Photo by Steve Hillebrand, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
The impacts of pesticides on wildlife are extensive, and expose animals in urban, suburban and rural areas to unnecessary risks. Beyond Pesticides considers wildlife to be any organism that is not domesticated or used in a lab. This includes but is not limited to bees, birds, small mammals, fish, other aquatic organisms, and the biota within soil. Wildlife can be impacted by pesticides through direct or indirect applications, such as pesticide drift, secondary poisoning, runoff into local water bodies, and groundwater contamination. It is possible that some animals could be sprayed directly, while others consume plants or prey that have been exposed to pesticides.
Click the links below to quickly navigate our wildlife page:
Pesticide exposure can be linked to cancer, endocrine disruption, reproductive effects, neurotoxicity, kidney and liver damage, birth defects and developmental changes in a wide range of species. Exposure to pesticides can also alter an organism’s behavior, impacting its ability to survive. In birds, for example, exposure to certain pesticides can impede its singing ability, making it difficult to attract a mate and reproduce. Pesticides can also affect a bird’s ability to care for its offspring, causing their young to die. For bees, even “near-infinitesimal” levels of systemic pesticides result in sublethal effects, impacting mobility, feeding behaviors, and navigation.
Many deformations have been found after exposure to hormone-mimicking pesticides classified as endocrine disruptors. The impacts of these chemicals include hermaphroditic deformities in frogs, pseudo-hermaphrodite polar bears with penis-like stumps, panthers with atrophied testicles, and intersex fish in rivers throughout the United States. Reproductive abnormalities have been observed in mammals, birds, reptiles, fish, and mollusks at levels considered “safe” by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Visit our Pesticide Gateway for more information about specific pesticides and their impact on wildlife.
Biodiversity is the web of life, including the complex array of organisms that live in the environment and their interactions and interdependencies. The functionality of biodiversity has deep significance to nurturing and protecting the many individual species in the environment as part of a greater whole. The impacts that pesticides have on wildlife directly relates back into the functioning of biodiversity. The Earth’s rich biological heritage of species, communities, and ecosystems, which have evolved across millions of years, is rapidly deteriorating and in many instances irreversibly disappearing. The aforementioned impacts that pesticides have on wildlife is a major cause for concern in regards to the deterioration of biodiversity.
Organic pest management sharply contrasts with a chemical-intensive approach in terms of its impact on the stability and resiliency of ecosystems. This divergence has enormous consequences for biodiversity and survival of wild species. Recognizing that various land management practices may have different effects on the web of life is crucial to maintaining the intricate balance and life-sustaining benefits of nature. Utilizing organic pest management over chemical-intensive controls is the most crucial change that can be made in order to mitigate negative impacts of pesticides to wildlife and to preserve the Earth’s remaining biodiversity.
The estimated economic costs of losses to biodiversity in the form of pollinator services, “beneficial” predators, birds and aquatic life are continually changing as more complex and comprehensive studies are published. Earlier studies estimated that the cost of losses to biodiversity might amount to more than $1.1 billion every year. Now, we know that the loss of biodiversity can cost hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Natural pest control, a fundamental agricultural service, is estimated to be worth $100 billion annually. The role of soil biota in increasing agricultural productivity is worth $25 billion annually. By 2009, the value of dependent crops attributed to all insect pollination was estimated to be worth $15.12 billion annually.
|Photo by Pierre Mineau, Canada|
Other economic impacts can come from the recreational use of wildlife. US citizens already spend over $60 billion annually on hunting, fishing and observing wildlife, much of which is dependent on insects as a food source. Researchers have found that there is a steady decline in these insects due to pesticide exposure and an overall decline in biodiversity. It could be concluded then that, as beneficial insect populations decline, their ability to provide ecosystem services will also decline, impacting the available wildlife for hunting, fishing and observing. The demand for these recreational activities will stay constant while the supply (availability) will decline, causing an increase in dollars spent by US citizens for each year.
One way to combat all of the negative impacts of pesticides to wildlife is to initiate organic practices on your own lawn and in your own garden, while supporting organic agriculture instead of conventional agriculture that relies on pesticides. Beyond Pesticides supports organic agriculture as effecting good land stewardship and reducing hazardous chemical exposures to wildlife. The pesticide reform movement, citing pesticide problems associated with chemical agriculture, from groundwater contamination and runoff to drift, views organic as the solution to these serious environmental threats.
Conventional agriculture relies on a “pick and choose” method when it comes to pesticide use, only treating the symptoms of bad land management instead of acknowledging the deeper problems and attempting to fully understand agriculture as a whole system, including impacts on wildlife. The greatest benefit and positive change would come from adopting a whole systems approach, starting with management methods which “feed-the-soil,” promoting healthy land from the ground up. Beyond Pesticides has long supported a “feed-the-soil” approach to agricultural management. We promote a systems approach that centers on management of soil health and proper fertilization that eliminates synthetic fertilizers and focuses on building the soil food web and nurturing soil microorganisms. Experience demonstrates that this approach will build a soil environment rich in microbiology that will produce strong, healthy land and benefit wildlife at the same time.
By promoting soil resiliency, the need for pesticides is dampened, which promotes natural predators and wildlife by giving them a chance to do what they were meant to do in nature. Organic systems save wildlife from the dangerous impacts of pesticides, encourages them to flourish, and restores the natural balance that is unable to exist in a conventional agricultural system.
One way that groups like Beyond Pesticides have sought to protect wildlife from the threat of pesticides is by holding federal agencies accountable to the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The ESA was passed in 1973 in order to provide for the conservation of ecosystems upon which threatened and endangered species of fish, wildlife and plants depend. EPA has routinely disregarded the ESA’s requirement to consult with federal wildlife agencies on how to implement conservation measures to protect threatened and endangered species from pesticides. After years of gridlock, federal wildlife agencies, EPA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) asked the National Academy of Sciences to study the issue and report on ways to better protect listed species (any species that is likely to become endangered or any species which is in danger of extinction) from the effects of toxic pesticides. The National Academy report identified deficiencies for all the agencies involved in pesticide consultations, but singled out the EPA’s approach for its numerous analytical shortcomings.In response to the Academy’s recommendations, the agency announced several reforms designed to better protect endangered species in the fall of 2013.
A stranded fish at Murray's Cauld near Selkirk, Photo by Walter Baxter
While the ESA is one of the most important laws for protecting wildlife, The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), Clean Water Act (CWA), and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) are also significant laws that are meant to keep wildlife safe. FIFRA regulates pesticides to prevent “unreasonable adverse effects” to humans and the environment, including wildlife. The stated objective of the CWA is to “restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters…for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife.” Finally, NEPA requires that any federal government action that may impact wildlife and the environment must review and evaluate those impacts before any action is taken. Each of these laws can be utilized to protect wildlife by holding federal agencies accountable to them. For more detailed information about each law and how they protect wildlife, read Preserving Biodiversity As If Life Depends on It, from our winter 2011-2012 Pesticides and You newsletter.
See below for successful litigation regarding pesticides and wildlife:
EPA Agrees to Regulate Novel Nanotechnology Pesticides after Legal Challenge (March 2015)
Final Suit Routing Genetically Engineered Crops and Related Practices from Refuges (March 2015)
Following Lawsuit, EPA Restores Stream Buffers to Protect Salmon from Pesticides (August 2014)
The Dangers of Pesticides to Wildlife
Getting the Drift on Chemical Trespass
Pesticides That Disrupt Endocrine System Still Unregulated by EPA
Preserving Biodiversity As If Life Depends On It
Environmental and Economic Costs of the Application of Pesticides Primarily in the United States
The Real Story on the Affordability of Organic Food
Protecting Life: From Research to Regulation