Joiner employed an independent contractor to spray pesticide on his crops. During the application process, the spray damaged a nearby fishing lake owned by Boroughs. When Boroughs sued, the trial court held that Joiner was not liable as a matter of law since an independent contractor inflicted the injury. Boroughs contends that Joiner is liable because the work done was inherently or intrinsically dangerous. On appeal, does Boroughs argument have merit? Why or why not?