Re: “The Playbook for Poisoning the Earth”, by Lee Fang

I thought this was a good piece of journalism that exposed the underhanded tactics used to whitewash the environmental damage being caused by the use of neonics. The author supplied a lot of strong evidence to support these assertions. I know from experience that corporations are effectively using sponsorship money to stifle criticism of neonics by researchers and beekeeping organizations.
  
Many of the scientists quoted in the article emphasized that they publicly applaud and support the principals of Integrated Pest Management (IPM). This strikes me as disingenuous, when, according to the article, they are also working to ensure these large corporations maintain and increase neonic sales.
     
For an informative discussion about IPM see:

“Neonicotinoid Seed Treatments: Limitations and Compatibility with Integrated Pest Management”
 
 https://dl.sciencesocieties.org/publications/ael/abstracts/2/1/170026

It says of neonic use:

“The current approach is one whereby the targeted pest species tend to be only occasional
pests, but the tactic being deployed against them suits severe pests. This use pattern is directly contrary to IPM principles.”

“The amount of neonicotinoid applied to seeds that actually gets absorbed
by plants is typically about 1 to 10%; the rest remains in soil where it is vulnerable to leaching (Alford and Krupke, 2017; Krupke et al., 2017a).”

“Remarkably, even though NST were used on close to 100% of corn acres by 2011 (Douglas and Tooker, 2015), recent data from USGS suggest that the amount of neonicotinoids
applied to corn doubled between 2011 and 2014 (Fig. 1), despite corn prices falling over that period and acreage remaining fairly stable (USDA National Agricultural
Statistics Service, 2017). Because the increased use on corn cannot be explained by expanding treated acres, it must correspond to increasing per-seed application rates. Notably, this increase has come as concerns about nontarget effects and resistance have mounted (details below).”


“Since its introduction, IPM has become synonymous with long-term, sustainable control of pests in agricultural and nonagricultural settings (Kogan, 1998; Sternberg, 2017) and even has been adopted by some medical practitioners to treat human diseases, including cancer (e.g., Gatenby, 2009).”


Canadian canola farmers sow neonic-coated seed year after year. This practise obviously violates the principals of IPM. Yet in an industry-funded research paper, scientists argue that relying solely on neonics for flea beetle control in canola crops should be considered “an IPM approach”. See:

“Evaluating the Role of Seed Treatments in Canola/Oilseed Rape Production: Integrated Pest Management, Pollinator Health, and Biodiversity”

https://www.mdpi.com/2223-7747/5/3/32/htm

From the paper:  

“While we can, and should, strive to develop models that allow us to use insecticides only where (and when) they are needed, in the meantime seed treatment insecticides in canola represent the most environmentally sustainable approach to protecting the crop and the environment. As such they play, and will continue to play for the foreseeable future, an important role in an IPM approach for canola and oilseed rape.”
 
Such twisted logic encapsulates the state of North American agriculture today, where convenience and human greed triumph over proven scientific principles that have been forged by hard-earned experience.

Ted


PS. The beekeeping industry also tends to fall off the IPM wagon when dealing with varroa, relying on a single chemical control until a new one comes along. Some beekeepers now use Oxalic Acid Vapour (OAV) exclusively for varroa control because it is inexpensive. They argue that IPM principals don’t apply with OAV because varroa “cannot” develop resistance to it, and OAV doesn’t harm the environment (but keep your mask on). Shouldn’t we play it safe and stick with science? 

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html