(Beyond Pesticides, March 11, 2015)   The White House’s recommendations for pollinator-friendly landscaping at federal facilities are “largely unachievable,” according to trade groups AmericanHort and the Society of American Florists. The groups believe that growing plants that attract and feed honey bees, wild bees, butterflies and other pollinators without a reliance on persistent, systemic and toxic pesticides that can harm them is “not a viable recommendation.” This comes in spite of several initiatives already taken by nurseries across the country to limit or restrict the use of systemic neonicotinoid pesticides on nursery and ornamental plant production.

Last fall, the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) announced new guidelines for federal agencies to incorporate pollinator friendly practices at federal facilities and on federal lands.

Critical to pollinator health within these guidelines is a requirement that agencies should “[a]cquire seeds and plants from nurseries that do not treat their plants with systemic insecticides.” Further, the document states that, “Chemical controls that can adversely affect pollinator populations should not be applied in pollinator habitats. This includes herbicides, broad spectrum contact and systemic insecticides, and some fungicides.” Concurrent with CEQ’s announcement, the General Services Administration (GSA) also stated it is in the process of internally reviewing pollinator friendly guidelines for facility standards at “all new project starts.” Systemic pesticides like neonicotinoids have been linked to bee decline, and are noted for their contamination of pollen and nectar, as well as their persistence in soil and water. Visit  What the Science Shows.

But in a letter submitted last month to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, which is spearheading the White House’s directive to establish a federal Pollinator Health Task Force to respond to declining pollinator populations, AmericanHort and the Society of American Florists took issue with CEQ’s suggestion that agencies avoid plants treated with systemic insecticides.

According to the groups, the recommendation in CEQ’s guidelines for pesticide restriction would impede the use of neonicotinoids, and would clash with state and federal requirements to treat for invasive pests. “We are concerned that some of the guidance recommendations provided in the ‘pollinator’ addendum are largely unachievable by industry, as they are not reflective of federal and state regulatory requirements and do not account for the significant pest challe nges that our segment of agriculture faces,” the letter states.

The groups believe that foregoing neonicotinoids could violate legal requirements to keep nurseries free of “all injurious insects,” including the emerald ash borer, the Asian longhorned beetle and other pests. Recommending that plant material be sourced only from suppliers that can “verify no insecticide treatments” is not a viable recommendation and could influence some growers to take greater risk and potentially spread problematic and invasive pests and disease on federal properties,” they wrote.

The letter also questions the guidance’s definition of integrated pest management (IPM), especially methods that promote use of biological controls, like predatory insects, to protect plants. CEQ in its guidance notes that IPM, “places an emphasis on the reduction of pesticide use and the implementation of preventative and alternative control measures.” However, the groups believe that CEQ’s IPM recommendations alter and expand the legislative definition of IPM by highlighting one perspective of IPM above other considerations. The letter states this “is not appropriate and is not reflective of the intent of IPM. Risks and benefits must be taken into consideration when making these decisions and the CEQ language suggests otherwise.” The letter requests edits to the definition of IPM in CEQ’s guidance document and also a removal of statements regarding sourcing plant material from growers that have not used insecticides or systemic insecticides and replace with statements for sourcing of plant material from growers who have adopted an IPM program in their plant production practices.

Plants can be grown without neonicotinoids and other systemic pesticides              

It is a common myth perpetuated by the pesticide, agricultural, and horticultural industry that growing plants without pesticides cannot be done. But while these two national industry groups charge that creating pollinator habitat without toxic inputs cannot be done to protect pollinators, several smaller nurseries and retail outlets have already pledged to not use systemic neonicotinoids to grow their plants and protect pollinators. Focused on their owe operations, Behnke Nurseries Co. in Maryland has issued a policy statement to their stores that prohibits the application of neonicotinoids to its plants and recommends using least-toxic alternatives. Bachman’s 21 locations in Minnesota are eliminating neonicotinoids on their nursery stock and outdoor plants. Taking it to the next level, Bachman’s is also working with suppliers to discontinue the use of neonicotinoids. Cavano’s Perennials, MD, Blooming Nursery, OR, North Creek Nurseries, PA, Suncrest Nurseries Inc, CA, Desert Canyon Farm, CO, and others have either discontinued or never used neonicotinoid pesticides in their nursery operations. Additionally, BJ’s Wholesale Club (over 200+ locations) is asking its vendors to discontinue neonicotinoid use. Home Depot also has plans to work with its suppliers to transition from neonicotinoid reliance.

Beyond Pesticides also has a comprehensive directory of companies and organizations that sell organic seeds and plants. Included in this directory are seeds for vegetables, flowers, and herbs, as well as live plants and seedlings.

Mounting scientific evidence points to the role of pesticides in bee declines across the globe, especially to neonicotinoids (eg imidacloprid, clothianidin, thiamethoxam) which, even at low levels, have been shown to impair foraging, navigational and learning behavior in bees, as well as suppress their immune system to the point of making them susceptible to pathogens and parasites. Last week, beekeepers, farmers, businesses and environmental advocates rallied in front of the White House to deliver over 4 million petition signatures  that call on the Obama administration to protect pollinators, and over 125 groups sent a letter to the White House.

While industry deflection tactics are working to shift focus away from their pesticide products, local efforts provide a promising opportunity for communities across the United States to stand up for pollinators. Eugene (Oregon), Skagway (Alaska), Ontario (Canada), and the European Union have all instituted either permanent or temporary bans on the use of neonicotinoid pesticides. With one in three bites of food reliant on bees and other insects for pollination, the decline of honey bees and other pollinators due to pesticides, and other human-made causes demands immediate action. Visit Beyond Pesticides’ BEE Protective webpage to learn more about the issue and what can be done to protect pollinators.

(Beyond Pesticides, March 10, 2015) U.S. Senator Charles E. Schumer (D-NY) yesterday called on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) yesterday to immediately investigate the specific use of pentachlorophenol  (penta or PCP), a toxic wood preservative, to treat  utility poles throughout Long Island and urged  Public Service Electric and Gas (PSEG) Long Island to immediately suspend further use of this chemical until a  federal review  is complete. PSEG has been installing new, chemically-treated utility poles throughout the Towns of North Hempstead and East Hampton. In his press  release, Senator Schumer expresses  serious concern about penta’s  health risks to utility workers, adults and children and its ability to  move  into water over the long-term as the chemical leaches from the poles. The Senator also notes that a private firm has conducted a study based on a very limited sample size that does not consider long-term risks as the pole decomposes and further leaches toward groundwater. EPA, which is responsible for evaluating penta’s health and environmental risk, has noted public health concerns related to the chemical when ingested or inhaled, including  neurological, respiratory, kidney and immune system effects.

On Long Island, 95,000 of PSEG’s 324,000 utility poles have been treated with penta. Across the country, penta is used on approximately 55 percent of 166 million wooden utility poles. Localities throughout Long Island have voiced concern about the use of this chemical and the potential for it to leach into the ground water. In September, the Town of North Hempstead passed a law requiring warning labels on utility poles treated with PCP. The mandated labeling states, “This pole contains a hazardous chemical. Avoid prolonged direct contact with this pole. Wash hands or other exposed areas thoroughly if contact is made.” In January, PSEG filed suit in the U.S. District Court against the Town of North Hempstead to stop the signage, asserting that the law violates the utility companies’ right to free-speech by forcing them to post warning signs containing “disputed phrases and accompanying text urging the public to take action.”  Shortly after North Hempstead’s action, New York State Senator John LaValle and Assemblyman Fred Thiele announced companion legislation to prohibit the future use of utility poles treated with penta, and call for the posting of warnings to inform people about the dangers of contact with penta  on existing poles.  In the international arena, the technical scientific committee to the Stockholm Convention, which calls for the worldwide elimination of persistent organic pollutants (POPs), has advised the nation signatories to the treaty to add penta to the list of POPs. It will make the decision in May. Meanwhile, the U.S., which never ratified the treaty, has sent EPA officials to the proceedings of the Convention to try to block the listing of penta as a persistent organic pollutant.

As debate rages and communities attempt to protect themselves in the absence of adequate EPA action, there are alternatives to chemically treated poles. Alternatives range from poles constructed of cement, fiberglass, or recycled metals, as well as laying utility lines underground. Currently, the long-term costs of purchasing, installing and maintaining fiberglass and concrete poles makes them competitive to treated wood utility poles.

Despite inadequate regulatory action, EPA has recognized that the short-term ingestion and inhalation of penta is extremely toxic to humans and is a “probable” human carcinogen. Short-term inhalation of penta can result in issues with the respiratory tract, blood, kidney, liver, immune system, eyes, nose, skin as well as neurological issues. PCP is highly toxic and has been listed as a possible carcinogen by national and international agencies. Concerns have been raised throughout the years over EPA’s continued registration of PCP in the U.S. despite having been banned in all European Union member states, China, India, New Zealand, Indonesia, and Russia. According to Beyond Pesticides’ Pole Pollution, EPA has calculated that children face a 220 times increase in the risk of cancer from exposure to soil contaminated with PCP leaching out of the utility poles. These utility poles are ubiquitous across our country.

Sen. Schumer is joined by town of North Hempstead Supervisor Judi Bosworth, other Long Island residents. The Senator said that because the penta treated telephone and electrical poles can be found in populated areas like yards, parks, outside schools and around local businesses, it is critical that EPA quickly conduct a safety review of penta related to human health risks and risks to soil and groundwater, and urged that PSEG suspend the use of this chemical in utility poles until the EPA investigation proves this chemical appropriate for use in these poles.quick

“There’s no debate that ‘penta’ is a highly toxic chemical that should be nowhere near playgrounds or our drinking water, and I am petitioning the federal EPA to step in and investigate the long-term impact of using this toxic chemical specifically on utility poles in Long Island neighborhoods and parks. The EPA is the golden standard when it comes to assessing health and environmental risk of such chemicals, and has yet to review penta, and I am urging them to end the debate regarding the use of this chemical by PSEG. Many of these wooden utility poles are standing nearby schools, parks, businesses and homes, and so, we must ensure that residents and children are not being exposed to the highly toxic chemical if it leaches into the ground water. In the meantime, PSEG should stop installing these utility poles until the long-term federal investigation is completed,” said Senator Schumer.

“I am extremely pleased to be standing with Senator Schumer as we speak out about the harmful effects of penta to our residents and our environment. I and many of the Town’s residents are extremely concerned about the continued use of penta as a pesticide for utility poles. Penta is a probable carcinogen and has long been recognized as a public health threat. It’s time for the EPA to investigate this toxic carcinogen,” said Town of North Hempstead Supervisor Judi Bosworth.

“I join Senator Schumer and Supervisor Bosworth in raising serious health concerns over pentachlorophenol contamination. Recent soil and groundwater tests adjacent to newly installed utility poles in East Hampton found penta in the soil at extremely high levels””at amounts far exceeding New York State Department of Environmental Conservation standards””and chemical components associated with penta in the groundwater,” said Town of East Hampton Supervisor Larry Cantwell.

Twenty six countries, including Canada, currently ban penta completely. In December, the preservative was found in soil surrounding the utility poles in East Hampton. Senator Schumer said that a recent study conducted by a private firm is totally insufficient in terms of ensuring that these penta-treated poles do not pose a threat to the long-term health of local residents: the study was based on a very limited sample size and studied poles that were recently placed in the ground. Senator Schumer said that the federal government should be involved, and urged the EPA to conduct a federal study on penta’s long-term impact on communities with these utility poles, particularly related to the long-term degradation of these poles and subsequent leaching into the soil and ground water. EPA recently announced that it plans to reassess the safety of penta, however the agency has yet to release its final work plan to evaluate health and environmental risks, and Senator Schumer is urging the agency to focus on the specific threat that utility poles treated with this substance may pose to communities across Long Island.

Beyond Pesticides has been sounding the alarm on toxic wood preservatives for decades, and has done extensive work to address the risks of exposure to penta and the other two heavy-duty wood preservatives, inorganic arsenicals (such as chromated copper arsenate, or CCA) and creosote. In addition to Pole Pollution, Beyond Pesticides also published Poison Poles, which examines the toxic trail left by the manufacture, use, storage and disposal of the heavy-duty wood preservatives from cradle to grave. On December 10, 2002, a lawsuit led by Beyond Pesticides was filed in federal court by a national labor union, environmental groups and a victim family to stop the use of arsenic and dioxin-laden wood preservatives, which are used to treat lumber, utility poles and railroad ties. The litigation argued that the chemicals, known carcinogenic agents, hurt utility workers exposed to treated poles, children playing near treated structures, and the environment, and cites the availability of alternatives.

For more extensive information about pesticide-treated wood for utility poles and railroad ties, see Beyond Pesticides Wood Preservatives program page, and read Beyond Poison Poles: Elected officials say no to toxic utility poles in their communities, from the Fall 2014 issue of Pesticides and You.

Take Action:
Join Beyond Pesticides’ Poison Pole Campaign. Take a photo of the ugly pole in your neighborhood, on your street, at a bus stop, in a park, or even at your local playground. If people walk, live or play near the pole, show that in the photo, if possible. Include your name and the location of the photo and send it to [email protected] by April 30, 2015.

Source: Press Release

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

(Beyond Pesticides, March 7, 2015) The quaint and charming town of Ogunquit, Maine has proudly accepted the 16^th Down East Environmental Award, presented by Down East magazine, for passing a ballot initiative  last November that prohibits  the use of toxic lawn pesticides on all public and private land within the town —only the second community in the United States to do so, following Takoma Park in Maryland. To help the community implement the new law and provide hands-on technical information to people in town and the region, the local hardware store, Eldredge Lumber and Hardware, is sponsoring a training open to the public, landscapers, and officials on Saturday, March 14.

In 1979, Down East magazine introduced the prestigious Down East Environmental Award in order to encourage the conservation of Maine’s natural resources and to honor citizens and groups who are at the forefront of creating positive environmental change, or have helped to secure conservation efforts in the past. Previous recipients of this award include Governor Percival Baxter, who in 2004 was recognized for his deep dedication to conserving the wilds in the state of Maine, specifically around Mt. Kadahdin, and Governor John E. Baldacci, who in 2009 was presented with the award for his work on the Sears Island Planning Initiative.

Similarly to Governors Baxter and Baldacci, the community members of Ogunquit demonstrated their dedication to conserving Maine’s natural resources by banning all insect killers, weed killers and fertilizers last November. Before the ban was passed, the Ogunquit Conservation Commission launched a three-year education and awareness campaign to further their goal to “protect and maintain Ogunquit’s natural resources, to conserve natural habitat, to procure and develop open spaces, parks and trails, to establish public access conservation easements through land trusts or town owned properties.” This campaign helped to grow overwhelming support for the ordinance and it re-passed on November 4, 2014 with a vote of 444 to 297 in favor of the ban. Ogunquit has since become a leader within Maine and the wider United States, demonstrating to others how to best protect public health and create a sustainable environment within a community.

The presentation of this award to Ogunquit is especially important because it demonstrates to citizens that there are ways to create positive environmental change with their own actions, such as doing something as simple as discontinuing the use of pesticides on their own property. Halting the use of pesticides on private property is as important as a ban on public lands — private residential usage leads to pollution of local waterways and dangerously impacts public health too. Of the 30 most commonly used lawn pesticides, 17 are possible and/or known carcinogens,   18 have the potential to disrupt the endocrine (hormonal) system, 19 are linked to reproductive effects and sexual dysfunction, 11 have been linked to birth defects, 14 are neurotoxic, 24 can cause kidney or liver damage, and 25 are sensitizers and/or irritants. Children are especially sensitive to pesticide exposure as they take in more pesticides relative to their body weight than adults and have developing organ systems that are more vulnerable and less able to detoxify toxic chemicals. Getting rid of pesticide use on your lawn may seem daunting, but there are many alternatives for safer lawn care. Pest and weed pressure can be reduced and ultimately eliminated through a “feel the soil” approach that centers on natural, organic fertilization, and proper cultural practices such as correct mowing height, aeration, and overseeding. Creating a toxic-free lawn is possible when you understand why weeds occur in the first place, and take steps to eliminate conditions that allow their growth.

Along with human health risks, pesticides can and do negatively impact animal habitats and the environment. Aquatic animals are extremely sensitive to pesticide runoff. Increased levels of lawn care pesticides in stream systems have been found to decimate populations of some aquatic crustaceans, while causing others to mutate and become resistant to the pesticides. Ogunquit’s decision to ban pesticides not only led to greater protection of its residents, but also to the unique ecosystem surrounding it, including precious salt marshes and beaches where migratory birds, fish and mammals make their home.

Pro-pesticide lobbyists have a history of undermining these types of decisions, pushing against localities’ right to enact legislation that would protect community health and the environment. Specifically in Ogunquit, a pro-pesticide group called RISE (Responsible Industry for a Sound Environment) passed out flyers to Ogunquit resident’s homes in order to spread false information and cast doubt over the impending decision. In the 1990’s, groups like RISE worked feverishly to enact regressive state pesticide preemption laws that prevent localities from enacting any ordinance that regulates pesticides more strictly than state law. Maine is one of seven states that does not preempt local authorities’ ability to restrict the use of pesticides on all land within their jurisdiction.

Take action. Whether your state has preemption or not, you can still work to get toxics out of your community. It takes a lot of work and commitment, but it can be done with some perseverance. It’s important to find support —friends, neighbors, and other people who share your concerns about environmental health. It’s also essential to reach out to your local politicians and government. Beyond Pesticides has resources and factsheets available to help you organize in your community. You can also call (202-543-5450) or email ([email protected]) for one-on-one consultation about the strategies you can take to have an impact.

Attend a workshop with Chip Osborne and Jay Feldman on transitioning to organic land management. On Saturday, March 14,  Chip Osborne  of Osborne Organics and Jay Feldman of Beyond Pesticides  are conducting two workshops on implementing the new Ogunquit law, focusing on organic turf management practices that can effectively replace chemical-intensive methods with better results at a competitive cost. The training sessions are being hosted by Eldredge Lumber and Hardware in York, Maine. For more information on the training programs, location, and to register, please contact Eldredge Hardware.

Source: Seacoastonline

Photo Credit: Downeast Lakes Land Trust

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

(Beyond Pesticides, March 6, 2015) Last Friday, Oregon enacted a new rule which bans the use of four types of bee-killing insecticides, including  imidacloprid, clothianidin, thiamethoxam and dinotefuran, regardless of application method on linden trees and other Tilia species. The four insecticides that are now illegal to spray on Tilia trees are all in the neonicotinoid chemical class which are implicated in pollinator decline, and represents a step forward in protecting bees. However, Tilia trees are not the only route of exposure that bees and other pollinators have to neonics, which are currently applied to fields across the U.S. as seed treatment.

The rule comes at the request of the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA) following several bee-kill incidents in Oregon since June 2013, when more than 50,000 bumblebees were killed after dinotefuran was sprayed on trees in a shopping mall parking lot in Wilsonville, Oregon. After the incident in Wilsonville, ODA initially placed restrictions on two of the chemicals, dinotefuran and imidacloprid on Tilia trees, and the state launched a task force to look at protections for pollinators. The group came out with a range of recommendations including increased outreach and education about bees and support for bee habitat research, but stopped short of prioritizing state restrictions on neonicotinoid use.

Mounting scientific evidence points to the role of pesticides in bee declines across the globe, especially to neonics, which, even at low levels, have been shown to impair foraging, navigational and learning behavior in bees, as well as suppress their immune system to point of making them susceptible to pathogens and parasites.

Earlier this week, beekeepers, farmers, businesses and environmental advocates rallied in front of the White House to deliver over 4 million petition signatures calling on the Obama administration to protect pollinators, and over 125 groups sent a letter to the White House. Some promising steps have been taken, such as the ban of neonics on National Wildlife Refuges, and the issuance of a Presidential Memorandum which established a corresponding White House Task Force. However, federal agencies, such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) remain hesitant to take meaningful action.

Meanwhile, local efforts provide a promising opportunity for communities across the United States to stand up for pollinators. Eugene (Oregon), Skagway (Alaska), Ontario (Canada), and the European Union have all instituted either permanent or temporary bans on the use of neonics.

With one in three bites of food reliant on bees and other insects for pollination, the decline of honey bees and other pollinators due to pesticides, and other man-made causes demands immediate action. Visit Beyond Pesticides’ BEE Protective webpage to learn more about the issue and what can be done to protect pollinators.

Source: The Oregonian

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

(Beyond Pesticides, March 05, 2015) A federal audit has concluded that acceptable federal inspections at pesticide-producing establishments have not been conducted in North Dakota, possibly endangering the public and the environment. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) independent Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued a report last week that finds the state lacks a state inspector with qualifications equivalent to a federal inspector who can conduct inspections on EPA’s behalf. As a result, North Dakota facilities that produce or handle pesticides have not been federally inspected for 14 years, and that about 1,300 pesticide imports that have come through the state since 2011 have not undergone federal inspections.

“Without such inspections, residents in other states and locations in the United States, in addition to North Dakota, could be at risk,” according to the report signed by EPA Inspector General Arthur A. Elkins Jr.

Staff at EPA Region 8 stated that inspections authorized under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) have not been conducted because North Dakota officials do not want federal inspections in their state. FIFRA (Section 7) gives EPA inspection authority and enables the agency to take enforcement actions against facilities that are not in compliance with the Act. Failure to conduct inspections increases the risk of pesticides not being in compliance with federal law, which could result in potential risks from toxics being undetected and adverse human health and environmental impacts occurring.

In a statement issued in response to the OIG report, EPA Region 8 said that it will make sure that some state inspectors are federally certified, but that the report from OIG “does not present an accurate or complete picture of the intensity of pesticides oversight and inspection activity conducted in the state.”

The OIG report has angered North Dakota Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring, who says the state is being treated unfairly by the federal agency.

“They don’t seem to understand or realize how you need to operate in the real world,” he said.

North Dakota’s Agriculture Department handles inspections of pesticide handlers in partnership with EPA, and receives funding from the federal agency for that work. However, the OIG report concluded that the agency should not accept “the state’s preference that federal inspections not be carried out in North Dakota.” The report adds that 14 years have passed since acceptable inspections of pesticide facilities in North Dakota have occurred. Mr. Goehring, on the other hand, asserts that about 680 proper inspections have been conducted in that time.

OIG recommends that the regional EPA office immediately begin handling inspections of pesticide handlers and imports in the state, or have them done by North Dakota inspectors with federal credentials. The state has not had a federally credentialed inspector since the last one retired two years ago.

The report “notes a specific concern with having inspectors operating in the state that are federally certified, and this is a concern that EPA Region 8 has committed to remedy as we move forward,” the regional office said in its statement. “It is worth noting that the state had a federally certified inspector on staff until their retirement in 2013 and is in the process of obtaining federal credentials for two state inspectors.”

Mr. Goehring said inspections of pesticide facilities handled by his office meet or exceed federal standards, and import inspections at the U.S.-Canada border have always been a federal responsibility, though the state has assisted when asked.

The regional EPA office said the OIG report “presents an incomplete picture of EPA activity” when it comes to import inspections. Mr. Goehring plans to consult with the regional EPA office and get federal credentials for at least one state inspector.

You can learn how to reduce your own pesticide footprint by checking out Beyond Pesticides’  Eating with a Conscience  website and choosing organic, which provides environmental and health benefits to consumers, workers, and rural families. The Eating with a Conscience database, based on legal tolerances (or allowable residues on food commodities), describes a food production system that enables toxic pesticide use both domestically and internationally, and provides a look at the toxic chemicals allowed in the production of the food we eat and the environmental and public health effects resulting from their use. For more information on the benefits of organic agriculture, see Beyond Pesticides’  Organic Food program page.

Join us in person to help us continue the fight against pesticide use. This spring is Beyond Pesticides’  33rd National Pesticide Forum  in Orlando, FL, April 17-18th 2015. Early bird registration is in effect until March 15, so make your plans to register today!

Source: The Fresno Bee

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

(Beyond Pesticides, March 4, 2015) The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has agreed to hear the case brought by beekeepers challenging the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) approval of a toxic pesticide known to be toxic to bees. In 2013, the beekeepers filed suit against the agency, citing that the new chemical, sulfoxaflor, as further endangering bees and beekeeping and noting that their concerns were not properly addressed by EPA before registration was granted. Sulfoxaflor is a sub-class of the neonicotinoid pesticides that have been linked to global bee declines.

The Court has agreed to hear the case on April 14, 2015. The case, Pollinator Stewardship Council v. EPA, which requests changes to EPA’s product label for sulfoxaflor, was first filed July 2013. The petitioners include the Pollinator Stewardship Council, the American Honey Producers Association, the National Honey Bee Advisory Board, the American Beekeeping Federation, and beekeepers Bret Adee, Jeff Anderson and Thomas Smith. The beekeeper groups are represented by Earthjustice.

The case is one of a number of pending legal cases on EPA’s pesticide decisions under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), including one submitted March 2013 by Beyond Pesticides, the Center for Food Safety, beekeepers, and other environmental and consumer groups challenging the agency’s failure to protect pollinators from dangerous pesticides. That lawsuit challenges EPA’s oversight of the neonicotinoid insecticides-clothianidin and thiamethoxam– which have repeatedly been identified as highly toxic to honey bees, as well as the agency’s registration process, labeling deficiencies, and seeks suspension of the registrations.

In the case of sulfoxaflor, the beekeepers’ suit is requesting changes in the sulfoxaflor product label, the Biological Economic Assessment Division (BEAD) assessment of the value of pollinators and their established habits, and EPA’s risk assessment process. According to Greg Loarie, one of the Earthjustice attorneys arguing the case, “There’s very little case law in general challenging directly EPA’s decisions regarding pesticide labels.”

EPA states in court documents that the benefits of sulfoxaflor -like the potential to replace older and more toxic pesticides and a lower needed dose- outweigh the risk to pollinators. In registration documents, EPA also notes that none of the objections to sulfoxaflor registrations point to any data “to support the opinion that registration of sulfoxaflor will pose a grave risks to bees,” even though the agency itself acknowledges that sulfoxaflor is highly toxic to bees. The agency states that even though sulfoxaflor is highly toxic to bees it does not demonstrate “catastrophic effects” on bees from its use. While sulfoxaflor exhibits behavioral and navigational abnormalities in honey bees, EPA downplays these effects as “short-lived.” Dow Agrosciences, which developed and commercialized sulfoxaflor, has intervened on behalf of EPA in the suit.

Sulfoxaflor is a new active ingredient, registered in 2013, whose mode of action is similar to that of neonicotinoid pesticides —it acts on the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) in insects. Even though it has not been classified as a neonicotinoid, it elicits similar neurological responses in honey bees, with many believing that sulfoxaflor is the new generation of neonicotinoid. Sulfoxaflor is registered for use on vegetables, fruits, barley, canola, ornamentals, soybeans, wheat and others. Several comments were submitted by concerned beekeepers and environmental advocacy groups, like Beyond Pesticides, that stated that approval of a pesticide highly toxic to bees would only exacerbate the problems faced by an already tenuous honey bee industry and further decimate bee populations. However, EPA dismissed these concerns and instead pointed to a need for sulfoxaflor by industry and agriculture groups to control insects no longer being controlled by increasingly ineffective pesticide technologies.

Despite the continued decline in bee and pollinator populations across the U.S., EPA has since registered two other chemicals, cyantraniliprole and flupyradifurone. Cyantraniliprole is noted by EPA as “highly toxic on acute and oral contact basis” to bees, while flupyradifurone, a new systemic, butenolide insecticide from Bayer CropScience approved just this year, is found to be “highly toxic to individual adult honey bees.” Adding these new bee toxic chemicals into the environment will mean that bees and other non-target organisms will be exposed to mixtures of chemicals that are not only highly toxic, but have yet to be evaluated for their combined or synergistic effects with other bee-toxic substances, and possibly compounding the already dire plight of pollinators. A recent government sponsored national survey indicates that U.S. beekeepers experienced a 45.2% annual mortality rate with their hives between April 2012 and March 2013. During the winter of 2013/14, two-thirds of beekeepers experienced loss rates greater than the established acceptable winter mortality rate. EPA, which is part of the White House Task Force on Pollinator Health, tasked with stemming the tide on bee declines, has a responsibility to bees, the environment and beekeepers in protecting bees and other pollinators from dangerous pesticides. However, the agency seems to be putting corporate interests before pollinators health.

Join us in urging the White House to take meaningful action to protect pollinators. Visit save-bees.org and sign the petition to the White House.

Source: Greenwire

Congress heeds call to action and introduces legislation as pressure mounts on White House Task Force to issue meaningful recommendations

March 4, 2015 (Washington, DC)””A coalition of beekeepers, farmers, business leaders, environmental and food safety advocates rallied in front of the White House and delivered more than 4 million petition signatures today calling on the Obama administration to put forth strong protections for bees and other pollinators. This action anticipates the Pollinator Health Task Force recommendations, expected later this month. The task force, announced by the White House this past June, is charged with improving pollinator health through new agency regulations and partnerships. The assembled groups demand that the recommendations include decisive action on rampant use of neonicotinoids, a class of systemic insecticides scientists say are a driving factor in bee declines.

The rally coincided with both a D.C. metro ad campaign and Representatives Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) and John Conyers’s (D-MI) reintroduction of the Saving America’s Pollinators Act, which would suspend the use of four of the most toxic neonicotinoids until the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) conducts a full review of their safety.

Representative Blumenauer, said, “Pollinators are not only vital to a sustainable environment, but key to a stable food supply. In fact, one out of every three bites of food we eat is from a crop pollinated by bees. It is imperative that we take a step back to make sure we understand all the factors involved in bee population decline and move swiftly to protect our pollinators.”

“The EPA plans to wait until 2018 before reviewing the registration of neonicotinoids.   But America’s bees cannot wait three more years.   Neither can the thousands of farmers that rely on pollinators,” said Representative Conyers.  “Our honeybees are critical to ecological sustainability and to our economy.    I am urging all of my colleagues to please protect our pollinators and support the Saving America’s Pollinators Act.”

“America’s beekeepers cannot easily survive in the toxic environment the EPA has supported,” said Roger Williams, president of the Central Maryland Beekeepers Association, and a speaker at today’s rally. “On top of many other stresses, bee-toxic pesticides, whether used to coat seeds or as sprays, are weakening and killing our bees and threatening the livelihood of the beekeepers who are so intimately tied to our nation’s food supply.”

In a letter on Monday, more than 125 conservation, beekeeping, food safety, religious, ethnic and farming advocacy groups urged President Obama and the EPA to take swift and meaningful action to address the impacts of toxic pesticides on pollinator species. The European Union passed a two-year moratorium on three of the most widely used neonicotinoids, yet the EPA has approached the issue with little urgency.

“Business leaders nationally recognize the importance of pollinators to the well-being of the economy, people, and ecosystems,” said Fran Teplitz, Co-Executive Director, Green Business Network and Bryan McGannon, Deputy Director, American Sustainable Business Council. “Businesses committed to sustainability support strong federal action to protect pollinators from pesticides linked to their decline; now is the time to act.”

While advocates remain hopeful, they also made it clear that voluntary, enforceable proposals from the task force are unacceptable. Federal agencies have hinted at continued efforts to promote more of the same — voluntary farming management practices, insignificant pesticide label changes, and weak state pollinator plans. And advocates contend that without new, meaningful protections, the Task Force may actually do more harm than good.

“Given  the  historic decline in the population of pollinators ”” bees, butterflies and birds ”” it is critical that the President and  White House Task Force show forceful leadership in addressing  all factors contributing to the crisis, with  the suspension of neonicotinoid insecticides being a critically necessary action,” said Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides and who spoke at today’s rally.

Neonicotinoids are a class of pesticides known to have acute and chronic effects on honey bees and other pollinator species and are considered a major factor in overall population declines. A growing body of independent science links a class of pesticides called neonicotinoids to bee declines, both alone and in combination with other factors like disease and malnutrition. Twenty-nine independent scientists conducted a global review of 1,121 independent studies and found overwhelming evidence of pesticides linked to bee declines. Neonicotinoids are also slow to break down, causing them to build up in the environment and endangering a whole range of beneficial species that inhabit these ecosystems.

The 4 million signatures were collected by Avaaz, Beyond Pesticides, the Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Food Safety, CREDO, Earthjustice, Environment America, Food and Water Watch, Food Democracy Now!, Friends of the Earth U.S., Green America, MoveOn, Organic Consumers Association, Pesticide Action Network, Save Our Environment, TakePart, and Toxic Free North Carolina.

Media Contacts:
Abigail Seiler, Center for Food Safety, 202-547-9359, [email protected]
Kate Colwell, Friends of the Earth, 202-222-0744, [email protected]
Paul Towers, Pesticide Action Network, 916.588.3100, [email protected]

Expert Contacts:
Bryan McGannon, American Sustainable Business Council, 202-650-7678, [email protected],
Fran Teplitz, Green America, 202-872-5326, [email protected]
Roger Williams, Central Maryland Beekeepers Association, 802-355-9933, [email protected]
Jay Feldman, Beyond Pesticides, 202-543-5450, [email protected]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 3, 2015) Over 125 conservation, beekeeping, food safety, religious, ethnic and farming advocacy groups are urging President Obama and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to take swift and meaningful action to protect honey bees and other pollinators from toxic pesticides. Groups, including Beyond Pesticides, raised their voice through a letter sent in advance of a pending report from the White House Pollinator Task Force, which was established last June by the President with the goal to “reverse pollinator losses and help respond populations to healthy levels.” Last October the White House announced it would miss its self-assigned deadline, delaying the urgent action that is needed to address this crisis.

The letter urges President Obama and executive agencies to take action against a class of pesticides called neonicotinoids, systemic poisons that are devastating bee populations. They are also threatening the nation’s food supply, since one-third of the food consumed in the United States is pollinated by bees.

“Through bold and decisive action from the White House and EPA, we can begin to reverse bee declines and protect pollinator populations for future generations,” said Nichelle Harriott, Science and Regulatory  Director at Beyond Pesticides.

Among other steps the  letter calls for:

• expedited review of the registration process for neonicotinoids;
• strengthening of risk-assessment requirements;
• closure of loopholes that allow dangerous pesticides to be approved with inadequate review;
• improvements in the oversight of neonicotinoid use in seed coating;
• upgrades to EPA’s bee- and bird-killing incident reporting system; and
• EPA to comply with the Endangered Species Act by ensuring that these toxic pesticides are not killing our nation’s most imperiled species.

Neonicotinoids are widely used in U.S. agriculture and are particularly harmful because they are systemic ”” they poison entire plants, including the nectar and pollen ”” and persistent, lasting months or even years in the plant, soil and waterways.

“Bee populations across the country are declining at an alarming rate,” said Mark Emrich, beekeeper and president of the Washington State Beekeepers Association, a signatory to the letter. “Bees and beekeepers can’t be held responsible for the problems with pesticides. We need protections that ensure the continued health of our food system and agricultural economy; it’s time for the president and his task force to step up.”

“Given  the  historic decline in the population of pollinators ””bees, butterflies and birds, it is critical that the President and  White House Task Force show forceful leadership in addressing  all factors contributing to the crisis, with  the suspension of neonicotinoid insecticides being a critically necessary action,” said Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides. “The indiscriminate poisoning of pollinators by persistent, neurotoxic neonicotinoids that translocate through plants and contaminate pollen and nectar must stop, and it will take bold action and direction from the highest level of government to ensure a timely and adequate response,” said Mr. Feldman.

Acute exposure to neonicotinoids can cause massive bee die-offs, such as the incident in which 50,000 bumblebees died in an Oregon parking lot in 2013. Even at low exposures, neonicotinoids impair bee health by affecting cognitive functions that make it possible for bees to forage, communicate and find their way back to their hives.

Join the action later this week!

Beyond Pesticides and other groups will continue to fight for the suspension of bee-toxic neonicotinoid pesticides. Individuals can support these needed changes by going to save-bees.org and signing the petition to the White House. Later this week, groups will deliver petition signatures to President Obama in front of the White House and call on the President to #BeeKindObama by taking bold and decisive action to protect pollinators. We want you there! Send an email to [email protected] to RSVP for the rally, and stay tuned for future ways you can get involved!

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides,

(Beyond Pesticides, March 2, 2015) Amid growing consumer backlash, Hershey’s has announced first steps toward moving to non-genetically engineered (GE) ingredients in its chocolate. The news comes in response to tens of thousands of Facebook posts, emails, and telephone calls from consumers who took part in a campaign calling on Hershey’s to move to non-GE ingredients led by GMO Inside. In a statement released February 18, Hershey’s said that it will “transition some of its most popular chocolate brands, including Hershey’s Kisses Milk Chocolates and Hershey’s Milk Chocolate Bars to simpler ingredients.” Last week, Hershey’s confirmed with GMO Inside that as part of its commitment to simpler ingredients, its two iconic products will be non-GE by the end of the year, however the company did not respond to the request to source its sugar organically.

“We congratulate Hershey’s on this important move and great first step. As one of the leading chocolate companies in the U.S., this commitment will help move the rest of the companies in this sector,”
said Nicole McCann, Green America Food Campaigns Director, “Hershey’s joins General Mills, Unilever, Post Foods, and other leading companies in responding to consumer demand to make at least some of its products non-GMO.”

Because the main ingredient in the two Hershey’s chocolate products is  sugar, and most conventional sugar in the U.S. is sourced from GE sugar beets, this action could have a potentially huge impact on the market. This is unlike a similar effort to appeal to consumers, when General Mills announced last year that it would remove all GE ingredients from Cheerios. However, the main ingredient in Cheerios is oats, and oats are not currently genetically engineered, so many in the environmental community ascertained that it was simply a ploy by the company to revive its image after spending millions of dollars to defeat state-level GE labeling initiatives. Furthermore, General Mills rejected a companywide ban of GE ingredients last fall.

“Hershey’s needs to take the next step and go non-GMO with all of its chocolates, and get third-party verification for non-GMO ingredients. This includes sourcing milk from cows not fed GMOs and agreeing to prohibit any synthetic biology ingredients, starting with vanilla,” stated John Roulac, co-chair of GMO Inside. “Consumers are increasingly looking for non-GMO products and verification, and Hershey’s and its competitors would be wise to offer third-party verified non-GMO products to consumers.”

Though this is certainly a step in the right direction, Beyond Pesticides wants  Hershey’s to take it a step further and source organic ingredients. The best  way to avoid genetically engineered foods in the marketplace is to purchase foods that have the USDA certified organic seal. Under organic certification standards, genetically modified organisms and their byproducts are prohibited, and have third-party verification. However, because of USDA policies that allow the proliferation of GE crops, organic agriculture is under threat and subject to genetic drift contamination.

Additionally, GE agriculture is associated with the increased use of herbicides that GE crops are developed to tolerate. Repeated spraying of these herbicides, particularly  glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup,  destroys refuge areas  for beneficial insects such as the monarch butterfly and  leads to resistance  in the very weed species that GE technology is intended to control. Despite rampant glyphosate resistance, questions about the health and safety of GE foods, and the presence of organic management practices that are  more protective of human health and the environment, the agrichemical industry continues to resort to increasingly toxic combinations of chemicals. Recently, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it has registered Enlist Duo ®, officially approving  the sale and use of a new wave of genetically-engineered (GE) 2,4-D tolerant crops and their accompanying herbicide formulations.

For more information on GE foods, see Beyond Pesticides’  Genetic Engineering  website. If you’d like more information on choosing foods without pesticides and GE ingredients, visit our guide to Eating With a Conscience.

Source: GMO Inside

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

(Beyond Pesticides, February 27, 2015) New research from the University of Minnesota presents some of the first evidence linking the bee-killing insecticides known as neonicotinoids to monarch butterfly deaths. The study finds that milkweed plants, which monarch butterflies need to survive, may also retain neonicotinoids from nearby plants, making milkweed toxic to monarchs.

Monarch population numbers have fallen by 90% in less than 20 years. This year’s population was the second lowest since careful surveys began two decades ago. The critical driver of monarch decline  is the loss of larval host plants in their main breeding habitat, the midwestern Corn Belt. Monarchs lay eggs exclusively on plants in the milkweed family, the only food their larvae will eat.

University of Minnesota entomologist Vera Krischik, Ph.D. fed butterflies milkweed plants treated with the neonicotinoid insecticide known as imidacloprid in amounts that might typically be found on backyard plants. While adult monarchs and painted lady butterflies were not affected, which, according to Dr. Krischik, indicates the ability of the adults to detoxify, the larvae of both species of butterflies died.

During the course of the study, larvae fed on the treated plants for seven days.

“For the monarch, nobody was left that were feeding on the treated plants,” said Dr. Krischik, whose research has been accepted for publication by a scientific journal.” For the painted lady (butterflies), there were a few scattered larvae that made it to the end of their feeding period.”

Dr. Krischik says her research shows a potential risk to monarchs when neonicotinoids are used in backyard plants near milkweed plants. She did not look at the impact of much lower insecticide rates used in farm fields.

“I would say if you’re using it in your backyard and you’re applying this to a rosebush right next to the milkweed, the risk is high,” she said.

Recently, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) announced plans to conduct a year-long status review of the monarch butterfly to determine whether the species is eligible for protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). FWS is taking this action as result of an August 2014  legal petition  filed by health and environmental groups that presented substantial information indicating that listing under the ESA may be warranted. In November 2014, Beyond Pesticides joined over 200 environmental groups and businesses in  a letter asking for federal protection  for monarch butterflies in the wake of shocking declines. FWS has also pledged $3.2 million as part of a new campaign to save the imperiled species.

The decline of monarch habitats is not the only environmental effect linked to the pervasive use of highly toxic herbicides and insecticides. For example, the emergence and spread of glyphosate-resistant “super weeds” is strongly correlated with the upward trajectory of herbicide use, according to a  study  conducted by Charles Benbrook, Ph.D.  Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup formulation, is  one of the most widely used conventional pesticide active ingredients in the U.S.  And, similar to monarch butterflies, honey bees and other wild bees have also been experiencing a drastic  decline in numbers  that has been linked to the prevalent use of neonicotinoids.

Critical to the survival of monarchs, other pollinators, and organisms essential to ecological balance is the large-scale  adoption of organic farming practices. Beyond Pesticides supports  organic agriculture  as effecting good land stewardship and a reduction in hazardous chemical exposures for workers on the farm. The pesticide reform movement, citing pesticide problems associated with chemical agriculture, from groundwater contamination and runoff to drift, views organic as the solution to a serious public health and environmental threat. To attract beneficial insects like monarchs and protect their habitats in your own backyard, there are  several steps  you can take. Like any other living organisms, pollinators need food, water, and shelter in order to thrive. For more information, see  Managing Landscapes with Pollinators in Mind  and  Hedgerows for Biodiversity: Habitat is needed to protect pollinators, other beneficial organisms, and healthy ecosystems.  You can also visit the  BEE Protective Habitat Guide  and  Do-It-Yourself Biodiversity  for more ways in which you can protect our pollinator friends.

With one in three bites of food reliant on bees and other insects for pollination, the decline of honey bees and other pollinators due to pesticides, and other man-made causes demands immediate action. For more on this and what you can do to protect pollinators, visit Beyond Pesticides’  BEE Protective webpage.

Take Action:
1. Tell USDA that habitat is critical to protecting against species decline. Agriculture can protect bees, pollinators, and the delicate balance of ecosystems. But, only if we send a comment to the National Organic Program (NOP) to make sure that happens. See Sample Comments Here. >>Send your comment today! The deadline is TODAY, February 27, at midnight.

2. Let President Obama know you want action. Let’s make sure @BarakObama and the @WhiteHouse #BeeKindObama, and take action to #SaveOurBees. Sign the petition HERE.

3. Join us in person to help us continue the fight to protect butterflies and other pollinators from neonicotinoids. This spring is Beyond Pesticides’  33rd National Pesticide Forum  in Orlando, FL, April 17-18th 2015. Early bird registration is in effect until March 15, so make your plans to register today!

Source: MPR News

Photo Source: Diane St. J, CT

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

(Beyond Pesticides, February 26, 2015) Yesterday, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) granted Florida citrus growers an emergency exemption to use the bee-killing pesticide clothianidin to control Asian Citrus Psyllid (ACP), a pest that causes “citrus greening,” a devastating citrus plant disease. Clothianidin, which is not currently registered for use on citrus, is part of a class of neurotoxic, systemic insecticides called neonicotinoids, which have been implicated in global honey bee declines and suspended in the European Union. “EPA needs to assist in stopping the deadly use of pesticides that harm bees, butterflies, and birds with sustainable practices, rather than imperil pollinators with its decisions,” said Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides, a health and environmental advocacy group. He continued, “We understand the immediate chemical needs of chemical-intensive agriculture for increasingly toxic and persistent chemicals, but urge EPA to help stop the treadmill, lest it allow irreversible harm to the environment, biodiversity, and human health.” Beyond Pesticides is urging EPA to require that growers adopt a management plan in order to apply clothianidin. “Ultimately, EPA should be requiring growers to adopt integrated organic systems to manage pests, as a part of an emergency permit,” said Mr. Feldman. Read Beyond Pesticides’ open letter response to EPA.

Honey bees in Florida, researchers say, contribute to the productivity of several groups of citrus fruit, including many orange and grapefruit varieties. Through their pollination services and foraging in citrus fruit, bees and other pollinators will be exposed to the contaminated pollen and nectar in the trees’ flowers, as the systemic clothianidin translocates throughout the treated trees. Bees are exceedingly common in citrus groves, from which they produce a high quality honey crop. Citrus greening has caused significant difficultly between beekeepers and citrus farmers who are combating the spread of the psyllid  with toxic chemicals. Back in 2013, one of Florida’s largest citrus growers, Ben Hill Griffin, Inc., was fined $1,500 after a state investigation found that the farm illegally sprayed pesticides, resulting in the death of millions of managed honey bees.

According to the University of Florida, there are approximately 6,000 acres of certified organic citrus in Florida that does not permit the use of neonicotinoid pesticides, including clothianidin. Farm operations that are USDA certified organic avoid the use of toxic chemicals by implementing holistic management systems plans. Matt McLean of Uncle Matt’s Organic is one such grower, with over 1,000 acres of organic citrus, his family will be joining Beyond Pesticides’ at the 33rd National Pesticide Forum in Orlando in April, to discuss benefits of growing organic, and efforts to combat citrus greening without toxic chemicals. Additionally, USDA announced last summer that it would broaden its use of tiny parasitic wasps, Tamarixia Radiata, to combat citrus greening disease.

Pollinators continue to face dire threats to their survival. Bees, butterflies, and others have seen drastic population declines over the last several years due to habitat loss and widespread pesticide use. Pesticides also pose a greater threat to ecosystems and biodiversity, according to a meta-analysis by a group of global, independent scientists. EPA, tasked with regulating pesticides and protecting the environment from harm, has thus far failed to sufficiently act to protect pollinators from dangerous pesticides. In fact, just last month EPA approved yet another bee-toxic pesticide, flupyradifurone, following other recent and questionable bee-toxic pesticide approvals like sulfoxaflor, which was approved for registration despite warnings from concerned groups and beekeepers.

EPA issued the 2 ½ year emergency permit to allow clothianidin without subjecting its decision to any public comment. Beyond Pesticides is party to a lawsuit challenging EPA’s failure to adequately review and restrict clothianidin.

Take Action:
Sign the Petition! Tell the President to #BeeKindObama. As honey bee declines continue and the crisis begins to impact consumer’s pocketbooks, it is imperative the President Obama and executive agencies take swift action to address this issue by suspending neonicotinoid pesticides.

State and local efforts are also critical in pressuring the White House to act. Concerned residents can get engaged by encouraging your community to be pollinator friendly and make changes that will protect your local pollinator population. For help with your campaign, visit the BEE Protective webpage, and contact Beyond Pesticides at 202-543-5450, or by email at [email protected].

Learn more about organic citrus operations in Florida, pollinator issues, and what you can do to help at the 33rd National Pesticide Forum  in Orlando, Florida April 17-18, 2015, Agricultural Justice, Age of Organics, and Alligators, Protecting health, biodiversity, and ecosystems.  Get more information and register today!

Download a PDF version of the press release here.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Photo Source: Organic Beekeeper Blog

(Beyond Pesticides, February 25, 2015) The biotechnology industry behind genetically engineered (GE) foods have for years touted that their technology is safe, dismissing any attempts to challenge their science or regulate their material. However, 300 scientists, physicians and scholars assert there is no scientific consensus on the safety of GE foods and find that claims of safety are an “artificial construct that has been falsely perpetuated” through various forums and media.

The statement, published in the journal Environmental Sciences Europe and entitled, “No scientific consensus on GMO safety,” cites a concerted effort by GE seed developers and some scientists, commentators and journalists to construct the claim that there is a “scientific consensus” on GE safety, and that debate on the topic is “over.” According to the 13-page statement, 300 independent scientists and researchers felt compelled to develop a document that offered a balanced account of the current state of dissent in this field, based on published evidence in the scientific literature, for both the interested public and the wider science community. They find that a claim of safety “”¦is misleading and misrepresents or outright ignores the currently available scientific evidence and the broad diversity of scientific opinions among scientists on this issue.”

For years, the safety of GE food has been a hotly controversial topic that has been much debated around the world. According to the scientists, published results are contradictory, in part due to the range of different research methods employed, an inadequacy of available procedures, and differences in the analysis and interpretation of data. Further, rigorous assessment of GE safety has been hampered by the lack of funding independent of proprietary interests. Research for the public good has been further constrained by property rights issues, and by denial of access to research material for researchers unwilling to sign contractual agreements with industry, which confer unacceptable control over publication to the proprietary interests. In concluding, the scientists state that current scientific evidence “prevents conclusive claims of safety, or of lack of safety, of GE,” and that claims of consensus on the safety of GE “are not supported by an objective analysis of the scientific literature.”

Claims of Safety

In their review of the scientific literature the group finds that most studies concluding that GE foods are as safe and nutritious as non-GE foods were conducted by biotechnology companies or associates that are also responsible for commercializing GE crops. Additionally, no epidemiological studies in human populations have been carried out to establish whether there are any health effects associated with GE food consumption, and therefore claims that GE foods have been eaten for years in the US with no ill effects cannot be substantiated and have no scientific basis.

The paper also points out that while an EU research project has been cited internationally as providing evidence for GE crop and food safety, the report based on this project, ”˜A Decade of EU-Funded GMO Research’, presents no data that could provide such evidence from long-term feeding studies in animals.

Similarly, another frequently cited claim that several hundred studies document the general safety and nutritional value of GE foods is also misleading. Examination of the studies listed reveals that many do not provide evidence of GE food safety and, in fact, some provide evidence of a lack of safety. Further, many of the studies were conducted over short periods compared with the animal’s total lifespan and thus, cannot detect long-term health effects.

Claims of Government and Scientific Organizational Endorsements

According to the authors, claims that there is a consensus among scientific and governmental bodies that GE foods are safe, or that they are no more risky than non-GE foods are false. Reports by the Royal Society of Canada and British Medical Association have noted that some GE foods could be of considerable harm. The positions of some prominent scientific  organizations have been misrepresented or opposed by members, further highlighting the lack of consensus among scientists. The authors further note that even the positions taken by other organizations on the potential benefits of GE have frequently been highly qualified, acknowledging data gaps and potential risks of GE technology. For instance, a statement by the American Medical Association’s Council on Science and Public Health acknowledged “a small potential for adverse events … due mainly to horizontal gene transfer, allergenicity, and toxicity,” and recommended that voluntary notification (labeling) of GE crops be made mandatory.

Environmental Impact

There is no consensus on environmental impacts of GE foods, and many concerns have been raised about increased herbicide use, potential health impacts and the rapid spread of herbicide-resistant weeds. The statement concludes, “”¦the totality of scientific research outcomes in the field of GE crop safety is nuanced; complex; often contradictory or inconclusive; confounded by researchers’ choices, assumptions, and funding sources; and, in general, has raised more questions than it has currently answered.”

With the recent approval of the Arctic ® apple – the first genetically engineered apple that does not brown after slicing or bruising, the expansion of GE crops without a full understanding of human and environmental health risks should provide pause for concern. Along with unknown long-term impact on public health, GE material introduced into the environment continues to threaten native pollinators and other beneficial organisms, propagate resistant weeds and insects, and contaminates non-GE and organic farms.

Currently in the U.S., GE foods are not required to be labeled and many consumers are unaware that the foods they are ingesting are GE material whose long-term health impacts are not fully understood. That is why it is important to eat organically and support organic agriculture. Not only does organic exclude GE material from production, but people who eat organically also have lower levels of pesticides in their bodies. For more information on the hazards associated with GE technology, visit the Genetic Engineering webpage; for more on the benefits of organic agriculture, see the  Organic Food program page.

Continue the conversation on GE labeling by attending the 33^rd National Pesticide Forum, taking place this year in Orlando, FL, April 17-18th, 2015.Chef Hari Pulapaka, PhD, signatory to the 700 chefs’ letter in support of GE labeling will present his take on the issue. Early bird registration is in effect until March 15, so make your plans to register today!

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Source: Center for Food Safety

(Beyond Pesticides, February 24, 2015) According to recent reports from local California news outlets, Honey Bees are in Short Supply In Central Valley, with the risk that consumers across the United States will be seeing higher prices on fruits, nuts, and vegetables this year as a consequence of declining honey bee populations. The ongoing pollinator crisis has resulted in greater than 30% of managed bee colonies dying off each winter since 2006, an unsustainable rate that will inevitably impact the pocketbooks of consumers in the U.S. and may even ultimately result in global malnutrition.

But that doesn’t have to be the outcome. As Beyond Pesticides continues to remind concerned residents, although there are a number of hazards affecting honey bee populations, this crisis is No Longer a Big Mystery. The scientific evidence shows that a class of toxic, persistent, systemic chemicals called neonicotinoids present immense risks to honey bees and other pollinator species. Twenty-nine scientists spanning multiple disciplines analyzed over 800 peer-reviewed papers on the subject came to a similar conclusion. “The assessment found that both individuals and populations can be adversely affected by low or acute exposure making them highly vulnerable. Pollinators exposed to contaminated pollen, nectar and water are harmed at field realistic concentrations,” notes the Task Force on Systemic Pesticides.

At the close of National Pollinator Week 2014, President Obama issued a Memorandum mandating the creation of a federal strategy to promote the health of honey bees and other pollinators within 180 days. Last October the White House announced it would miss its self-assigned deadline, delaying the urgent action that is needed to address this crisis. As the European Union has already done, EPA must move swiftly to suspend the most harmful uses of neonicotinoids, and address the gaps that allowed these systemic insecticides on to market on a “conditional” basis, without a full review of pollinator impacts.

>>Join us in asking the President to #BeeKindObama and take swift action to protect pollinators.

Numerous other localities and organizations have taken action to protect honey bees from neonicotinoid pesticides. And a growing number of state legislatures are now debating whether to move forward on restrictions regarding these bee-toxic chemicals. In Maryland the Pollinator Protection Act of 2015 is coming up for a committee vote today. The legislation will require nurseries in the state to display a disclosure statement on plants and seeds that are treated with neonicotinoid insecticides and phase-out their over-the-counter sales to retail consumers. Since use of neonicotinoid pesticides is still lawful under the bill, the legislation will require those who use them to be certified applicators or farmers, thus attempting to ensure more control over their application. Marylanders can support this critical legislation by sending a letter to their State Senator through this page.

Elsewhere, in Alaska, legislators introduced SB 20, which will  restrict neonicotinoid applications only to greenhouses. In Minnesota, state legislators and officials are continuing efforts to protect bees through HF 411, legislation that creates criteria for a pollinator-friendly neighborhood program. Such criteria would be based in part on the percentage of properties within a neighborhood refraining from using pesticide products that harm pollinators. HF 411 is reminiscent of the hard work that the folks at Bee Safe Boulder continue to do on a voluntary basis to protect honey bees and other pollinators. Earlier this month, the group gave a presentation to the Boulder City Council, pushing for the city to become bee safe.

Sign the Petition! Tell the President to #BeeKindObama. As honey bee declines continue and the crisis begins to impact consumer’s pocketbooks, it is imperative the President Obama and executive agencies take swift action to address this issue by suspending neonicotinoid pesticides.

State and local efforts are also critical in pressuring the White House to act. Concerned residents can get engaged by encouraging your community to be pollinator friendly and make changes that will protect your local pollinator population. For help with your campaign, visit the BEE Protective webpage, and contact Beyond Pesticides at 202-543-5450, or by email at [email protected].

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

(Beyond Pesticides, February 23, 2015) A Hawaii state House agriculture committee rejected a bill Thursday that sought to impose buffer zones for large agricultural companies that spray restricted-use pesticides near schools and other sensitive areas. The proposal, House Bill 1514, introduced by Rep. Chris Lea, stemmed from concerns about  the impact of genetically-engineered (GE) farming and its inherent dependency on increasing  pesticide use. The measure sought  to require companies’  disclosure of the pesticides used and the volume of use.

The bill had strong support from the Hawaii chapter of the national nonprofit Center for Food Safety (CFS), as well as a strong backing from neighbor island residents. Maui, Kauai, and the Big Island have all passed laws recently to regulate the seed industry, but a federal  district  court judge  has ruled  that Hawaii counties do not have that power.

Industry has been especially effective in obstructing the bill. CFS’ Hawaii director, Ashley Lukens, said after Thursday’s hearing that she was frustrated by the limited amount of time advocates were given to testify. “It was clear from the very beginning that the hearing was intended to allow the industry to reiterate their talking points,” she said.

Not surprisingly, companies (like Monsanto) that compose Hawaii’s $243 million seed industry argued that the measure was misguided, and several farming organizations opposed it as well. “HB 1514 will take farmland out of production, increase costs, and make it even more difficult to farm in Hawaii,” the Hawaii Farm Bureau Federation said in written testimony. The state Department of Agriculture was also critical of the bill and its focus on the seed industry.

While the idea of imposing buffer zones still has a chance in the Senate, it must get past a number of obstacles.

Additionally, three similar measures have passed the Senate committees on health and the environment but are waiting for additional hearings. Senate Bill 801, which pertains to providing notice for pesticide use,  was recently re-referred to the Senate Finance Committee, chaired by Sen. Jill Tokuda.  Senate Bill 1037, which requires the health department to establish a mandatory disclosure program for pesticide use,  is also waiting to be heard by Sen. Tokuda. Senate Bill 793, which establishes mandatory notice when pesticides are applied outdoors near sensitive areas,  is awaiting a hearing from Sen. Tokuda and Consumer Protection Committee Chairwoman Rosalyn Baker from Maui.

Residents living on the Hawaiian Islands are subject to a particularly pronounced form of environmental assault, as the state’s premiere growing conditions have made it a prime target for agrichemical companies to test new, experimental forms of GE crops. Data released last year reveals that  high levels of restricted use pesticides, in some cases almost double the pounds per acre average of other states, are being used in Kauai County. According to the Center for Food Safety, in  2014 alone,  there were 1,381 field test sites in Hawaii, compared to only 178 sites in California- a large agricultural state. Most of these crops are engineered to resist herbicides and pesticides. Testing these crops means repeated spraying of dangerous chemicals near neighborhoods, schools, and waterways.  Residents of the Hawaiian Islands that live, work, or go to school near these fields are  subject to incessant  pesticide  spraying, as the climate provides a year-round growing season for GE crops.  A May 2014 report  found 25 herbicides, 11 insecticides and 6 fungicides in Hawaii’s waterways, underscoring resident concerns for both the land and human health.

Beyond Pesticides continues to be an ardent supporter of commonsense protections from pesticides and their associated use on GE crops. Given the  impending approval of GE crops  designed to withstand applications of the highly toxic herbicide 2,4-D, these protections are more important than ever.

Join us in person to help us continue the fight against pesticide use. This spring is Beyond Pesticides’  33rd National Pesticide Forum  in Orlando, FL, April 17-18th 2015. Early bird registration is in effect until March 15, so make your plans to register today!

Source: Civil Beat

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

(Beyond Pesticides, February 20, 2015) A broad-based coalition is urging Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper to put a stop to proposed changes to federal aquaculture regulations, citing damage to the environment and existing businesses. The proposed amendments to the federal Fisheries Act would exempt the aquaculture industry from provisions that “prohibit the release of deleterious substances into water frequented by fish.”

Coalition members are worried that the changes will result in pesticides routinely being dumped into the Bay of Fundy,  located between the Canadian provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, and remove Environment Canada’s role in aquaculture activities, said spokeswoman Maria Recchia, the executive director of the Fundy North Fishermen’s Association.

Aquaculture, which refers to the breeding, rearing, and harvesting of aquatic organisms such as fish, shellfish, and plants, provides half of the world’s seafood. According to  Food and Water Watch, offshore aquaculture follows an industrial agriculture model which grows thousands of animals in a confined environment. For fish, however, this confined space is in the ocean, meaning all of the waste products from the operation flow directly into the ocean. This includes excess feed and chemicals that are used, such as antibiotics and pesticides, to treat or prevent disease that occurs when fish are in confinement. Another major concern is the possibility of escaped farmed fish, which can compete with and interbreed with wild fish.

The coalition wrote an open letter to Prime Minister Harper on Tuesday, with 120 signatories,  including business leaders, commercial and recreational fishing associations, scientists, lawyers, and environmentalists.”

“In essence, in the end, we are going end up with the aquaculture being essentially self-regulated and self-monitored,” said Recchia, who is based in southwestern New Brunswick.

“And I think we’re going to have a much worse style of management than we have now and it’s going to be a lot more problematic for the marine environment.”

Stewart Lamont, owner of Tangier Lobster in Nova Scotia, agrees. “The value of our industry is based on a pristine, non-polluted marine environment,” Lamont said in a statement.

“We have already dealt with the impacts of pesticides, and see federal fines levied on something that would now become legal. To have DFO authorize pollution from a coastal industry is simply baffling,” he said.

Salmosan, a pesticide formulation containing the active ingredient azamethiphos and currently approved for use in the Bay of Fundy, can be hazardous to lobsters and other species hundreds of meters from a farm. Another pesticide, Alphamax (active ingredient deltamethrin), which was temporarily used to combat a sea-lice infestation five years ago, could kill lobsters up to 10 kilometers, or nearly six miles, away.

The draft changes to the Fisheries Act have been in the works since 2011 and are close  to being passed, said Recchia.

“These regulations will set back Canadian aquatic environmental protection measures several decades,”  Bill Ernst, a retired Environment Canada toxicologist, said in a statement. “They will eliminate Environment Canada’s role in enforcing the law with respect to aquaculture and hand responsibility over to Health Canada, who do not have an undivided environmental protection mandate.”

Pesticide inputs in aquaculture have been shown to have devastating impacts on the surrounding environment. The deaths of hundreds of lobsters in the Bay of Fundy in 2010 due to cypermethrin exposure 2010 prompted an investigation into how the pesticide ended up in the region. While cypermethrin, a synthetic pyrethroid, is not approved for use in fish farming in Canada, it is used in the U.S. and in Maine to control sea lice outbreaks in salmon farms. Environment Canada’s enforcement division eventually indicted the multinational firm Cooke Aquaculture and three of its senior officials on eleven criminal charges stemming from the illegal pesticide application.

In the U.S., changes to rules on conventional aquaculture have raised concerns for the environment as well as organic standards.

While  aquaculture  has the potential to lessen pressure on severely stressed wild fish populations, poorly designed and managed systems repeat the mistakes commonly seen in industrial-style livestock production. Crowding an excessive number of fish into an unnatural habitat creates a breeding ground for pests and diseases which producers treat with prophylactic doses of medications, including antibiotics. Sea lice, for example, were known to afflict wild runs of Atlantic salmon, but did not become an economically significant pest until the introduction of large-scale net pen production systems. Routine treatment with pesticides such as cypermethrin and antibiotics to minimize the symptoms of an unhealthy environment results in accelerated pest resistance and prompts producers to employ increasingly toxic compounds.

Residues from these medications along with fish excrement and excess feed are released into open water with often severe environmental consequences, especially for benthic organisms, which live in, on, or near the bottom of aquatic environments, such as lobsters. Many commercial aquaculture operations, including salmon production systems, utilize large amounts of wild captured fish that are processed for use as feed. Numerous traditional cultures developed aquaculture systems utilizing natural inputs and ecological cycles to raise high quality food with minimal adverse environmental impact.

Join us in person to help us continue the fight against pesticide use. This spring is Beyond Pesticides’  33rd National Pesticide Forum  in Orlando, FL, April 17-18th 2015. Early bird registration is in effect until March 15, so make your plans to register today!

Source: CBC News

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

(Beyond Pesticides, February 19, 2015) Last week, regulators at the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) approved a genetically engineered (GE) apple that does not brown after slicing or bruising. The “Arctic” apple, produced by Okanagan Specialty Fruits, is engineered using a novel technique called RNA interference (RNAi). In the case of this GE apple, RNAi technology has been used to silence the genes that produce polyphenol oxidase (PPO), the enzymes responsible for the browning that results after an apple has been bruised. Government approval of this method of genetic engineering is raises serious concerns because of considerable uncertainty regarding the unintended effects of this technology. These concerns are compounded by the agrochemical industry’s future interests in using RNAi technology to control crop pests.

So far, USDA has approved commercial use of Granny Smith and Golden Delicious “Arctic” apples, and the company plans to produce Gala and Fuji cultivars in the future. Beyond the questionable utility of an apple that does not brown, are the health and economic risks associated with the apple’s commercial production and use. Some opposing the GE apple have dubbed it the “botox apple” as it can give apples  the appearance of being fresh long after it is sliced when it is not; raising concerns about the development and spread of bacteria. There is also uncertainty whether turning off these genes may impact other genes or the rest of the apple tree, as compounds that produce PPO are present throughout the tree, not just in the fruit.

There is also the constant threat that GE crops pose to organic farmers. Organic and non-GE apple farmers that produce their crops near where the Arctic apple is being grown put their crops at risk of cross-contamination from pollen (likely through bee pollination). A 2014 study released by Food and Water Watch and the Organic Farmers’ Agency for Relationship and Marketing (OFARM) found that one third of organic farmers have experienced GE contamination on their farm due to the nearby use of GE crops. The survey was conducted in response to USDA 21st Century Agriculture (AC21) report on “coexistence” between GE and non-GE farmers.  The AC21  report was strongly criticized by the National Organic Coalition (NOC), of which Beyond Pesticides is a member, for recommending that organic and non-GE conventional farmers pay for crop insurance or self-insure themselves against unwanted GE contamination. Beyond Pesticides maintains that in  approving this and other new GE crops, USDA should stipulate that organic and non-GE farmers are entitled to assurances against trespass from genetic drift and compensation from the polluters for any losses in the value of their crop.

As many consumers are now aware, GE foods are not required to be labeled in the U.S.  Without this statement, Arctic apples have the potential to make their way into you or your child’s lunch without any indication. A number of states, including Washington, Oregon, California, and Colorado, have come close to requiring labels for GE products at the state level through razor-thin public ballots, but to date only Vermont has mandated these simple statements informing consumers. At the federal level, efforts to codify voluntary GE labels through the appropriately coined DARK Act have not moved forward. However, last week the Genetically Engineered Food Right-to-Know Act was reintroduced in the House and Senate, with major support from over 700 American chefs, including Top Chef star Tom Colicchio, and33^rd National Pesticide Forum speaker Hari Pulapaka, PhD (register now!).

By silencing the genes within an apple, RNAi technology presents risks that have not been fully evaluated by regulators. Without addressing these issues, agrochemical companies have begun development of RNAi GE crops that, rather than target a gene within the plant, produces RNA that acts as a pesticide able to silence the gene in a target pest, such as the western corn rootworm, which is rapidly developing resistance to current GE techniques that  incorporate bacillus thuringiensis toxins. A 2013 study from USDA researchers identified risks to RNAi insecticides that include potential for off-target gene silencing, silencing of the target gene in unintended organisms, and immune stimulation.

It is critical that concerned citizens contact their state and federal elected representatives and urge them to support efforts to label genetically engineered crops. In the absence of mandatory labeling, residents can purchase certified organic foods, which prohibit  the use of any GE ingredients. For more information on the hazards associated with GE technology, visit Beyond Pesticides’  Genetic Engineering webpage.

Continue the conversation on GE labeling by attending the 33^rd National Pesticide Forum, taking place this year in Orlando, FL, April 17-18th, 2015.Chef Hari Pulapaka, PhD, signatory to the 700 chefs’ letter in support of GE labeling will present his take on the issue. Early bird registration is in effect until March 15, so make your plans to register today!

Source: Center for Food Safety, USDA

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

(Beyond Pesticides, February 18, 2015) Several new speakers, including cutting edge researchers bridging science and policy, have been added to the lineup of speakers at the 33rd National Pesticide Forum  in Orlando, Florida April 17-18,  Agricultural Justice, Age of Organics, and Alligators. And, right now we are running an early bird discount rate of $5 off the normal price through March 15. Register today!  

The Forum, which will be held at Florida A&M University College of Law, is convened by Beyond Pesticides in collaboration with the Farmworker Association of Florida, FAMU Law School, Florida Organic Growers and Consumers, as well as local environmental and public health advocacy organizations.  The Forum provides an opportunity to share the current science and policy information and discuss local, state, and national issues, and  will focus on agricultural justice, particularly as it relates to farmworker protections and organic agriculture. Biodiversity, pollinator protection, and other relevant issues for central Florida, including mosquito management and genetic engineering will also be covered.

Early Bird Registration Details:  
We have a special early bird registration rate, which is  $5 off the normal price until March 15. After that date, general admission will be $45, and $25 for students with current ID. We also have an upgraded rate of $75, which includes a 1-year membership to Beyond Pesticides and a free 100% organic tote bag, and an industry rate of $175.  Register today!  Registration includes  organic food and drink!!  All entry levels include access to all sessions, workshops, plus Friday afternoon Lake Apopka toxic tour (RSVP required), and printed materials. Additionally, we will serve breakfast, lunch, dinner on Saturday, along with receptions both nights with organic beer and wine.  Click here  to register now, or go to:  http://Reg33NPF.

New Speaker Highlights:
Tyrone Hayes, PhD  is a trailblazing biologist whose research finds that the herbicide atrazine feminizes male frogs, is one of the leading scientists critical of the pesticide industry and regulatory process. He is a professor of Integrated Biology at the University of California, Berkeley, and is one of the leading scientists critical of the pesticide industry and regulatory process. Dr. Hayes has published more than 40 papers, over 150 abstracts and has given more than 300 talks on the growth and development in amphibians. Dr. Hayes’ work has shown that current regulatory reviews allow widespread use of pesticides that cause serious adverse effects well below legal standards.  Through his research, he states,  “I have come to realize that the most important environmental factors affecting amphibian development are synthetic chemicals (such as pesticides) that interact with hormones in a variety of ways to alter developmental responses.”

Geoffrey Calvert, MD is Team Leader at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Dr. Calvert is author of numerous studies  and reports, including the recent CDC report, Worker Illness Related to Newly Marketed Pesticides, which  evaluates a farmworker poisoning incident in Washington State and identifies  deficiencies in farmworker protection from pesticides.

Philip K. Stoddard, PhD is Mayor of the City of South Miami, as well as a professor of biology at the Florida International University. He was elected Mayor in 2010, and re-elected in 2012 and 2014, and is a strong proponent of community, livable cities, quiet neighborhoods, responsive government, and environmental protection, leading  efforts to protect beneficial species. As mayor, he spearheaded an initiative to address mosquito-borne diseases while limiting environmental damage from over-application of broad-spectrum insecticides, designating the city of South Miami as a wildlife sanctuary in order to prevent mosquito spray by the county.

See  previously  highlighted speakers here, or see the full  lineup of speakers here.

The conference, including a tour in the Apopka area, runs from the afternoon of April 17 through the evening of April 18, and brings together scientists, policy makers, and public health and environmental advocates to interact and strategize on solutions that are protective of health and the environment.  See the tentative schedule here.  

Other Details:

• Lodging and Local Information:  Official hotel information, including directions to the conference site;
• Facebook Event page:  Interact with other forum attendees on our Facebook Event page!
• Forum Videos:  Watch videos from last years’ conference and more

For more information, go to  www.beyondpesticides.org/forum.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

(Beyond Pesticides, February 17, 2015) The Center for Biological Diversity filed a lawsuit in federal court in California February 12 against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for failing to ensure that three widely used pesticides ””atrazine, 2,4-D and alachlor”” do not jeopardize the survival of two Bay Area endangered species, the delta smelt and Alameda whipsnake. FWS has yet to act on a request from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to determine whether measures are needed to protect the delta smelt and Alameda whipsnake from exposure to these pesticides.

“These pesticides are known to harm wildlife even in miniscule amounts, so it’s long past time that we start taking commonsense steps to protect endangered species, our water and ourselves,” said Brett Hartl, endangered species policy director at the Center. “Putting off any analysis of the harms caused by pesticides for six years is simply unacceptable, and has set back the recovery of these two species substantially.”

Scientific research has shown that atrazine can harm the development of amphibians at exposures of just a few parts per billion, is toxic to fish, reptiles, mammals and birds, and may elevate risks of birth defects in people. Up to 80 million pounds of atrazine are used in the U.S.  each year. An EPA risk assessment for 2,4-D concluded that the pesticide poses acute risks to freshwater fish and invertebrates and causes chronic impacts in other wildlife. Alachlor is now a restricted-use pesticide, having been classified by the EPA as a “likely” human carcinogen.  Approximately four  million pounds are used in the country each day. All three pesticides have been routinely found in surface and groundwater tested by the U.S. Geological Survey.

“Despite pesticides saturating our lands and waters, the Fish and Wildlife Service has simply stuck its head in the sand for years and ignored the widespread harm to endangered species across the country,” said Mr. Hartl. “When a pesticide like atrazine has been shown to chemically castrate amphibians at concentrations of a few parts per billion, it’s unconscionable that the Service has simply done nothing.”

Center for Biological Diversity previously sued the EPA for failing to consult over the impacts of pesticides on endangered species in the Bay Delta. In 2006 the Center reached a settlement imposing restrictions on pesticide use until the consultation was completed. The EPA completed its portion of the settlement, requesting that FWS  complete consultations. But those consultations have not been completed because the agency has not finished the process.

Numerous studies have linked pesticides with significant developmental, neurological, and reproductive damage to amphibians. Tyrone Hayes, Ph.D., of the University of California Berkeley, whose research reveals that even minute doses of atrazine can induce hermaphroditism in male frogs, in effect “chemically castrating” the population, will be joining our lineup of speakers at the 33rd National Pesticide Forum. We invite you to join researchers, authors, organic business leaders, elected officials, activists, and others to discuss the latest pesticide science, policy solutions, and grassroots action. For more information, and to register, click here.

Source: Center for Biological Diversity

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

(Beyond Pesticides, February 13, 2015) With the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA)  nod to the pesticide industry on expanded uses of the herbicides 2,4-D and glyphosate, environmental groups are charging that the agency violated the Endangered Species Act (ESA).  Repeating a pattern of putting the environment in harm’s way through violations of  federal endangered species  law, a lawsuit filed Friday  documents   EPA’s  failure to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) regarding the impact of the herbicide on two endangered species —the whooping crane and the Indiana bat— with the recent approval of Dow AgroSciences’ herbicide, Enlist Duo, for use on genetically engineered (GE) crops in six midwestern states.

Enlist Duo is an herbicide that incorporates a mix of  glyphosate  and a new formulation of  2,4-D, intended for use on GE Enlist Duo-tolerant corn and soybean crops. Approved for use on GE corn and soybeans that are engineered to withstand repeated applications of the herbicide, the creation of 2,4-D-tolerant crops and EPA’s approval of Enlist Duo is the result of an overuse of glyphosate, an ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup. The misuse resulted in an infestation of glyphosate-resistant super weeds which can now be legally combatted with the more potent 2,4-D. Dow Chemical has presented 2,4-D-tolerant crops as a quick fix to the problem, but independent scientists, as well as USDA analysis, predict that the  Enlist crop system will only foster more weed resistance.

“EPA admits that its approval of a toxic pesticide cocktail including 2,4-D for widespread use may affect endangered species, including the whooping crane, one of the most endangered animals on Earth,” said Paul Achitoff, Earthjustice’s managing attorney. “We ask only that the court decide whether EPA has violated the law, as we believe it has before putting these imperiled birds at further risk.”

By EPA’s own admission, whooping cranes “will stop to eat and may consume arthropod prey” that may have been exposed to 2,4-D in fields sprayed with Enlist Duo, and that in sufficient amounts, this exposure can be toxic to the cranes. According to the motion, the “whooping crane is one of the most endangered animals on earth. It was pushed to the brink of extinction by unregulated hunting and loss of habitat to just sixteen wild and two captive whooping cranes by 1941. Conservation efforts over the past seventy years have led to only a limited recovery; as of 2006, there were only an estimated 338 whooping cranes in the wild.”

Similarly, EPA’s own analysis found that the Indiana bat would likely suffer from reproductive harm resulting from the consumption of 2,4-D-contaminated prey, as a direct result of EPA’s approval of Enlist Duo. In addition to habitat loss and cave disturbance, scientists have attributed pesticide contamination of the Indiana bats’ food supply as a reason for their continued decline.

EPA approved Dow’s Enlist Duo weed killer, which the Agriculture Department signed off on a month earlier, in October 2014.

The new seed and herbicide combination would harm more than just these two species. Critics maintain that Enlist Duo could result in other environmental and health problems. 2,4-D has been linked to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, developmental and reproductive toxicity, neurotoxicity, and a whole host of additional health effects.

The motion filed by the farm and environmental groups Center for Food Safety, Earthjustice, National Farm Coalition, the Environmental Working Group, and others, with the 9^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, builds on a previous challenge of EPA’s approval of the new herbicide.

Join us in person to help us continue the fight against the dangerous wave of GE crops and chemicals. This spring is Beyond Pesticides’  33rd National Pesticide Forum  in Orlando, FL, April 17-18th 2015. Early bird registration is in effect until March 15, so make your plans to register today!

Source: Des Moines Register, Earthjustice

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

(Beyond Pesticides, February 12, 2015) Oregon Senator Michael Dembrow (D-Portland) and Representative Ann Liniger (D-Lake Oswego) introduced a bill on Tuesday targeting the loosely regulated aerial pesticide spraying practices of the Oregon timber industry.

The bill will establish residential, school, drinking water, and fish habitat buffers zones, require timely notification of spraying and controlled burns for nearby residents, increase record keeping requirements, establish protected areas where pesticide spraying is prohibited, and grant investigative and enforcement authority to the Oregon Health Authority in cases of human pesticide exposure.

Development of the bill grew out of a series of incidents across Oregon involving residential pesticide exposure and poisoning from aerial spraying of forest lands. The main incident, which spurred state-wide outrage and investigations into the pesticide regulation and enforcement practices of the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA), involved Curry County residents who complained of pesticide exposure after witnessing aerial spraying near their homes.

After pressure from local residents, investigative reporters, and environmental groups, ODA was ordered to publicly disclose pesticide records. It was found that the pesticides being sprayed were 2,4-D and triclopyr  ””information that conflicted with previous statements and reports and adding to the trend of opaque and lackluster ODA enforcement efforts. Eventually, the pilot responsible for the incident had his license suspended for a year and was fined $10,000 and the company that employed the pilot was also fined $10,000 and had all its licenses revoked for a year for providing false information to the state.

In a similar case, the community of Triangle Lake experienced pesticide exposures from the aerial application of herbicides to timberland, and atrazine and 2,4-D were subsequently found in the urine of residents around Triangle Lake. After these incidents, state and federal agencies launched the Highway 36 Corridor Public Health Exposure Investigation. The investigation resulted in the Oregon State Forester requiring pesticide applicators to turn over three years of forestry pesticide spray records from private and state timber operations.

“We’ve heard widespread concern that Oregon isn’t doing enough to protect the health of rural citizens from aerial herbicide sprays,” Sen. Dembrow said in a statement. “It’s time to change these outdated policies.”

Timing is also ripe for improved environmental and wildlife protections, particularly with regard to salmon streams and drinking water. Within the Pacific Northwest, an area where the timber industry dominates, Oregon’s regulations are some of the least protective. And with recent legal victories, requiring EPA to restore no-spray buffer zones around waterways to protect imperiled salmon and steelhead from five toxic pesticides, the bill would move the state coordination with EPA standards. The bill could also improve Oregon’s chances of receiving approval from EPA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) for its coastal nonpoint pollution control program.

Join Beyond Pesticides as we continue to learn about the dangers of pesticides and the actions we can take, like the Oregon bill, to establish better protections for people and the environment against pesticide use at the 33rd National Pesticide Forum in Orlando, FL, April 17-18th 2015. Early bird registration is in effect until March 15, so make your plans to register today!

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Sources: Oregon Public Broadcasting; Beyond Toxics

(Beyond Pesticides, February 11, 2015) In 2008, France announced it would voluntarily cut pesticide use by 50 percent by 2018, and emerged as the European leader in  reducing pesticide dependency. With its plan faltering, the European Union’s (EU) biggest agricultural producer and pesticide user has announced the expansion of  a network of pioneer farms experimenting with alternative techniques and mandated reductions in pesticide sales as it  delays its target reduction until 2025.

The French government has pushed back to 2025 the timeline for halving pesticide use and added an intermediate target of a 25 percent fall by 2020, Agriculture Minister Stephane Le Foll said. The  2018 target was slated as voluntary, but pesticide use has actually increased, in part due to poor weather, according to French officials. As the EU’s top agricultural producer, France is trying to become less dependent on pesticides, which are known to pose various health and environmental risks.

The targets for pesticide reduction remain mostly non-binding on farmers, but Minister Le Foll said his revamped plan would encourage a change in practices by expanding their focus on  alternative techniques. The minister notes that farmers need training  in best practices to replace the massive use of pesticides with more targeted treatments and biological ways to control pests. In the new revamped plan, the government will also add a binding target on pesticide suppliers to reduce their volumes by 20 percent over five years, encouraging them to shift toward selling farmers services to reduce chemical use. Companies will face penalties if they fail to meet the target under a certificate scheme to be developed.

According to Minister Le Foll, 2,000 farms across France have already seen pesticide use fall 12 percent in 2013, even though a 9 percent rise in total use in France was seen that year. Pesticide usage can be cut both through technology that allows farmers to apply crop treatments more precisely, and through biological control that replaces chemicals with natural organisms. However, as expected, representatives of crop farmers argue that tightening restrictions on pesticide use have left them with few viable options for containing crop pests and diseases.

France, like the EU, has sought to become less dependent on pesticides. In 2013, the EU became the first region in the world to ban certain neonicotinoid pesticides that have been linked to global bee decline. France banned the use of the neonicotinoid imidacloprid on corn and sunflowers in 1999, and rejected an application for clothianidin registration in 2008. Similarly, the EU enacted a measure to set limits for chemicals, including pesticides and heavy metals, in lakes, rivers and coastal waters that may endanger the survival of ecosystems and, via the food chain, human health. According to the measure, EU member states will have until 2018 to meet these water standards. States will have to reduce pollution from “priority substances,” cease or phase out emissions, discharges and losses of “priority hazardous substances” in order to achieve good surface water chemical status and to be in compliance with the objectives set by the water quality standards. Previous steps have been taken by the EU to reduce pesticide pollution that include limitations on aerial spraying, the use of buffer zones around agricultural lands and restrictions on the use of pesticides of high concern. More recently, France has been at the forefront of efforts to restrict the cultivation of genetically engineered (GE) crops.

Pesticides are linked to a growing number of human health diseases, including Parkinson’s disease, various types of cancer, and learning and behavioral impairments, such as ADHD and even autism. In one 2012 study, pesticides were found to be linked to a 30 percent decline in sperm counts of French men over the last two decades. Pesticides also contaminate waterways, impact non-target and beneficial organisms, and persist in the environment for years. These chemicals have also been shown to reduce ecosystem biodiversity. A report by Pierre Mineau, PhD. finds that the major contributor to the decline in farmland and grassland birds is pesticide use. This report finds that the best predictor of bird declines is the lethal risk from insecticide use modeled from pesticide impact studies. In 2012, one study reported that widely used herbicides adversely impact non-target invertebrate organisms including endangered species

Along with human and environmental impacts, the French have other pesticide-related concerns. An examination of 300 French wines found that 90 per cent contained traces of the chemicals most commonly used to treat vines. Thirty-three chemicals found in fungicides, insecticides, and herbicides showed up in wines, and every wine showed some detectable trace of chemicals. (The study can be found here in French.) The French wine industry’s notorious use of high levels of pesticides, including fungicides, continues to put workers and the environment at risk.

For more information on the hazards of pesticides and human health, visit Beyond Pesticides’ Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database. These hazards associated are unnecessary, and therefore unacceptable, given the viability of organic agricultural practices that are integral to a growing $35 billion  market. See the  organic program page. Beyond Pesticides has many resources, including the ManageSafe database to help avoid and manage  unwanted insects without the use of synthetic chemicals. These techniques include exclusion, sanitation and maintenance practices, as well as mechanical and least-toxic controls.

Source: Reuters

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

(Beyond Pesticides, February 10, 2015) Scientists at the Universities of Dundee and St. Andrews in Scotland have found evidence confirming that the levels of neonicotinoid (neonic) pesticides bees are likely to encounter in the wild impair the pollinator’s brain cells, resulting in colony declines. Bees and other wild pollinators provide services of over $125 billion globally, but are experiencing widespread and consistent losses that have the potential to increase global malnutrition and disease if not properly addressed. Although countries and regions across the globe have taken action to suspend or restrict the use of neonic pesticides in light of their threat to bees, policymakers in the U.S. continue to delay, impose inadequate changes, or even introduce new bee-toxic chemicals.

The recent study, Chronic exposure to neonicotinoids increases neuronal vulnerability to mitochondrial dysfunction in the bumblebee (Bombus terrestris), published in the Journal of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, finds a mechanistic explanation for previous findings that observed poor navigation and foraging in colonies of bumblebees exposed to neonicotinoids. To do this, researchers exposed bumblebees to doses of the neonics imidacloprid and clothanidin generally expected to be seen in the field (10 nanomoles[nM]/2.1ppb), and measured the amount that accumulated in the insect’s brain. They observed the bees accumulate between 4 and 10 nM of the chemicals within three days. Clothianidin exhibited an acute effect on the bumblebee’s brain, breaking down the mitochondria in its brain cells. Although imidacloprid did not exhibit this acute effect, after only two days of chronic exposure to an infinitesimal 1 nM amount of the chemical, the bumblebees’ brain cells became susceptible to mitochondrial damage by normal levels of acetylcholine, a neurotransmitter.

“Our research demonstrates beyond doubt that the level of neonicotinoids generally accepted as the average level present in the wild causes brain dysfunction and colonies to perform poorly when consumed by bumblebees,” he said. “In fact, our research showed that the ability to perturb brain cells can be found at 1/5 to 1/10 of the levels that people think are present in the wild,” said Chris Connolly, Ph.D, coauthor of the study.

With this impact, although bumblebees are unlikely to die, they are likely to encounter difficulty in learning and memory. Exposed bees will have greater difficulty, for instance, in recognizing the smell of a flower, or how to find their way back to their colony.

Researchers made certain to investigate how low levels of neonicotinoids effected bumblebee colonies on the whole. When exposing the bees to 1nM of imidacloprid in sugar water, scientists found adverse effects on colony growth and the condition of the nests compared to untreated colonies. Treated colonies exhibited a 55% reduction in live bee numbers, 71% reduction in healthy brood cells, and a 57% reduction in the total bee mass of the nest.

“This is not surprising as pesticides are designed to affect brains of insects so it is doing what it is supposed to do but on a bumblebee as well as the pest species. The bumblebees don’t die due to exposure to neonicotinoids but their brains cells don’t perform well as a result and this causes adverse outcomes for individual bees and colonies,” Dr. Connoly noted.

This study is the latest in a string of research that shows significant reason for policymakers to suspend the use of these toxic chemicals to alleviate the stress on global pollinator populations. In 2014, research published by Dave Goulson, PhD, in Ecotoxicology found “near-infinitestimal” exposure to neonicotinoids reduced bumblebees pollen foraging efficiency. This study built on previous studies that showed reduced colony growth and queen production, but added another piece to the puzzle by outfitting bees with Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) chips, allowing researchers to see how bees became worse and worse at collecting pollen and nectar. Now, with this new study, researchers have shown what is actually occurring within the bee’s brains to cause them to act this way in the field.

“This is not proof that neonicotinoids are solely responsible for the decline in insect pollinators, but a clear linear relationship is now established. We can now be confident that at these levels, neonicotinoids disrupt brain function, bee learning and the ability to forage for food and so limit colony growth,” said Dr. Connoly.

Although it is known that there are a number of stressors acting on pollinators, including viruses, pathogens, other pesticides, reduced foraging, and many others, policymakers can make an enormous difference in the health of these beneficial species by suspending the use of neonic pesticides. As Beyond Pesticides continues to assert, the global decline of insect pollinators No Longer a Big Mystery.

“It may be possible to help bees if more food (bee-friendly plants) were available to bees in the countryside and in our gardens,” said Dr. Connoly. “We suggest that the neonicotinoids are no longer used on any bee-friendly garden plants, or on land that is, or will be, used by crops visited by bees or other insect pollinators.”

While President Obama and the White House Pollinator Task Force consider their recommendations to address the pollinator crisis in the United States, concerned residents must make their voice heard. Sign the petition urging the President to enact meaningful protections for bees here. Become active in your community or campus and use the BEE Protective campaign’s resources to advocate for changes at the local level; organizations both large and small have already enacted meaningful changes.

Source: The FASEB Journal, Phys.org

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

(February 9, 2015, Beyond Pesticides) A report, Monarchs in Peril: Herbicide-Resistant Crops and the Decline of Monarch Butterflies in North America, released by Center for Food Safety (CFS) last week, reveals the devastating  impact of Monsanto’s and the nation’s biggest selling herbicide, Roundup (glyphosate), on the survival  of monarch butterflies. The herbicide is  used to treat  millions of acres of herbicide-tolerant  genetically engineered (GE) crops, eliminating the monarchs’ sole source  of food, milkweed, and approaching  a collapse of their population, which has plummeted over the past 20  years. The report cites findings that  glyphosate use on Roundup Ready  (glyphosate-tolerant) crops has nearly eradicated milkweed around farmland in the monarchs’ vital midwest breeding ground. At the urging of scientists and public interest groups, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is currently considering listing the monarch as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

“This report is a wake-up call. This iconic species is on the verge of extinction because of Monsanto’s Roundup Ready crop system,” said Andrew Kimbrell, executive director at Center for Food Safety. “To let the monarch butterfly die out in order to allow Monsanto to sell its signature herbicide for a few more years is simply shameful.”

Monarch population numbers have fallen by 90% in less than 20 years. This year’s population was the second lowest since careful surveys began two decades ago. The critical driver of monarch decline is the loss of larval host plants in their main breeding habitat, the Midwestern Corn Belt. Monarchs lay eggs exclusively on plants in the milkweed family, the only food their larvae will eat.

Monarch butterflies have long coexisted with agriculture, but the proliferation of herbicide-tolerant GE crops is threatening that balance. Monsanto’s glyphosate-tolerant Roundup Ready corn and soybeans have radically altered farming practices, sharply increasing the extent, frequency and intensity of glyphosate use on farm land. Glyphosate —one of the very few herbicides that kills common milkweed— was little used two decades ago, but has become by far the most heavily used herbicide in America thanks to GE Roundup Ready crops. As a result, corn and soybean fields in the Corn Belt have lost 99% of their milkweed since just 1999.

“The alarming decline of monarchs is driven in large part by the massive spraying of glyphosate herbicide on genetically engineered crops, which has virtually eliminated monarch habitat in the corn and soybean fields that dominates the Midwest landscape,” said Bill Freese, Center for Food Safety science policy analyst and co-author of the report. “Glyphosate is the monarch’s enemy number one. To save this remarkable species, we must quickly boost milkweed populations and curtail the use of herbicide-resistant crop systems.”

Milkweed does grow outside of cropland, but there is too little habitat to support a viable monarch population. First, corn and soybeans dominate the Midwest landscape, leaving little area in roadsides, pastures, and other land where milkweed grows. Second, monarchs produce almost four times more eggs per plant on milkweed within agricultural fields than on milkweed growing elsewhere.

“Milkweed growing in Midwest cropland is essential to the monarch’s continued survival. Without milkweed, we’ll have no monarchs,” said . Martha Crouch, Ph.D., biologist with Center for Food Safety and co-author of the report. “Very few of us fully understand the ecological impacts of our food system, but we need to pay attention. The decline of the monarch is a stark reminder that the way we farm matters.”

As the monarch population declines other threats have greater impacts, and the butterflies are less likely to bounce back from adversity. For example, a winter storm in 2002 killed an estimated 468-500 million monarchs. A similar storm today could completely eliminate today’s much reduced monarch population.

Environmental groups, led by Center for Food Safety and the Center for Biological Diversity, filed a legal petition with FWS to protect monarchs as threatened under ESA in August. In November, 40 leading scientists and over 200 environmental groups and businesses sent a letter to FWS in support of the petition. In December 2014, the Service responded to this petition request and announced that ESA listing may be warranted, an important first step towards securing stronger protections for monarch butterflies. While obtaining ESA listing is paramount, numerous interim and additional policy recommendations are listed at the end of Center for Food Safety’s report.

The decline of monarch habitats is not the only environmental effect linked to the pervasive use of highly toxic herbicides and insecticides. For example, the emergence and spread of glyphosate-resistant “super weeds” is strongly correlated with the upward trajectory of herbicide use, according to a study conducted by Charles Benbrook, Ph.D. Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup formulation, is one of the most widely used conventional pesticide active ingredients in the U.S. And, similar to monarch butterflies, honey bees and other wild bees have also been experiencing a drastic decline in numbers that has been linked to the prevalent use of neonicotinoids.

Critical to the survival of monarchs, other pollinators, and organisms essential to ecological balance is the large-scale  adoption of organic farming practices. Beyond Pesticides supports organic agriculture as effecting good land stewardship and a reduction in hazardous chemical exposures for workers on the farm. The pesticide reform movement, citing pesticide problems associated with chemical agriculture, from groundwater contamination and runoff to drift, views organic as the solution to a serious public health and environmental threat. To attract beneficial insects like monarchs and protect their habitats in your own backyard, there are several steps you can take. Like any other living organisms, pollinators need food, water, and shelter in order to thrive. For more information, see Managing Landscapes with Pollinators in Mind  and Hedgerows for Biodiversity: Habitat is needed to protect pollinators, other beneficial organisms, and healthy ecosystems.  You can also visit the BEE Protective Habitat Guide and Do-It-Yourself Biodiversity for more ways in which you can protect our pollinator friends.

With one in three bites of food reliant on bees and other insects for pollination, the decline of honey bees and other pollinators due to pesticides, and other man-made causes demands immediate action. For more on this and what you can do to protect pollinators, visit Beyond Pesticides’ BEE Protective webpage.

Source: Center for Food Safety

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.