LISTSERV - IOWA-TOPICS Archives - LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG

Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-844155355==_ma============"
Approved-By:  Laurel Hopwood <[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID:  <f0624086acdaf26e73f4a@[192.168.1.3]>
Date:         Tue, 7 May 2013 18:52:18 -0400
Reply-To:     Biotech Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Biotech Forum <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Laurel Hopwood <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Can a lawsuit save America's bees
To:           [log in to unmask]
Precedence: list

--============_-844155355==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"

<http://modernfarmer.com/2013/05/can-a-lawsuit-save-americas-bees/>http://modernfarmer.com/2013/05/can-a-lawsuit-save-americas-bees/
(edited)

Steve Ellis  and a handful of other beekeepers from around the 
country are teaming up with some of the most powerful and 
sophisticated environmental groups in the U.S.

They're plaintiffs in a lawsuit, Ellis v. Bradbury (read the 
complaint 
<http://www.scribd.com/collections/4246349/Ellis-v-Bradbury>here), 
against the EPA to stop the use of two pesticides that Ellis and 
other beekeepers believe are killing their bee colonies. The suit not 
only attempts to eliminate the use of neonicotinoid pesticides 
containing the ingredients clothianidin and thiamethoxam, which 
damage the central nervous system of insects, but to challenge the 
way the EPA approves pesticides.

If they win, it could change the way pesticides hit the market. If 
they lose, Ellis and the others believe it could be the end of 
beekeeping as we know it.

They are far from alone in their concerns-the European Union 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/30/business/global/30iht-eubees30.html>voted 
in late April to temporarily ban some neonicotinoids, including those 
fingered in the suit, for two years because of their detrimental 
effect on honeybees.

"We're right on the edge of losing it, and we need help right now," says Ellis.

To that end, the beekeepers set out to find allies. They include 
nonprofit advocacy groups such as the 
<http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/>Center for Food Safety, 
<http://www.beyondpesticides.org/>Beyond Pesticides, 
<http://www.sierraclub.org/>the Sierra Club, 
<http://www.panna.org/>Pesticide Action Network North America, and 
the <http://www.ceh.org/>Center for Environmental Health who 
collectively filed the suit (as well as three other beekeepers) in 
federal court in late March. The EPA has until mid-May to respond.

The dire situation has garnered international attention and at stake 
is not only the fate of honeybees and the ecosystems that depend on 
them for pollination, but perhaps more tellingly the farmers who 
require the hives of commercial beekeepers to pollinate their crops, 
including almonds, stone fruits, avocados, apples, and carrots.

Ellis and the environmental groups believe that clothianidin and 
thiamethoxam - insecticides applied to dozens of crops spread over 
more than 100 million acres by farmers seeking to protect their 
yields from a variety of insects - are in large part to blame for 
colony collapse disorder. They say that their bees become 
contaminated with the nerve agents while foraging nectar from the 
treated crops.

As to why the EPA has been slow to name pesticides as the primary 
culprit, Ellis says, "They seem more interested in getting products 
registered quickly, than doing work to protect the environment from 
the result of those products."

Ultimately, if a person or group has a beef with a pesticide, they 
must take it to the EPA's doorstep. The 
<http://www.epa.gov/agriculture/lfra.html>Federal Insecticide, 
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) tasks the agency with 
regulating the use and sale of pesticides to protect humans and the 
environment. But when it comes to putting pesticides on the market, 
the EPA can "conditionally" greenlight products. That means they OK a 
pesticide for use with the understanding that additional scientific 
data is needed before final registration can be approved. And that 
process, the lawsuit says, has been abused.

According to the complaint, thiamethoxam and clothianidin were 
conditionally registered in 2000 and 2003 respectively. There are no 
set deadlines for conditionally registered products to be reviewed, 
and more than a decade later, the requirement for basic scientific 
studies on the impact of the insecticides has gone unmet. Among the 
outstanding studies, the complaint says that EPA hasn't fulfilled its 
stated requirement to "complete an adequate life cycle study, and 
evaluation of exposure and effect to the queen bee."

"They have remained conditionally registered for 10 years without 
adequate information," says Peter Jenkins, lead counsel on the suit 
for the Center for Food Safety. "That wasn't what Congress intended, 
and we think that's a compelling argument to make before a judge."

The suit also argues that the EPA has denied that certain uses of 
clothianidin pose an "imminent hazard" to honey bees and made this 
final determination without considering new data about bee kills. It 
also claims that the EPA repeatedly failed to publically announce new 
or changed uses of the pesticides. And this could provide some relief 
for beekeepers. When it was found in recent similar cases that the 
EPA failed to meet public notice requirements, those pesticide 
registrations were in part withdrawn.

For many watching the case from the sidelines, of great interest is 
how the EPA will weigh its legal obligations. When the EPA registers 
a pesticide, it must balance the risks and benefits the chemical 
poses to the national food supply. Given that on the one hand 
neonicotinoids are used on corn, cereals, and sugar beets (among 
other major agricultural crops), and on the other that one-third of 
U.S. crops depend on pollinators, the stakes are enormous.

"I'm not familiar with another case where there would be anywhere 
near that large of an economic impact on both sides of equation," 
says former EPA attorney Tom Boer, who is now with the environmental 
defense law firm Barg Coffin Lewis and Trapp.



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

To get off the CONS-SPST-BIOTECH-FORUM list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
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








--============_-844155355==_ma============
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
 --></style><title>Can a lawsuit save America's
bees</title></head><body>
<div><a
href=
"http://modernfarmer.com/2013/05/can-a-lawsuit-save-americas-bees/"
>http://modernfarmer.com/2013/05/can-a-lawsuit-save-americas-bees/</a></div
>
<div>(edited)</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Steve Ellis&nbsp; and a handful of other beekeepers from around
the country are teaming up with some of the most powerful and
sophisticated environmental groups in the U.S.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>They're plaintiffs in a lawsuit, Ellis v. Bradbury (read the
complaint <a
href="http://www.scribd.com/collections/4246349/Ellis-v-Bradbury">here</a
>), against the EPA to stop the use of two pesticides that Ellis and
other beekeepers believe are killing their bee colonies. The suit not
only attempts to eliminate the use of neonicotinoid pesticides
containing the ingredients clothianidin and thiamethoxam, which damage
the central nervous system of insects, but to challenge the way the
EPA approves pesticides.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>If they win, it could change the way pesticides hit the market.
If they lose, Ellis and the others believe it could be the end of
beekeeping as we know it.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>They are far from alone in their concerns-the European Union <a
href=
"http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/30/business/global/30iht-eubees30.html"
>voted in late April to temporarily ban some neonicotinoids</a>,
including those fingered in the suit, for two years because of their
detrimental effect on honeybees.<br>
</div>
<div>"We're right on the edge of losing it, and we need help right
now," says Ellis.<br>
</div>
<div>To that end, the beekeepers set out to find allies. They include
nonprofit advocacy groups such as the <a
href="http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/">Center for Food Safety</a>,
<a href="http://www.beyondpesticides.org/">Beyond Pesticides</a>, <a
href="http://www.sierraclub.org/">the Sierra Club</a>, <a
href="http://www.panna.org/">Pesticide Action Network North
America</a>, and the <a href="http://www.ceh.org/">Center for
Environmental Health</a> who collectively filed the suit (as well as
three other beekeepers) in federal court in late March. The EPA has
until mid-May to respond.<br>
</div>
<div>The dire situation has garnered international attention and at
stake is not only the fate of honeybees and the ecosystems that depend
on them for pollination, but perhaps more tellingly the farmers who
require the hives of commercial beekeepers to pollinate their crops,
including almonds, stone fruits, avocados, apples, and carrots.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Ellis and the environmental groups believe that clothianidin and
thiamethoxam - insecticides applied to dozens of crops spread over
more than 100 million acres by farmers seeking to protect their yields
from a variety of insects - are in large part to blame for colony
collapse disorder. They say that their bees become contaminated with
the nerve agents while foraging nectar from the treated crops.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>As to why the EPA has been slow to name pesticides as the primary
culprit, Ellis says, "They seem more interested in getting products
registered quickly, than doing work to protect the environment from
the result of those products."</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Ultimately, if a person or group has a beef with a pesticide,
they must take it to the EPA's doorstep. The <a
href="http://www.epa.gov/agriculture/lfra.html">Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)</a> tasks the agency with
regulating the use and sale of pesticides to protect humans and the
environment. But when it comes to putting pesticides on the market,
the EPA can "conditionally" greenlight products. That means they
OK a pesticide for use with the understanding that additional
scientific data is needed before final registration can be approved.
And that process, the lawsuit says, has been abused.</div>
<blockquote><br></blockquote>
<div>According to the complaint, thiamethoxam and clothianidin were
conditionally registered in 2000 and 2003 respectively. There are no
set deadlines for conditionally registered products to be reviewed,
and more than a decade later, the requirement for basic scientific
studies on the impact of the insecticides has gone unmet. Among the
outstanding studies, the complaint says that EPA hasn't fulfilled
its stated requirement to "complete an adequate life cycle study,
and evaluation of exposure and effect to the queen bee."</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>"They have remained conditionally registered for 10 years
without adequate information," says Peter Jenkins, lead counsel on
the suit for the Center for Food Safety. "That wasn't what
Congress intended, and we think that's a compelling argument to make
before a judge."</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>The suit also argues that the EPA has denied that certain uses of
clothianidin pose an "imminent hazard" to honey bees and made this
final determination without considering new data about bee kills. It
also claims that the EPA repeatedly failed to publically announce new
or changed uses of the pesticides. And this could provide some relief
for beekeepers. When it was found in recent similar cases that the EPA
failed to meet public notice requirements, those pesticide
registrations were in part withdrawn.<br>
</div>
<div>For many watching the case from the sidelines, of great interest
is how the EPA will weigh its legal obligations. When the EPA
registers a pesticide, it must balance the risks and benefits the
chemical poses to the national food supply. Given that on the one hand
neonicotinoids are used on corn, cereals, and sugar beets (among other
major agricultural crops), and on the other that one-third of U.S.
crops depend on pollinators, the stakes are enormous.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>"I'm not familiar with another case where there would be
anywhere near that large of an economic impact on both sides of
equation," says former EPA attorney Tom Boer, who is now with the
environmental defense law firm Barg Coffin Lewis and Trapp.<br>
</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
</body>
</html>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe from the CONS-SPST-BIOTECH-FORUM 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 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
--============_-844155355==_ma============--