March 4, 2018 Senate District 39 forwarded the following agriculture resolutions to the State of MN DFL Platform Commitee:
1) Support legislation to restrict and reduce the use of neonicotinoids in the state.
2) Support a requirement that pesticide coated seeds, at a minimum, meet the labeling and registration requirements required of pesticides.
Europe poised for total ban on bee-harming pesticides (The Guardian)
https://www.theguardian.com/
Strongest evidence yet that neonicotinoids are killing bees (New Scientist)
https://www.newscientist.com/
Would we starve without bees? (BBC)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/
Attack of the bee killers: Documents show Bayer and Syngenta teamed up with farmers to get around bee-friendly regulation (Politico)
https://www.politico.eu/
Controversial pesticides can decimate honey bees, large study finds (Science)
http://www.sciencemag.org/
Farms could slash pesticide use without losses (The Guardian)
https://www.theguardian.com/
Pesticide Lobby Spends Millions To Defend Chemicals Tied To Bee Deaths (Huffington Post)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
Way to Go Bolton Bees!
Bolton Bees gets runner up in the Food/Agriculture/Beverage Division at the 12th Annual MN Cup Entrepreneurship awards. Way to go Chiara and Travis!
http://carlsonschool.umn.edu/mn-cup
This includes a 'verification of need' prior to the use of neonicotinoid pesticides, increased inspections and enforcement of pesticide label requirements, the formation of an interagency Pollinator Protection Team and many, many other great steps.
Go here for the full article:
http://www.nature.com/articles/srep29608
http://www.wired.com/2014/06/garden-center-neonicotinoids/
From Jim Riddle to Patrick Kerrigan:
This is huge!
State of Minnesota Directs Steps to Reverse Pollinator Decline and Restore Pollinator Health in Minnesota by Executive Order
Here is the link to the Executive Order 16-07 by Governor Mark Dayton:
https://mn.gov/governor/assets/2016_08_25_EO_16-07_tcm1055-253931.pd
https://mn.gov/governor/assets/2016_08_25_EO_16-07_tcm1055-253931.pd
This includes a 'verification of need' prior to the use of neonicotinoid pesticides, increased inspections and enforcement of pesticide label requirements, the formation of an interagency Pollinator Protection Team and many, many other great steps.
Thank you Governor Dayton, Commissioner of Agriculture Dave Frederickson, Representative Rick Hansen and all the many concerned citizens and pollinator advocates working on this.
New study finds that neonics can reduce bee sperm count by nearly 40%.
Mogren, C. L. and Lundgren, J. G. Neonicotinoid-contaminated pollinator strips adjacent to cropland reduce honey bee nutritional status. Sci. Rep. 6, 29608; doi: 10.1038/srep29608 (2016)
"Abstract
Worldwide pollinator declines are attributed to a number of factors, including pesticide exposures. Neonicotinoid insecticides specifically have been detected in surface waters, non-target vegetation, and bee products, but the risks posed by environmental exposures are still not well understood. Pollinator strips were tested for clothianidin contamination in plant tissues, and the risks to honey bees assessed. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) quantified clothianidin in leaf, nectar, honey, and bee bread at organic and seed-treated farms. Total glycogen, lipids, and protein from honey bee workers were quantified. The proportion of plants testing positive for clothianidin were the same between treatments. Leaf tissue and honey had similar concentrations of clothianidin between organic and seed-treated farms. Honey (mean±SE: 6.61 ± 0.88 ppb clothianidin per hive) had seven times greater concentrations than nectar collected by bees (0.94 ± 0.09 ppb). Bee bread collected from organic sites (25.8 ± 3.0 ppb) had significantly less clothianidin than those at seed treated locations (41.6 ± 2.9 ppb). Increasing concentrations of clothianidin in bee bread were correlated with decreased glycogen, lipid, and protein in workers. This study shows that small, isolated areas set aside for conservation do not provide spatial or temporal relief from neonicotinoid exposures in agricultural regions where their use is largely prophylactic."
http://www.nature.com/articles/srep29608
A win for bees! The United Court of Appeals annuls the EPA approval of the neonicotinoid: sulfoxaflor.
http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060024508
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/11/business/energy-environment/big-win-for-beekeepers-as-court-voids-insecticide.html?_r=4
Pesticides registered in Minnesota containing sulfoxaflor are:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/11/business/energy-environment/big-win-for-beekeepers-as-court-voids-insecticide.html?_r=4
Pesticides registered in Minnesota containing sulfoxaflor are:
| Product Name | EPA Reg. No. | SLN | Registration Status | Pct |
| CLOSER SC | 62719-623 | ACTIVE | 21.8 | |
| SEEKER | 62719-677 | ACTIVE | 9.62 | |
| TRANSFORM WG | 62719-625 | ACTIVE | 50 | |
| XXPIRE WG | 62719-676 | ACTIVE | 20 |
ELW
Minneapolis adopts bee friendly resolution
How Your Bee-Friendly Garden May Actually be Killing Bees
by Brandon Keimhttp://www.wired.com/2014/06/garden-center-neonicotinoids/
Stillwater City Council and Pollinator Friendly Alliance take steps to improve pollinator habitat
Great work Marcie and Laurie!
http://www.startribune.com/local/east/301283261.htmlFeb 16, 2015
Mycologist Paul Stamets asked Washington State University entomologist Steve Sheppard to help confirm his hunches about bees and fungi.
American Bee Journal Extra Debate on Neonicotinoids
"December 16, 2014 - ABJ Extra
Should the Agricultural Use of Neonicotinoids Be Banned?
by Kathy Keatley Garvey
UC-Davis Dept. of Entomology and Nematology
UC-Davis Dept. of Entomology and Nematology
A team of entomology graduate students from the University of California, Davis, successfully argued at the Entomological Society of America's recent student debates that a ban on the insecticides in agriculture “will not improve pollinator health or restore populations, based on current science. Neonicotinoids are important for control of many significant agricultural and veterinary pests. Part of the solution is to develop better regulations that will protect the health of pollinators and retain the use of an important IPM tool.”
UC Davis won the debate, defeating Auburn University, Alabama, and then went on to win the overall ESA student debate championship for the second consecutive year.
“Neonicotinoids are important for control of many significant agricultural and veterinary pests,” team captain Mohammad-Amir Aghaee said at the onset. “Part of the solution is to develop better regulations that will protect the health of pollinators and retain the use of an important IPM (integrated pest management) tool.” The team also argued successfully that neonicotinoids (also known as neonics) are not all “created equal.”
The insecticide, chemically similar to nicotine, is implicated in the mass die-off of pollinators. The European Union recently adopted a proposal to restrict the use of three pesticides belonging to the nenicotinoid family (clothianidin, imidacloprid and thiametoxam) for a period of two years. In addition, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced that by January 2016, it will ban the use of seeds treated with neonicotinoid pesticides and the use of crops improved through biotechnology throughout the 150 million acres managed by the National Wildlife Refuge System.
ESA officials chose the debate topic and assigned UC Davis to debate the “con” side and Auburn University, the “pro” side. The Auburn team argued that neonicotinoids are causing the death of bees essential for pollinating our food crops, and that the use of neonicotinoids should end. The debates took place at the ESA's 62nd annual meeting, held in Portland, Ore.
The UC Davis team included graduate students Mohammad-Amir Aghaee, Margaret "Rei" Scampavia, Ralph Washington Jr., and Daniel Klittich. Michael Parrella, professor and chair of the UC Davis Department of Entomology and Nematology, served as their advisor.
The Auburn roster included captain Olufemi Ajayi, Adekunle Adesanya, Julian Golec, Matt Burrows, Scott Clem and alternate Zi Ye. Associate professor David Held served as their advisor.
ESA sponsors the lively, cross-examination-style student debates as an educational and entertaining component of its annual meetings. The teams are given eight months to prepare. Team members must be enrolled in an entomology degree program (bachelor, masters or doctorate). Each debate spans 45 minutes and includes a seven-minute statement by each team; cross-examinations; rebuttals; and questions from the judges and audience.
UC Davis won the debate, defeating Auburn University, Alabama, and then went on to win the overall ESA student debate championship for the second consecutive year.
“Neonicotinoids are important for control of many significant agricultural and veterinary pests,” team captain Mohammad-Amir Aghaee said at the onset. “Part of the solution is to develop better regulations that will protect the health of pollinators and retain the use of an important IPM (integrated pest management) tool.” The team also argued successfully that neonicotinoids (also known as neonics) are not all “created equal.”
The insecticide, chemically similar to nicotine, is implicated in the mass die-off of pollinators. The European Union recently adopted a proposal to restrict the use of three pesticides belonging to the nenicotinoid family (clothianidin, imidacloprid and thiametoxam) for a period of two years. In addition, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced that by January 2016, it will ban the use of seeds treated with neonicotinoid pesticides and the use of crops improved through biotechnology throughout the 150 million acres managed by the National Wildlife Refuge System.
ESA officials chose the debate topic and assigned UC Davis to debate the “con” side and Auburn University, the “pro” side. The Auburn team argued that neonicotinoids are causing the death of bees essential for pollinating our food crops, and that the use of neonicotinoids should end. The debates took place at the ESA's 62nd annual meeting, held in Portland, Ore.
The UC Davis team included graduate students Mohammad-Amir Aghaee, Margaret "Rei" Scampavia, Ralph Washington Jr., and Daniel Klittich. Michael Parrella, professor and chair of the UC Davis Department of Entomology and Nematology, served as their advisor.
The Auburn roster included captain Olufemi Ajayi, Adekunle Adesanya, Julian Golec, Matt Burrows, Scott Clem and alternate Zi Ye. Associate professor David Held served as their advisor.
ESA sponsors the lively, cross-examination-style student debates as an educational and entertaining component of its annual meetings. The teams are given eight months to prepare. Team members must be enrolled in an entomology degree program (bachelor, masters or doctorate). Each debate spans 45 minutes and includes a seven-minute statement by each team; cross-examinations; rebuttals; and questions from the judges and audience.
The UC Davis team cited three main points:
• Pesticides are IMPORTANT tools used in modern agriculture
• Neonicotinoids were registered as reduced risk pesticide to replace the organophosphates, carbamates, and pyrethroids
• Banning neonicotinoids would increase of use of pesticides that have known non-target effects
• Pesticides are IMPORTANT tools used in modern agriculture
• Neonicotinoids were registered as reduced risk pesticide to replace the organophosphates, carbamates, and pyrethroids
• Banning neonicotinoids would increase of use of pesticides that have known non-target effects
The UC Davis team agreed that acute and chronic studies "have shown that neonics are toxic to honey bees and bumble bees (Blacquiere et al. 2012)" but argued that “all neonics are not created equal (Brown et al. 2014). They cited “inconsistent results with field-realistic doses (Cresswell et al. 2012)" and noted that “many other factors have been documented as contributing to pollinator decline (Epstein et al. 2012).”
It's not just insecticides that are killing bees, the UC Davis entomologists said. They listed the varroa mite (Varroa destructor), considered by U.S. beekeepers as Public Enemy No. 1; vectored pathogens, acaricides, antibiotics and fungicides directly added to the colony; pathogens such as American foulbrood and Nosema bombi); inadequate honey bee nutrition; insufficient food substitute: habitat fragmentation; and land-use changes and the increasing demand for pollination changes.
The UC Davis entomologists recommended that
It's not just insecticides that are killing bees, the UC Davis entomologists said. They listed the varroa mite (Varroa destructor), considered by U.S. beekeepers as Public Enemy No. 1; vectored pathogens, acaricides, antibiotics and fungicides directly added to the colony; pathogens such as American foulbrood and Nosema bombi); inadequate honey bee nutrition; insufficient food substitute: habitat fragmentation; and land-use changes and the increasing demand for pollination changes.
The UC Davis entomologists recommended that
• Regulatory agencies need to have more thorough registration guidelines that incorporate bee toxicity data for all pesticides (Hopwood et al. 2012). This would encompass chronic toxicity, sublethal effects and synergistic effects.
• Better management practices be mandated that follow IPM principles that protect bees on crops (Epstein et al. 2012). This would include banning certain application strategies, using less toxic neonicotinoids, and encompass the essential education and communication.
• Better management practices be mandated that follow IPM principles that protect bees on crops (Epstein et al. 2012). This would include banning certain application strategies, using less toxic neonicotinoids, and encompass the essential education and communication.
In its summary statement, the UC Davis team said: “There is NO definitive scientific evidence that neonicotinoids are the primary cause of pollinator declines. Neonicotinoids are important reduced risk pesticides for management of some of our most damaging pests. Neonicotinoids should be better regulated, not banned." They concluded: “Given the current state of knowledge, banning neonicotinoids is a premature and disproportionate response to a complex issue. This requires holistic scientific inquiry and interpretation, and cooperation among stakeholders. Any changes must be based on science rather than opinion, current trends, or fear.”
The Auburn team, or the pro-team, opened the debate with “Neonicotinoids are causing the death of bees essential for pollinating our food crops. The use of neonicotinoids should end.”
Why? They outlined six key points:
The Auburn team, or the pro-team, opened the debate with “Neonicotinoids are causing the death of bees essential for pollinating our food crops. The use of neonicotinoids should end.”
Why? They outlined six key points:
1. Critical time for pollinators in the United States
2. Lethal and sub-lethal effects
3. Prevalence and exposure
4. Effects on other pollinators
5. Risk-assessment
6. Food Quality and Protection Act (FQPA) as a precedent
2. Lethal and sub-lethal effects
3. Prevalence and exposure
4. Effects on other pollinators
5. Risk-assessment
6. Food Quality and Protection Act (FQPA) as a precedent
Expanding on the fact that this is “a critical time for pollinators in the United States,” the Auburn team pointed out:
• Honey bees pollinate $15-20 billion dollars worth of crops in the U.S., and $200 billion worldwide
• Approximately $3 billion worth of crop pollination services are provided by native bees
• Colony Collapse Disorder likely has many contributing factors but many of those are enhanced by neonicotinoids
• The declining honey bee population: the U.S. had 6 million bee colonies in 1947 and now it's down to 2.5 million
• Approximately $3 billion worth of crop pollination services are provided by native bees
• Colony Collapse Disorder likely has many contributing factors but many of those are enhanced by neonicotinoids
• The declining honey bee population: the U.S. had 6 million bee colonies in 1947 and now it's down to 2.5 million
The Auburn team keyed in on lethal and sublethal effects of neonics: synergistic interactions with other pesticides, including DMI (demethylation inhibitor) fungicides; increased susceptibility to pathogens (Nosema spp.); decrease in foraging success; decrease in overwintering queen survival; learning impairment consequences; and reproductive inhibition.
The Alabama-based team also called attention to prevalence and exposure to neonicotinoids. They discussed the neonicotinoid residues found on bee-pollinated crops and plants by various means of exposure: seed coating; foliar spray, soil drench, trunk injections; length of residue (soil vs. foliage and length of bee exposure); and single exposures resulting in season-long impacts. They also said the multiple means of exposure due to application can lead to multiple routes of exposure within bees: via pollen, nectar, guttation fluid and extrafloral nectaries.
In addition, the Auburn entomologists argued that new and novel modes of action and classes of insecticides are emerging. leading to alternative options, and that the banning of neonics in agriculture won't destroy agriculture. They also discussed the restriction of organophosphate use with the adoption of FQPA in 1996. If neonics were banned, they said, this could open the door “for stronger and more reliable risk assessment” and potentially, "the adoption of integrated pest management (IPM) tactics."
In their concluding statement, the Auburn team said that current tools for risk assessment may not be adequate; and that limiting neonicotinoid use will not harm agriculture--"it will open the door for more sustainable agriculture and new insecticides." They emphasized that we must save our pollinators, especially in the United States. "The United States is a special case--globally there is an increase in bee colonies; however, the United States is at a critical point at which bee pollination services are being threatened irreversibly."
One of the several swaying arguments that led to UC Davis winning the debate was that not all neonics are created equal, and thus, they should not all be lumped together as "an equal" and all be banned.
The UC Davis team received a $500 cash award, a plaque and a perpetual trophy engraved with UC Davis. ESA president Frank Zalom, a distinguished professor and IPM specialist in the UC Davis Department of Entomology and Nematology, presented the awards. UC Davis team consultants included Extension apiculturist (emeritus) Eric Mussen and Extension entomologist Larry Godfrey, both of the UC Davis Department of Entomology and Nematology; and Dave Fujino, director of the California Center for Urban Horticulture at UC Davis.
Mussen, who retired in June after 38 years of service, met periodically with the UC Davis team at its practices. He’s frequently asked if neonics are the primary cause of CCD. "Neonics are only one of the classes of pesticide residues that we frequently find in analyses of adult bees, beeswax and stored pollens. We encounter CCD in colonies in which no neonicotinoid residues can be found, and we find colonies surviving year after year with measurable residues of neonicotinoids in the hives. Obviously, neonicotinoids do not appear to be 'the primary' cause of CCD."
Prior to the meeting, each team submitted a draft summary of its position (600 words maximum), and no more than 15 references, to the Student Affairs Committee Chair. After the meeting, each team can revise its manuscript before it is submitted for publication to the ESA journal, American Entomologist."
The Alabama-based team also called attention to prevalence and exposure to neonicotinoids. They discussed the neonicotinoid residues found on bee-pollinated crops and plants by various means of exposure: seed coating; foliar spray, soil drench, trunk injections; length of residue (soil vs. foliage and length of bee exposure); and single exposures resulting in season-long impacts. They also said the multiple means of exposure due to application can lead to multiple routes of exposure within bees: via pollen, nectar, guttation fluid and extrafloral nectaries.
In addition, the Auburn entomologists argued that new and novel modes of action and classes of insecticides are emerging. leading to alternative options, and that the banning of neonics in agriculture won't destroy agriculture. They also discussed the restriction of organophosphate use with the adoption of FQPA in 1996. If neonics were banned, they said, this could open the door “for stronger and more reliable risk assessment” and potentially, "the adoption of integrated pest management (IPM) tactics."
In their concluding statement, the Auburn team said that current tools for risk assessment may not be adequate; and that limiting neonicotinoid use will not harm agriculture--"it will open the door for more sustainable agriculture and new insecticides." They emphasized that we must save our pollinators, especially in the United States. "The United States is a special case--globally there is an increase in bee colonies; however, the United States is at a critical point at which bee pollination services are being threatened irreversibly."
One of the several swaying arguments that led to UC Davis winning the debate was that not all neonics are created equal, and thus, they should not all be lumped together as "an equal" and all be banned.
The UC Davis team received a $500 cash award, a plaque and a perpetual trophy engraved with UC Davis. ESA president Frank Zalom, a distinguished professor and IPM specialist in the UC Davis Department of Entomology and Nematology, presented the awards. UC Davis team consultants included Extension apiculturist (emeritus) Eric Mussen and Extension entomologist Larry Godfrey, both of the UC Davis Department of Entomology and Nematology; and Dave Fujino, director of the California Center for Urban Horticulture at UC Davis.
Mussen, who retired in June after 38 years of service, met periodically with the UC Davis team at its practices. He’s frequently asked if neonics are the primary cause of CCD. "Neonics are only one of the classes of pesticide residues that we frequently find in analyses of adult bees, beeswax and stored pollens. We encounter CCD in colonies in which no neonicotinoid residues can be found, and we find colonies surviving year after year with measurable residues of neonicotinoids in the hives. Obviously, neonicotinoids do not appear to be 'the primary' cause of CCD."
Prior to the meeting, each team submitted a draft summary of its position (600 words maximum), and no more than 15 references, to the Student Affairs Committee Chair. After the meeting, each team can revise its manuscript before it is submitted for publication to the ESA journal, American Entomologist."
October 21, 2014 Honey Bees getting stung by California's severe drought
November 25, 2014 Ontario reduces the acres planted with neonics by 80% by 2017
November 22-23, 2014 Minnesota Farmers Union Convention votes in five year moratorium on Neonicotinoids
From Jim Riddle to Patrick Kerrigan:
"You'll be pleased to know that the MFU adopted the following language at the convention this weekend:
"We support MFU engaging with stakeholders to look at and support adequate funding for research (including neonicotinoids, GMOs and monocultures), garden product labeling, remediation, increased habitats, education and legislation of conserving and protecting pollinators. We further support a five-year moratorium on neonicotinoid insecticides until research on their environmental and health impacts is complete.
I (Jim Riddle) introduced the second sentence as an amendment from the floor. After lively debate, it passed 70-43, with people having to stand up to be counted!"
October 29, 2014 State raises possibility of banning neonicotinoids
Follow the Honey: 7 ways pesticide companies are spinning the bee crisis to protect profits April 2014
Watershed Sentinel August 28, 2014 Neonicotinoids - the New DDT
Star Tribune Bees at the Brink part 4: A Scientist's Aim: Save the Bees
Sept 22, 2014 Seattle, WA citywide ban on neonics passes city council
US Fish and Wildlife Service is requesting Monarch butterflies go on the endangered species list
http://www.thenewsherald.com/articles/2014/09/12/life/doc5409d64acd468008613601.txtSept 7, 2014 Star Tribune Bees in the Brink part 3
Fields of green; a desert for beesAug 30, 2014 Pioneer Press article East Metro Suburbs Easing Rules on Beehives
(w/ HBCS members Elizabeth and Laurie)July 28, 2014 Shorewood, MN passes Bee Safe City Resolution
July 8, 2014 Star Tribune article Minneapolis beekeepers abuzz about eased restrictions
July 8, 2014 Star Tribune article Nature's Dying Migrant Worker
Bees at the Brink: part 1June 15, 2014 Star Tribune article Food companies work with farmers on sustainability
sustainability measures for food companies by farmers
May 11, 2014 Pioneer Press article
March 2014 Special Registration Review of Neoniotinoids (Draft)
The Minnesota Department of Agriculture Pesticide and Management Division has drafted this document. The document includes contact information to submit your comments and links for further information. The review, when started, should take six months or so.
Claudia Morgan's and Laurie Schneider's article in Stillwater Living and Stillwater Current
Pesticides that hurt bees don't help farmers, study finds
- Article by: JOSEPHINE MARCOTTY , Star Tribune
- Updated: March 24, 2014 - 9:44 PM
Neonics don't improve crop yields full article
"The Center for Food Safety said Monday that a growing body of independent scientific evidence shows that the pesticides, known as neonicotinoids, rarely improve crop yields. They are one of the most widely used agricultural chemicals in the world and a hot-button issue in the rising public concern over the fate of the honeybee."
Victory today at the House of Representatives March 19, 2014
After Beez Kneez and concerned citizens testified in favor of this bill
HF2798/ SF2695 - LABELING AND ADVERTISING OF NURSERY STOCK
Description by Gene, City of Mpls- Chief Author. Rep. Rick Hansen (South St. Paul)and Sen. Kari Dziedzic (Minneapolis). The bill defines pollinator lethal insecticide. Neonictinoids are included in the definition. The bill requires a business may not label a plant, plant material, or nursery stock as beneficial to polinators if it has been treated with a pollinator lethal insecticide.
The bill passed the House! However, it will go to the Senate next week and we need everyone to call their Senators and tell them to author and support their version of it!
To find you Senator, go here http://www.gis.leg.mn/
Keep up the good work everyone! And email me with any questions! (honeybeeclubstillwater@gmail.com can put you in touch with Kristy)
Kristy Allen
Beez Kneez, LLC
No comments:
Post a Comment