If Senator Harkin is interested in his legacy, as it relates to agriculture and the environment, this would be a great issue for him to work on, starting immediately! (I will call him, and let you all know the response.)(I don't claim ownership of this effort; any of you can join in, and tell your friends, please.) --Tom

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Laurel Hopwood <[log in to unmask]>
To: CONS-SPST-BIOTECH-FORUM <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wed, Jun 4, 2014 2:36 pm
Subject: What's Poisoning the Bees


This is the best article I've read on the honeybee demise issue.
I edited it, but sorry, it's still long.
Laurel Hopwood, Coordinator, Sierra Club Pollinator Protection Campaign

http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/whats-poisoning-the-bees/Content?oid=3939487&showFullText=tru
What's Poisoning the Bees 
Toxic pesticides are killing honeybees and other pollinators - and 
our food supply stands to suffer.
6/3/2014
edited

Chemical companies soon began coating the seeds of corn and other 
crops with neonic pesticides, a practice that became widespread in 
the early 2000s. Neonics are now used as seeds treatments on more 
than 140 crops - including most corn and a large portion of soy, 
wheat, and canola seeds. In the case of corn, the rise of neonic seed 
treatments occurred alongside the proliferation of genetically 
engineered crops. For the most part, "They don't sell the genetically 
modified seeds unless they are treated with the chemicals," said 
Susan Kegley, principal scientist with the Berkeley-based Pesticide 
Research Institute, explaining how Monsanto, Bayer, and Syngenta have 
created a system in which neonics are pervasive in our environment. 
While in the 1990s, only around 30 to 35 percent of total corn 
acreage in the United States (roughly 75 to 80 million acres) was 
treated with insecticides, by 2012, 94 percent (of 92 million acres) 
of corn seed planted in this country was treated with neonics, 
according to the Pesticide Action Network.

Studies have linked neonics to bee health. In 2012, entomologists at 
Purdue University published research showing that in agricultural 
fields that used neonic-treated seeds, neonics were found in the soil 
and nearby plants. Researchers also found clothianidin, a neonic 
compound (which was responsible for poisoning Ellis' bees last year), 
in the bodies of dead bees found near hive entrances, while no 
detectable levels of clothianidin were found in healthy bees. In 
addition, researchers discovered that the bees living in these 
environments transported tainted maize pollen back to their hives. 
"If you wanted to design something that would kill bees, this is it," 
said Greg Hunt, who co-authored the Purdue study and is a professor 
of entomology at the university. The use of pre-treated seeds is so 
prevalent that farmers "don't have a choice," he added. "It's not the 
growers' fault. ... It's very difficult to get untreated seeds." When 
I spoke with Hunt last month, he said he had found roughly a thousand 
dead bees in front of his hive at his home in Indiana just a few days 
earlier. The reason, he suspected, was a farmer who had planted corn 
a third-of-a-mile away on a field surrounded by dandelions, which the 
bees feed on. Hunt said he even found an empty bag of corn kernels 
nearby, indicating the farmer had used the most toxic clothianidin 
seed treatment available.

Just last month, Chensheng (Alex) Lu, associate professor of 
environmental exposure biology at the Harvard School of Public 
Health, published a study linking neonics to honeybee colony 
collapses, replicating findings he first published in a 2012 study. 
He observed three groups of six bee colonies each from October 2012 
through April 2013: Two of the groups were treated with different 
neonic compounds (at doses far below established lethal levels) and a 
control group was left untreated. For the first several months, all 
of the colonies experienced declines typical for New England winters. 
But in January, the control colony population began to increase, as 
is normal, while the neonic-treated hives continued to decline. By 
April, half of the neonic-contaminated colonies were lost, while only 
one of the colonies in the control group, which appeared to have been 
infected by a parasite, did not survive. "We were very confident in 
our conclusions that the pesticides caused this problem," Lu told me. 
Ken Warchol, a sixth-generation beekeeper who managed the colonies in 
Lu's research and co-authored the study, said that neonics exacerbate 
other threats facing honeybees, such as mites and diseases. "There's 
no question that it's a deadly combination." He noted that in his 
commercial business, losses are consistently higher for hives located 
near farms treated with pesticides compared to hives located in 
suburban and urban areas. Numerous beekeepers I interviewed for this 
story echoed Warchol's experience.

Even when bees aren't killed outright by neonics, they can suffer 
lingering effects from exposure to the pesticides. Ellis, for 
example, said that his colonies suffered for months after being 
initially exposed to pesticides. Part of the damage was due to the 
fact that the next cycle of bees was still feeding on 
pesticide-contaminated pollen, he said.
A new state-by-state analysis of honey production data over time 
produced by the Pesticide Research Institute suggests there's a 
correlation between colony losses and the emergence of certain 
pesticides. The report compares rates of decline in honey production 
over the last two decades with rates of approval of neonic usage on 
different crops, and concludes that there's a correlation between the 
two. "Where they are planting corn and soy, it's a disaster," said 
Kegley. "These are declines of anywhere between 30 and 80 percent." 
But in areas where bees are able to forage on plants that have not 
been contaminated with neonics, honey production levels generally 
stayed the same or increased, she said.

In light of the mounting evidence, the European Commission last year 
decided to enact a two-year ban on three neonics to give officials an 
opportunity to reevaluate the pesticide's potential harms to bees. 
For years, beekeepers and environmental activists (including Sierra 
Club) have called on the EPA to implement similar restrictions in the 
United States. So far, they haven't had any success.

The lawsuit alleges that the EPA relied on manufacturers' inadequate 
studies in its approval of two neonic compounds - clothianidin and 
thiamethoxam. Furthermore, the suit alleges, the EPA violated the law 
in its refusal to suspend the usage of these pesticides despite 
knowing the hazards proven by independent research. Critics say the 
lack of proper risk assessment is woven into the agency's so-called 
"conditional registrations," by which regulators can approve a 
pesticide that meets certain standards but still requires more 
testing. The EPA insists it only registers safe products, but from 
the perspective of the agency's critics, pesticide manufacturers have 
repeatedly abused the conditional registration process and secured 
federal approval for the widespread and unsafe use of toxic chemicals.
"We don't have the luxury of debating these questions for the next 
decade," said Tom Theobald, a Colorado beekeeper and co-plaintiff in 
the lawsuit. After 38 years in the industry, his honey business is no 
longer profitable due to repeated losses of his bees. "We are 
completely out of time." Theobald made headlines in 2010 when an EPA 
official sent him a memo - which he then leaked - that included 
concerns from the agency's own experts regarding "deficiencies" in a 
field study on the effects of clothianidin on honeybee hives. The 
study, which was funded by neonics manufacturer Bayer, found that the 
neonic seed treatments have no long-term effect on bees.
In 2003, the EPA approved a conditional registration for the 
pesticide, with the condition being that Bayer must conduct a study 
evaluating the long-term toxicity of the pesticide on pollinators. 
But the beekeepers who have filed suit against the EPA allege that 
Bayer has failed to meet this requirement.

"EPA knew from day one that there was this potential harm to 
pollinators and required [Bayer] to provide more information," said 
Sylvia Wu, a San Francisco-based staff attorney with the Center for 
Food Safety, a plaintiff in the suit. "[Bayer] hasn't produced it, 
but EPA has allowed the product to remain on the marketplace 
nonetheless." The Center for Food Safety, along with a number of 
advocacy groups and beekeepers, sued the EPA after the agency 
rejected their request in a 2012 petition to issue an emergency 
suspension of clothianidin. The lawsuit, filed last year in the US 
District Court for the Northern District of California, is winding 
its way through the courts. In April, a judge issued a ruling 
dismissing parts of the beekeepers' claims and allowing others to 
move forward.

Concerns about bee health extend beyond the use of neonics. Research 
has increasingly demonstrated that the combined use of pesticides can 
lead to significantly increased toxicity levels in bees. In April, 
the Pollinator Stewardship Council reported that almond pollination 
in California led to devastating losses for beekeepers this year. The 
multibillion-dollar almond industry, which depends entirely on 
commercial beekeeping for pollination in late winter, brought roughly 
1,300 beekeepers with a total of 1.7 million colonies to the state 
this season, according to the organization, which collects bee kill 
reports. Around 15 to 25 percent of those colonies were damaged, with 
losses totaling at least $64 million for the commercial beekeepers, 
the group said. The suspected culprit is a so-called "tank mix" of 
chemicals, which includes an insect growth regulator and fungicide.

The EPA, however, generally does not consider the impact of pesticide 
mixtures on bee health. "None of this has been adequately studied or 
taken into consideration for registration purposes," said Penn State 
entomologist Frazier. He published research in 2012 showing that 
certain chemicals sprayed on almonds - including chemicals that are 
considered "inert" and not subject to any regulatory testing 
whatsoever - can impair honeybee learning. "They are completely 
ignoring it," Frazier said. What's more, the almond growers who 
applied the tank mixes this year followed official label guidelines, 
said Michele Colopy, program director of the Pollinator Stewardship 
Council. "Growers and farmers are being shortchanged by the labels 
just as much as the beekeepers." Asked about the bee deaths as a 
result of almond pollination, an EPA spokesperson wrote in an email 
that the cause and scope of the incident is currently under 
investigation, but if the agency finds that these chemicals pose 
"unreasonable adverse effects to the environment," then it "will move 
quickly to take appropriate regulatory action."

The stakes are high for these companies. For example, Friends of the 
Earth's report noted that Bayer reported more than $10 billion in 
global sales from its pesticide and seed growth products in 2012. Its 
leading neonic product, a compound called imidacloprid, is worth $1.1 
billion, according to a 2011 Journal of Agricultural and Food 
Chemistry article cited by Friends of the Earth's report. Bayer also 
has shared interests in clothianidin, which the journal article said 
is worth $439 million. The neonic product manufactured by the 
Switzerland-based Syngenta is a compound called thiamethoxam, which 
is worth $627 million, according to the report. Syngenta reported 
nearly $2 billion in total insecticide sales in 2013. St. Louis-based 
Monsanto, meanwhile, reported sales in its seeds and genomics 
division of $10.3 billion in fiscal year 2013. (Monsanto does not 
report financial data specific to seed treatments.)
Neonics represent just a portion of these companies' massive 
operations. In 2013, Bayer's CropScience division reported sales of 
roughly $12 billion and gross profits of roughly $2.2 billion. In the 
same year, Monsanto reported sales of $14.86 billion and gross 
profits of $7.7 billion, while Syngenta reported sales of $14.7 
billion and gross profits of $6.7 billion.

The companies and their political action committees also spend 
significant sums on political donations and lobbying efforts in 
Washington, DC. Over the last ten years, Bayer, Syngenta, and 
Monsanto have spent roughly $55 million, $9 million, and $61 million, 
respectively, on lobbying activities, according to data from the 
companies and the Center for Responsive Politics. Since 2002, Bayer's 
PAC, Syngenta's PAC, and the Monsanto Citizenship Fund (the company's 
PAC) have donated roughly $2 million, $913,000, and $1.81 million to 
federal campaigns, according to data from the companies and from 
MapLight, a Berkeley-based nonpartisan research organization.

The congressional hearing on pollinators in April also heavily 
focused on varroa mites, relying on testimony from Bayer's Fischer 
and Jeff Pettis, research leader of the USDA's Agricultural Research 
Service Bee Research Laboratory. No independent scientists or 
commercial beekeepers were called to testify.

Jeff Pettis added that pesticide exposure is a key stress that can 
weaken bees and make them vulnerable to diseases. Last year, he 
co-authored a study showing that crop pollination exposes honeybees 
to pesticides that alter their susceptibility to a certain pathogen.

Some argue that the corporate influence on bee research extends to 
academia as well. "I think there are people that are afraid to 
publish data for fear of their careers being interfered with by 
industry," said Maryann Frazier, a honeybee specialist at Penn 
State's department of entomology (and wife of James Frazier). "There 
are people within the pesticide community that ... slam this research 
and these young up-and-coming scientists, because they have said 
something negative, even if the research has been peer-reviewed." 
Harvard's Lu said he was surprised by the intensity and the sometimes 
personal nature of the attacks he faced after he published research 
unfavorable to neonics.

Companies may also be attempting to influence academic research 
through contributions to universities. According to Bayer's Fischer, 
the company plans to spend roughly $12 million on bee health in North 
America this year, with about one-third devoted to research including 
grants to conservation organizations, contracts with research 
organizations, and research within universities. The amount Bayer has 
spent on bee research has increased significantly in recent years, he 
added. Bryan of Syngenta said the company invested $1.37 billion 
globally in research and development in 2013. Brennan from Monsanto 
said the company "does fund a lot of external research from a lot of 
different backgrounds, including academia." Monsanto spent $1.5 
billion on research and development in 2013, according to the 
company's financial reports, plus $113 million on purchasing 
Beeologics, the research firm, in 2011.
Such research investments can help the companies get the positive 
press they seek. When Monsanto announced that it had bought 
Beeologics, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch ran with this headline: 
"Monsanto buys Beeologics, working to save pollinating bees."

While the declining health of honeybees is certainly troubling, other 
insects and pollinators that are beneficial to our food supply are 
also under threat. New research raises concerns about the potential 
harms pesticides carry for a range of species, including birds, 
aquatic invertebrates, and butterflies. Some environmental advocates 
and researchers have attributed dramatic declines in monarch 
butterflies to the widespread use of herbicides, which has killed the 
milkweed plants on which monarchs depend.

"As we've switched to genetically engineered corn that allows us to 
spray more and more herbicides, we then kill off every piece of 
vegetation that's around the corn," said Towers, of the Pesticide 
Action Network. "The butterflies and the bees are just ... indicators 
of how the landscape has changed so dramatically."

While manufacturers present their chemicals as essential to modern 
agriculture, the widespread use of toxic pesticides is not the only 
option. Many food policy experts and environmental advocacy groups 
believe that "integrated pest management" programs - in which 
pesticides are used as a last resort - are more sustainable in the 
long-term and less hazardous to pollinators. In this model, growers 
use a variety of tactics to control pests, such as rotating crops and 
supporting predators. Instead of "pre-sterilizing" fields with 
chemicals, as the Center for Food Safety described in its recent 
report regarding the overuse of neonics, pesticides can be applied 
only when pest damage poses a serious economic threat. In organic 
food production, growers don't use any synthetic chemicals at all and 
only apply pesticides produced from natural sources.

Failing to change our current mode of agricultural production could 
be devastating. If commercial beekeepers can't keep their bees alive, 
they won't be able to bring their pollination services to the growers 
who depend on them. "Ten years from now, I don't know whether we will 
have commercial beekeeping as a career," said the Pesticide Research 
Institute's Kegley. Further declines in bee pollination could 
translate to smaller yields and higher prices for a number of crops, 
including apples, oranges, cherries, and blueberries. And that means 
a less healthy diet, said Kremen of the UC Berkeley Food Institute, 
noting that people struggling with malnutrition and obesity need 
access to affordable fruits and vegetables - foods that largely rely 
on bee pollination. "It's not a pretty picture."

Consider the case of almonds, which rely on pollination from a 
whopping 60 percent of all managed US honeybee colonies every year, 
according to the USDA. As the almond industry has boomed in recent 
decades, the number of honeybee colonies available for pollination 
services has dropped. At this stage, research shows that the 
beekeepers are just barely meeting demand. And after the devastating 
kills this past season, some beekeepers told the EPA that, without 
meaningful regulatory reforms, they will have to add a pesticide 
surcharge to almond pollination contracts for 2015, according to the 
Pollinator Stewardship Council. Other beekeepers, however, may just 
stay away from the almond groves altogether next year. The risk of 
severe hive damage is just too great.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see:
 http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp


 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]

Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see:
 http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp