Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

permaculture - [permaculture] EPA: Those Bee-Killing Pesticides? They're Actually Pretty Useless | Mother Jones

permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: permaculture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Lawrence London <lfljvenaura@gmail.com>
  • To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [permaculture] EPA: Those Bee-Killing Pesticides? They're Actually Pretty Useless | Mother Jones
  • Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 00:06:42 -0400

EPA: Those Bee-Killing Pesticides? They're Actually Pretty Useless | Mother
Jones
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2014/10/epa-those-bee-killing-pesticides-theyre-pretty-useless-otherwise

EPA: Those Bee-Killing Pesticides? They're Actually Pretty Useless
—By Tom Philpott <http://www.motherjones.com/authors/tom-philpott>
Tom Philpott
Food and Ag Correspondent
Tom Philpott is the food and ag correspondent for *Mother Jones*. For more
of his stories, click here <http://www.motherjones.com/authors/tom-philpott>.
To follow him on Twitter, click here <http://twitter.com/#%21/tomphilpott>.
RSS <http://www.motherjones.com/rss/authors/116126> | Twitter
<http://twitter.com/tomphilpott>
| Sat Oct. 18, 2014 6:00 AM EDT

Was it all for nought? Note: bumblebees, pictured here, have also been shown
<http://www.sciencemag.org/content/336/6079/351> to be harmed by neonics.
KZWW <http://flickr.com/link-to-source-image>/Shutterstock

So, there's this widely used class of pesticides known as neonicotinoids,
marketed by chemical giants Bayer and Syngenta, that have emerged as a prime
<http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/03/bayer-pesticide-bees-studies>
suspect
<http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2014/05/smoking-gun-bee-collapse>
in honeybee collapse, and may also be harming birds
<http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2013/03/not-just-bees-bayers-pesticide-may-harm-birds-too>
and water-borne critters
<http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2014/07/federal-agency-finds-neonic-pesticides-midwestern-water>.
But at least they provide benefits to farmers, right?

Well, not soybean farmers, according to a blunt economic assessment
released Thursday by the Environmental Protection Agency (PDF
<http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-10/documents/benefits_of_neonicotinoid_seed_treatments_to_soybean_production_2.pdf>).
Conclusion: "There are no clear or consistent economic benefits of
neonicotinoid seed treatments in soybeans."

Wait, what?

The report goes on: "This analysis provides evidence that US soybean
growers derive limited to no benefit from neonicotinoid seed treatments in
most instances."

Hmmm. But at least they're better for farmers than no pesticide at all?

Nope: "Published data indicate that most usage of neonicotinoid seed
treatments does not protect soybean yield any better than doing no pest
control."

Ouch.

One poll found that 45 percent of respondents reported finding non-treated
seeds "difficult to obtain" or "not available."

The EPA notes that in recent years, US farmers have been planting on
average 76 million acres of soybeans each season. Of those acres, an
average 31 percent are planted in seeds treated with neonics—that is,
farmers buy treated seeds, which suffuse the soybean plants with the
chemical as they grow. So that's about 24 million acres of neonic-treated
seeds—an area equal in size to the state of Indiana
<http://www.statemaster.com/graph/geo_lan_acr_tot-geography-land-acreage-total>.
Why would farmers pay up for a seed treatment that doesn't do them any
good, yet may be doing considerable harm to pollinators and birds? The EPA
report has insights: "data from researchers and extension experts ...
indicate that some growers currently have some difficulty obtaining
untreated seed." The report points to one small poll that found 45 percent
of respondents reported finding non-treated seeds "difficult to obtain" or
"not available."

Another reason may be marketing. Syngenta, for example, promotes its
"CruiserMaxx"
<http://www.syngentacropprotection.com/prodpreview/index.aspx?prodID=940&ProdNM=CruiserMaxx%20Beans>
seed treatment for soybeans, which combines a neonic insecticide
<http://www.syngentacropprotection.com/prodrender/index.aspx?prodid=721>
with two different fungicides. The pitch: "Promotes better emergence,
faster speed to canopy, improved vigor and higher yield potential.
Protects against damaging chewing and sucking insect pests. ... Increases
yield even under low insect pressure."

Only one US crop is planted more abundantly than soybeans: corn, which
typically covers around 90 million acres
<http://www.agriview.com/news/crop/usda-fewer-acres-of-corn-but-potential-for-record-crop/article_c01c112f-cf2f-5537-a8cb-da5f350428f4.html>.
According to Purdue entomologist Christian Krupke, "virtually all"
<http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0029268>
of it is from neonic-treated seeds. That's a land mass just 10 percent
smaller than California
<http://www.statemaster.com/graph/geo_lan_acr_tot-geography-land-acreage-total>.
You have to wonder what bang those farmers are getting for their buck. I
have a query into the EPA to see whether it has plans to conduct a similar
assessment for corn. Meanwhile, this March 2014 Center for Food Safety
research report,
<http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/files/neonic-efficacy_digital_29226.pdf>
which was reviewed by Krupke and Jonathan Lundgren, a research entomologist
at the US Department of Agriculture, found that the bee-killing pesticides
offer at best limited benefits to corn farmers, too.



  • [permaculture] EPA: Those Bee-Killing Pesticides? They're Actually Pretty Useless | Mother Jones, Lawrence London, 10/21/2014

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page