AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
![]() ![]() So it’s impossible to show that population changes greater than 7% were not due to neonic use on crops. ![]() But natural fluctuations can easily reach 15% from frigid cold snaps, infestations by Varroa destructor mites, or even beekeepers applying chemicals to hives to control mites or other pests and diseases. To pass the “no risk” test, evaluators must then prove the pesticide being tested doesn’t produce more than a 7% fluctuation in a beehive’s populations. That’s virtually impossible in densely populated Europe. But that means scientists need areas four times larger than Paris, France. To ensure experimental integrity, the BGRD requires that neonic test areas must be free of other pesticide-treated, bee-attractive crops, and far enough away from such areas that tests are not affected. At the highest tier – full field testing – the guidance specifies wide spatial separation requirements between test fields and control fields, where beehives are located. At Tier 1, extremely low laboratory test thresholds pretty much automatically force evaluations under more complex, costly and time-consuming second and third tiers. The BGRD specifies a three-tier scheme for evaluating potential impacts on bees. However, in the wacky world of EU regulations, the mere fact that member governments have refused to approve a guidance document doesn’t prevent unelected Eurocrats from using it to advance their agendas. That explains why EU member nation governments for three years have refused to approve the BGRD. It also means chemicals that can control crop pests may never be approved and only ineffective chemicals will be approved (along with chemicals that are or could be dangerous for bees, but are deemed to be “natural” or “organic”). Just as crazy, the agency’s 2013 Bee Guidance Reference Document lets bureaucrats decide which studies and data can be accepted and deemed relevant – and which can be ignored. There may be no actual evidence of harm, the EFSA says, but a risk to bees “cannot be excluded.” Going even further, the European Food Safety Authority now says bees are at grave risk from neonics used on European crops that do not attract bees, such as winter cereals, beets, potatoes, leafy vegetables, maize (corn) and sorghum – whether the neonics are seed treatments, foliar sprays or soil applications. As my longer article on explains, that evidence includes the EU’s own 20/16 studies, and nearly a dozen large-scale field studies around the world. ![]() Not surprisingly, almost four years later, there is no sign that the Commission will reconsider its position, despite accumulating evidence that managed bee populations are not now and never were in any danger of collapse or extinction. In 2013, their well-funded advocacy campaigns played a major role in causing the EU’s decision-making European Commission to impose a “two-year” ban on using neonicotinoids with bee-attractive crops. But despite this minimal risk, anti-pesticide activists have tried for years to blame neonics for recent honeybee health problems. domesticated and wild bees are barely exposed and thus unlikely to be harmed when neonic seed or soil treatments are used, in contrast to what can happen when manmade or “organic” chemicals are sprayed on crops. That minimizes impacts on beneficial insects – like crop-pollinating bees. These advanced systemic crop protectors are absorbed into the plant itself and thus target only pests that suck or chew on crops, particularly during the plants’ early growth phases. Scott Pruitt and his new team over at EPA will certainly want to avoid their malpractice.įor nearly a decade, manufactured controversies have raged around a relatively new class of pesticides called neonicotinoids. The European Union and Canada have provided object lessons in how not to regulate these important chemicals. Energy and climate are high on the fix-it list. With reform-minded folks in charge of the Executive and Legislative Branches, unelected, unaccountable, un-removable bureaucrats may soon be exerting far less power over our policies, regulations, lives and livelihoods. Europe gives Trump Administration excellent tutorials on how not to regulate pesticides
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |