BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Ted Hancock <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 22 Mar 2013 15:35:42 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (64 lines)
The report: "Impact of the Nations most Widely Used Insecticides on Birds"

http://www.abcbirds.org/abcprograms/policy/toxins/Neonic_FINAL.pdf

is easy to read and informative. The report summary refers to our discussion here saying:

"6. The link between impacts on the insect food of birds and declines of bird species is difficult to
establish unequivocally, save for the evidence linking the grey partridge to pesticide use in the
UK. A review of the existing literature suggests that it is difficult to predict the relative importance
of food supply during the breeding season (i.e. when an insect food base is critical) compared to
other risks such as habitat loss, food supply during migration and during winter, predation or
even direct losses from poisoning or disturbances such as mowing or tillage. Each species
responds to a different set of stressors and it is likely that many of the declines have multiple
causes.
Nevertheless, it would be foolhardy to argue that dramatic losses of insect biomass from
ecosystems is not going to have potential consequences on the integrity of those ecosystems
and on the species that depend to varying degrees on the spring-summer flush of insect food.
The impacts on terrestrial food chains from neonicotinoid (and other systemic) insecticides may
be much longer-lived and pernicious than those we have seen with non-systemic products.
Generally speaking, an over-efficient removal of insects in crop fields is seldom seen as a matter
of serious concern by regulators – especially in North America. The indirect impacts of pesticides
are not considered in registration reviews – whether in the US or anywhere else in the world.

In his book, Dutch toxicologist Henk Tennekes (2010) makes the case that the contamination of
surface water by neonicotinoids is so widespread in the Netherlands (and possibly elsewhere in
Europe), that loss of insect biomass on a continental scale is behind many of the widespread
declines that are being seen, be they of marsh birds, heath or meadow birds or even coastal
species. This suggests that we should be looking at possible links between neonicotinoid
insecticides and birds, not on a farm scale, but in the context of whole watersheds and regions.
Impacts from the neonicotinoids may very well be further afield than the arable area on which
they are used, and many of those impacts may be mediated through the aquatic environment.
Because aquatic impacts are considered during product registration reviews, it is reasonable to
ask whether the potential impact of neonicotinoids to aquatic life has been assessed correctly."

The report appears to acknowledge that farmers need pesticides to control pests. It compares some of the older pesticides to neonics, and points out where neonics are less toxic. However, given all the evidence, the report recommends neonics use be discontinued.

It would be ironic if we eliminated insects' predator, (birds), while trying to kill  insects.  Maybe ironic isn't the right word. 

Another small quote from the report:

"Recent studies in the U.S. and Europe have shown that small
amounts of neonicotinoids from treated seeds can cause
disorientation, suppressed immunity, and early death in honeybees.
This report makes clear that birds – critical agents in the control of
agricultural pests -- are adversely affected as well. A single seed
treated with imidacloprid is enough to kill a blue-jay-sized bird, and
less than one corn seed per day treated with any of the neonicotinoid
insecticides is sufficient to cause reproductive abnormalities. This is
extremely worrisome given the extensive use of neonicotinoids as
seed treatments for corn, soy, canola, and increasingly for cereals.
As this report shows, unlimited quantities of these treated seeds are
readily available to birds while regulators mistakenly assume that
exposure can be minimized by label statements or adherence to good
agricultural practices."

Ted

   

             ***********************************************
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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2