the Union Ministry of Panchayati Raj is organising a two-day PESA Mahotsav in Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, on 23–24 December 2025. The event marks the passage of the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996 (PESA), enacted by Parliament on 24 December 1996 to establish self-governance in Fifth Schedule areas. Scheduled Areas are those notified by the President of India under Article 244(1) read with the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution, which provides for a distinct framework of governance recognising the autonomy of tribal regions. At present, Fifth Schedule areas exist in ten states: Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Rajasthan and Telangana. The PESA Act, 1996 empowers Gram Sabhas—the village assemblies—as the foundation of self-rule in these areas. Among the many powers devolved to them is the authority to take decisions on local matters, including the regulation...

MG-NREGA: A global model still waiting to be fully implemented

By Bharat Dogra When the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MG-NREGA) was introduced in India nearly two decades ago, it drew worldwide attention. The reason was evident. At a time when states across much of the world were retreating from responsibility for livelihoods and welfare, the world’s second most populous country—with nearly two-thirds of its people living in rural or semi-rural areas—committed itself to guaranteeing 100 days of employment a year to its rural population.

When a city rebuilt forgets its builders: Migrant workers’ struggle for sanitation in Bhuj

Khasra Ground site By Aseem Mishra* Access to safe drinking water and sanitation is not a privilege—it is a fundamental human right. This principle has been unequivocally recognised by the United Nations and repeatedly affirmed by the Supreme Court of India as intrinsic to the right to life and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution. Yet, for thousands of migrant workers living in Bhuj, this right remains elusive, exposing a troubling disconnect between constitutional guarantees, policy declarations, and lived reality.

Policy changes in rural employment scheme and the politics of nomenclature

By N.S. Venkataraman* The Government of India has introduced a revised rural employment programme by fine-tuning the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), which has been in operation for nearly two decades. The MGNREGA scheme guarantees 100 days of employment annually to rural households and has primarily benefited populations in rural areas. The revised programme has been named VB-G RAM–G (Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission – Gramin). The government has stated that the revised scheme incorporates several structural changes, including an increase in guaranteed employment from 100 to 125 days, modifications in the financing pattern, provisions to strengthen unemployment allowances, and penalties for delays in wage payments. Given the extent of these changes, the government has argued that a new name is required to distinguish the revised programme from the existing MGNREGA framework. As has been witnessed in recent years, the introdu...

Rollback of right to work? VB–GRAM G Bill 'dilutes' statutory employment guarantee

By A Representative The Right to Food Campaign has strongly condemned the passage of the Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) (VB–GRAM G) Bill, 2025, describing it as a major rollback of workers’ rights and a fundamental dilution of the statutory Right to Work guaranteed under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA). In a statement, the Campaign termed the repeal of MGNREGA a “dark day for workers’ rights” and accused the government of converting a legally enforceable, demand-based employment guarantee into a centralised, discretionary welfare scheme.

Aravalli at the crossroads: Environment, democracy, and the crisis of justice

By Rajendra Singh* The functioning of the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change has undergone a troubling shift. Once mandated to safeguard forests and ecosystems, the Ministry now appears increasingly aligned with industrial interests. Its recent affidavit before the Supreme Court makes this drift unmistakably clear. An institution ostensibly created to protect the environment now seems to have strayed from that very purpose.

'Structural sabotage': Concern over sector-limited job guarantee in new employment law

By A Representative The advocacy group Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA) has raised concerns over the passage of the Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (VB–G RAM G), which was approved during the recently concluded session of Parliament amid protests by opposition members. The legislation is intended to replace the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA).

Making rigid distinctions between Indian and foreign 'historically untenable'

By A Representative Oral historian, filmmaker and cultural conservationist Sohail Hashmi has said that everyday practices related to attire, food and architecture in India reflect long histories of interaction and adaptation rather than rigid or exclusionary ideas of identity. He was speaking at a webinar organised by the Indian History Forum (IHF).

Search This Blog