Episode 3: Neonics with Jen Sass (Natural Resources Defense Council)

Natural-Environment-Environmental-Topics-Neonics-Image

No one likes getting stung by a bee, but with bee populations plummeting, it's time to understand why. Jen Sass joins us to explain the issues with neonicotinoids, an insecticide that's showing unintended consequences around the globe.

Learn about more environmental topics impacting our natural environment here!

Episode Intro Notes

What we’ll cover

What are neonics?
How are neonics applied?
How do the work?
How big is the market?
How widespread is their use?
What is the history of neonics?
How do bees absorb neonics?
Are neonics harmful to humans?
What else could be impacting the bees?
How dire is the situation?
Controversy over the science
What would happen if we stopped using neonics?
Regulatory loopholes & general regulations
What are the substitutes?
Recent News

What are neonics?

Neonics is short for neonicotinoids, the most widely used class of insecticides in both the United States and the world (NRDC).

How are neonics applied?

Neonics can be applied to crops to kill insects that harm crops. Neonics can also be applied to seeds before they are planted. Treating the seeds with neonics before they are sewn into the soil is the most common application method. The purpose is to avoid issues such as drift that can cause collateral damage, but dust residue with neonics has been shown to be released into the air anyway such as when the seeds are run through the planters (2). The seed treatment also lowers the amount used 10-20 fold, decreasing the need for open spraying of the plant (3).

How do they work?

Neonics are “systemic.” This means it trans-locates to all parts of the plant including the pollen and nectar of adult plants (NRDC and 1). This translocation to all parts of the plant makes them toxic to any insects that feed on the plant. They kill the insects by disrupting the neural transmission in the central nervous system of invertebrates (1). They mimic the action of neurotransmitters so they continuously stimulate the neurons leading to the ultimate death of the invertebrate. They disable synapses from firing correctly.

How big is the market?

A recent study found neonicotinoids make up 25% of the global agrochemical market with sales at $2.6 billion.

How widespread is their use?

Corn accounts for ¼ of all harvested land in the U.S. and virtually all of that corn (92-95%) begins with a seed treated with neonics.
More than 90% of North American canola seeds planted are neonic treated.
Approximately one-half of U.S. soybean seeds are treated with neonics.

What’s the history of neonics?

Neonics were first introduced in the mid-1990s (NRDC). Bayer Corporation made the first neonicotinoid in 1991 called imidacloprid. They were initially adopted due to their effectiveness on target pests, improved operator safety, and a reportedly favorable environmental profile.

How do bees absorb neonicotinoids?

Several ways: 1) drinking nectar; 2) transferring pollen; or 3) through a process called guttation, which is the act of the plant sweating (2). Corn, for example, sweats during the night. Bees can obtain water from guttation droplets, especially during dry weather.

More on guttation. When the moisture level of the soil is high, water will enter plant roots because the water potential (potential energy of water) of the roots is lower than in the soil solution. The water accumulating in the plant creates a root pressure that forces some water to exude through special leaf tip or edge structures called hydathodes (wikipedia page on guttation).

Are neonicotinoids harmful to humans?

No. The most widely used neonicotinoid insecticide, imidacloprid, is less toxic to people than caffeine, and about twice as toxic as ibuprofen (2). In general, vertebrates have lower numbers of nicotinic receptors with high affinity to neonicotinoids, which is why neonicotinoids generally show a priori higher toxicity to invertebrates than vertebrates (1).

What else could be impacting the bees?

Varroa mites. They are external honey bee parasites. While not deadly in themselves, these parasites act as a vector, attaching to honeybees and appearing to be “both a disseminator and activator of a number of bee viruses” (3). They are visible to the naked eye and look kind of like a tick. It attaches to the body of the bee and sucks its blood leaving wounds and transmitting diseases such as the deformed wing virus.
Climate change leading to bees coming out of hibernation when the flowers are not in bloom.
Honey bees and bumble bees are closely related but only the bumble bees hibernate. Honey bee colonies, while smaller in the winter, are actively eating and working all winter long (4). Honey bees form what is called a “winter cluster.” The worker bees huddle and swarm around the queen bee, who is at the center of the cluster, and shiver in order to keep the center warm. Though the queen bee stays in the center, the worker bees rotate so that no one bee gets too cold. The temperature of the cluster can range from 46 degrees at the exterior to 80 degrees at the interior (5). Bees rely on the honey for energy; heat energy is produced by the oxidation of the stored honey and this heat is circulated throughout the winter cluster by the wing-fanning of worker bees. A hive of honeybees consumes up to 30 pounds of stored honey over the course of the winter.
Loss of habitat. Land use change and the widespread use of herbicides that are killing off the blooming wildflowers and groundcover like clover that bees rely on for food.

How dire is the situation?

In total, between April 2014 and April 2015, United States beekeepers lost an average of 42.1 percent of their bees. Globally, pollinators aren't faring much better -- in February 2016 the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) released an assessment of pollinator health that noted that in some areas, 40 percent of invertebrate pollinator species are so threatened that they could face extinction (7).

These sustained losses are mainly from colony collapse disorder. This is where the adult bees disappear from a colony leaving behind the queen and the hive’s young (9).

Pollinator extinction poses a huge threat to food security, because about 75 percent of all foods crops require a pollinator to grow (7). 71 of the 100 leading crops that produce 90% of the world’s food are pollinated, at least in part, by managed honeybees (9).

The USDA says bees provide $20-$30 billion in domestic agricultural revenue (9).

Neonics are water soluable and have a long half life. This allows them to accumulate in soils, surface water, and groundwater (9).

Some neonic pesticides are 5,000 to 10,000 times more acutely toxic to bees than the World War II insecticide DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) made famous in Rachel Carson’s 1962 book Silent Spring, and now banned globally for agriculture uses. (31)

Controversy over the science

Environmentalists think will wipe out the bees. [1] [2]. Science supporting this view

May 2014 Harvard School of Public Health study linked low doses of neonicotinoids to colony collapse disorder (2).
One study showed that bumblebees exposed to high doses of the neonic imidacloprid in the lab, then released to forage in the field, had sharply reduced colony growth rates and produced 85 percent fewer queens to found new colonies (3).
One study more than 30 percent of free-ranging honeybees whose brains were doused with the neonic thiamethoxam—which is not the way bees encounter the chemical in the real world— got confused, failing to return to the hive (3).
Canola is a nutritionally rich crop for bees. Neonicotinoids are widely used to protect Canada’s canola crop from pests but the bee populations there seem unaffected (3).
Australia is one of the heaviest per crop users of pesticides and yet it has one of the healthiest bee colonies in the world (3). [3]
In June 2013, 50,000 bees died in a parking lot of a Target in Wilsonville, Oregon after being sprayed with a neonicotinoid called dinotefuran.

Agricultural companies think it poses no risk when used responsibly. Science supporting this view

One University of Maryland study found a neonicotinoid developed by Bayer (imidacloprid) isn’t main cause of higher death rates in honeybee colonies in the US over the past decade. It adds stress but is not the sole cause of honeybee deaths when used in realistic levels.
They argue that the lab studies that show these horrible effects on bees come from direct exposure and in amounts that do not occur in the real world.
Some say neonicotinoids are just one factor and contributing to the decline of bees and it’s not even the worst (most say habitat loss is).
Effects may vary by crop. EPA released a preliminary pollinator risk assessment for the neonicotinoid called imidacloprid (8). Its data show a residue level on cotton and citrus above the threshold at which effects on pollinator hives are likely to be seen. However, corn and leafy vegetables either do not produce nectar or have residues below the EPA identified level.

What would happen if stopped using neonics?

Big impact

The Crop Protection Association (members include all the major agrochemical companies) say food prices would rise 40% without the use of pesticides (6).
One 2013 study found that the application of neonics greatly benefited the economy in Europe, contributing an estimated $4.28 billion in revenue.

Little impact

Stevens & Jenkins (2014) reviewed 19 studies and concluded that neonics have little to no benefits to the agricultural yields of soybeans and corn. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also conducted a study in 2014 estimating the benefits the application of neonics had on soybeans and their findings concurred with those established by Stevens & Jenkins (2014) . Additionally, Stevens & Jenkins point to a study conducted by Sinnathanby et al. (2013) which concluded that increased pesticide usage was a key driver behind a $79 million annual decline in U.S. agricultural value when compared with 1986 figures—a figure derived from yield reductions in pollinator-dependent crops (9).

Regulatory loophole

We found a loophole—referred to as “conditional registration”—has allowed the majority of pesticides to enter the market without a public and transparent process. In some cases, pesticides have not even been subjected to a full set of toxicity tests. As many as 65 percent of more than 16,000 pesticides were first approved for the market through this loophole, including neonicotinoid pesticides.

-EPA reviews health and environmental effects data submitted by a company and may register a pesticide or, alternatively, grant a "conditional registration" for a pesticide under certain circumstances, even though some of the required data may not have been submitted or reviewed. The company must provide the missing data within a specified time (14).

Regulation stuff generally (13)

Regulation of pesticides by the federal government began in 1910 with the Federal Insecticide Act. Focus there was on ensuring the quality of the pesticide chemical for the consumer rather than ensuring human health is not affected.

When the use of synthetic organic pesticides became more widespread and the risk to damage to human health increased, Congress decided it had to regulate the pesticides for health. In 1947, it passed the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). FIFRA required that all pesticide products be registered with the USDA before their sale in interstate or foreign commerce. It further required that products have certain information on their labels (e.g., name of manufacturer, ingredients, etc.) (13).

In 1972, FIFRA was amended in a new law titled the Federal Environmental Pesticide Control Act. Now all pesticides had to be registered with EPA and classified as either for general or restricted use. Most importantly, FEPCA set a new registration standard for pesticides, allowing the registration of a pesticide only if it could be determined that the pesticide would not cause unreasonable adverse effects on the environment.

As a result of existing regulations under the FIFRA, six to nine years and $50 million or higher are required for a new pesticide active ingredient to progress from the laboratory to the marketplace. Two to three years alone are needed to obtain a complete EPA pesticide registration. Data requirements for this registration can include 70 specific tests and cost the company registering the pesticide up to $10 million.

Under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, as amended, (FIFRA),1 EPA registers pesticides distributed, sold, or used in the United States and prescribes labeling and other regulatory requirements to prevent unreasonable adverse effects on the environment (14).

Before a pesticide can be sold or distributed in the United States, it must be registered under FIFRA. 16 At any time, EPA may initiate a suspension or cancellation proceeding for a pesticide registration if safety concerns develop (14).

Conditional vs. Unconditional (14). FIFRA section 3(c)(5) and section 3(c)(7) set forth two sets of statutory standards under which EPA may register pesticides.

Unconditional. EPA is authorized to grant registrations under section 3(c)(5) if EPA determines, among other things, that the application materials provided satisfy the requirements of the statutes and that the information those materials contain concerning the pesticide demonstrates that, when used in accordance with widespread and commonly recognized practice, the product will not generally cause unreasonable adverse effects on the environment. Such registrations are commonly referred to as “unconditional” registrations because they are approved without EPA imposing a requirement on the registrant to develop additional data. (2) notify the registrant of deficiencies in the data or the need for additional information, or (3) deny the application.

Conditional. In addition, section 3(c)(7) of FIFRA provides EPA the authority to grant a “conditional registration” for a pesticide product under certain circumstances, although some necessary data have not been provided by the registrant in the application. Under this authority, EPA may grant a conditional registration for pesticide products that are identical or substantially similar to pesticide products that are already registered or for a new use of a currently registered product as long as EPA determines, among other things, that the pesticide will not significantly increase the risk of unreasonable adverse effects on the environment. This authority also allows EPA to grant a conditional registration for pesticide products with new active ingredients where data are missing from the application because the requirement for the data was imposed so recently that the registrant did not have adequate time to generate the data and EPA determines, among other things, that the pesticide will not cause unreasonable adverse effects on the environment during the time needed to generate the data. According to EPA officials, registrants typically have from 1 to 4 years to provide the missing data required by a conditional registration. The registrant can ask EPA to waive the requirement for additional information or, according to EPA officials, extend the time frame. If the registrant does not submit the data specified within the required time frame, EPA can cancel the pesticide registration.

For example, an environmental group that requested info from EPA said the information showed that over 3,200 pesticides had been in conditional status since 1995 (15 years) and that 2,100 pesticides had been in conditional status since 1990 (20 years).

What are the substitutes?

Some say if that the use of neonicotinoids is banned then the use of organophosphates will increase (10). The response is that typically insecticides are not needed; only 10% of the time for corn and soybeans do insects need to be controlled. [4]

Some say go with integrated pest management, which includes techniques such as crop rotations and the use of natural predators to reduce pests.

Sometimes there are less toxic, less persistent insecticide options and other times there aren’t,” she said in an email. “There are some foliar products on the market that are less toxic to bees and less persistent in the environment. Coragen, Bt products like Xentari and Dipel, and Beleaf are all examples. These are definitely alternatives but largely for Lepidoptera and grasshopper control (10).

Prophylactic uses of pesticides such as seed-treatments are inconsistent with an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) framework, which favors the use of non-chemical treatments. Pesticides should only be used in cases where the pest population is high enough to pose an economic threat to farmers, and all other strategies have failed.23

Steps Forward

The EPA now requires the industry to submit data on a pesticide’s potential impact on young bees, toxicity from eating contaminated pollen and nectar, and long-term impacts on whole colony health and survival.
Close Conditional Registration loophole
EPA and USDA should track the production, sale, use, and environmental movement of pesticides
Increase bee-friendly, flower-rich habitat
Farmlands, urban parks and gardens, public lands, and even roadside right-of-ways could all support pesticide-free wildflowers to provide
Support growers to transition to more sustainable farming methods

Recent news

Maryland’s legislature passed a bill called the Maryland Pollinator Protection Act on April 7, 2016. It creates a ban on consumer use (e.g., home gardeners) of neonicotinoids; those trained to use the pesticide, farmers, and veterinarians can still use it.

In 2015, Maryland beekeepers lost 61 percent of their honeybee populations, which is twice the national average (7).

Some cities have outright bans and several states are currently considering legislation like Maryland’s.

In 2015, EPA proposed to prohibit the use of pesticides that are toxic to bees, including the neonicotinoids, when crops are in bloom and bees are under contract for pollination services. The Agency temporarily halted the approval of new outdoor neonicotinoid pesticide uses until new bee data is submitted and pollinator risk assessments are complete (8).

The National Assembly of France, the largest crop producing nation in the EU, passed an outright ban on neonics in March 2016. It still needs to pass the Senate. Farmers worry there is no viable substitute and France would be put a disadvantage relative to other EU countries (11). EU banned the use of three neonics starting in 2013 (12).