Colony Collapse Disorder is a condition affecting honey bee colonies. The issue has agricultural industries that rely on bees for pollination, environmental groups and the pesticide industry in a total uproar. The problem showed up about fifteen years ago when a mysterious “disease” swept through honey bee hives. Beekeepers opened their hives to find that their bee colonies were gone. Disappeared. Nowhere. Over the ensuing years, a host of potential causes for what became known as Colony Collapse Disorder have been suggested. But no parasites, infections, predators, or visible cause could be found. However, the impact of the threat is very real. Honey bees are needed to pollinate $15 billion in US crops annually. Last year, the US Agriculture Department reported that 42% of US honeybee colonies died in the 12 month period ending in April 2015.
Attention turned to crop pesticides called “neonics”. Derived from nicotine, neonics were a powerful new weapon with few known problems. But research in Europe showed that when exposed to neonics, some worker bees no longer seemed to be able to find their way back the hive from foraging expeditions. They literally just got lost. The ensuing dust up resulted in neonic bans in Europe.
There are many different neonic pesticides marketed by a number of companies for various applications. Flupyradifurone, for example, is registered by the EPA for a large number of crops such as citrus, cotton, and potatoes for use against piercing and sucking insects such as aphids, whiteflies, thrips, and psyllids. But critics say the research on its toxicity is woefully inadequate. Research used by the EPA, they claim, focuses on immediate toxicity, but flupyradifurone, the critics say, is persistent, lasting up to 300 days in the environment and in water columns and accumulating in nectar and pollen. The first exposure is not toxic, the critics say, but the substance becomes more toxic after the second exposure and even more toxic after the third. They claim the timing of maximum residues in comb pollen, nectar and wax varied but generally occurred one week to several months after the second application. In short, yes, the bees can drink it the first time they encounter it but from then on, all bets are off. The research illustrates just how complex the issue of toxicity can be.
In January, the EPA (which has been uncharacteristically silent to date) released its preliminary report on the issue of neonics. The review found that one of a variety of neonics, imidacloprid, can leave residue in cotton and citrus plants at levels that could harm bee colonies, but that levels on other crops like corn and leafy vegetables didn’t pose a risk. The review said more data is needed to fully assess any risk to bee colonies from use on cereal grains and legumes and that the agency would be conducting three additional studies on the impact of neonics on bees which it will complete by 2017. Last year the agency proposed a ban on neonics when crops are in bloom and bees are being used to pollinate.
Attention turned to crop pesticides called “neonics”. Derived from nicotine, neonics were a powerful new weapon with few known problems. But research in Europe showed that when exposed to neonics, some worker bees no longer seemed to be able to find their way back the hive from foraging expeditions. They literally just got lost. The ensuing dust up resulted in neonic bans in Europe.
There are many different neonic pesticides marketed by a number of companies for various applications. Flupyradifurone, for example, is registered by the EPA for a large number of crops such as citrus, cotton, and potatoes for use against piercing and sucking insects such as aphids, whiteflies, thrips, and psyllids. But critics say the research on its toxicity is woefully inadequate. Research used by the EPA, they claim, focuses on immediate toxicity, but flupyradifurone, the critics say, is persistent, lasting up to 300 days in the environment and in water columns and accumulating in nectar and pollen. The first exposure is not toxic, the critics say, but the substance becomes more toxic after the second exposure and even more toxic after the third. They claim the timing of maximum residues in comb pollen, nectar and wax varied but generally occurred one week to several months after the second application. In short, yes, the bees can drink it the first time they encounter it but from then on, all bets are off. The research illustrates just how complex the issue of toxicity can be.
In January, the EPA (which has been uncharacteristically silent to date) released its preliminary report on the issue of neonics. The review found that one of a variety of neonics, imidacloprid, can leave residue in cotton and citrus plants at levels that could harm bee colonies, but that levels on other crops like corn and leafy vegetables didn’t pose a risk. The review said more data is needed to fully assess any risk to bee colonies from use on cereal grains and legumes and that the agency would be conducting three additional studies on the impact of neonics on bees which it will complete by 2017. Last year the agency proposed a ban on neonics when crops are in bloom and bees are being used to pollinate.