# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Honeybees' brains are very sophisticated and each bee knows there is an important job to do.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Millions of dead bees are a side effect of spray meant to control Zika spread

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Want to eat? Then save pollinators from extinction, U.N. report says

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Researchers working to solve mystery of honeybee deaths

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pollination by honeybees is import for agriculture. But many of the bees are abandoning their hives and dying. Scientists, beekeepers and companies are trying to find out why.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Firstly, I give permission for use of all material on this website for educational purposes so long as it is attributed to ScientificBeekeeping.com.

This is not a "How You Should Keep Bees" site; rather, I'm a proponent of "Whatever Works for You" beekeeping. I'm a "data over dogma" guy, and I implore my readers to correct me on any information at this website that is out of date or not supported by evidence.
"It's what you know for sure that keeps you from learning."
And I'm all about learning. I'd like to make it perfectly clear that I do not consider myself to be the final arbiter on any matter! In investigating many of these controversial subjects, my brain feels like a GPS unit, repeatedly saying, "Recalculating" and sometimes even "Turn around when possible." This is why I take care to hold no positions, and appreciate being intelligently challenged on any point. If something comes to my attention that makes me rethink or correct anything I've written, I am more than happy to rebut myself on these pages.

I've visited beekeepers in many countries, and realize that there are as many ways to keep bees as there are beekeepers. The bees don't care whether you are a commercial or hobby beekeeper, nor whether your personal preference is Langstroth, Warre, top-bar, small cell, foundationless, "natural" or conventional beekeeping-the same biology applies to all. My goal is to provide any and all beekeepers with a resource of readable and straightforward information on how to practice good bee husbandry, and to exercise environmental and community responsibility.

This site is more or less a record of my learning process as I apply my formal training as a biologist to the practice of running my ever-evolving commercial beekeeping operation in California. I have no interest in offering advice (there are plenty of beekeepers more than eager to do that). Rather, what I do offer is evidence-based and scientifically-verified explanations of the biological processes occurring in the hive, as well as the effects of various management options. I then leave it to each beekeeper to use that information in order to make their own better-informed practical management decisions.

In this "post-truth, information overload era" novice beekeepers can be overwhelmed by an internet and popular press chock full of conflicting strong opinions and questionable advice. If you are a beginning beekeeper looking for basic information, or an experienced beekeeper looking for a summary of mite treatment options, I suggest that you go directly to Basic Beekeeping. Otherwise, I suggest that you click on the blue categories to the right of each page to see which articles are available, or go to Articles By Publication Date, or use the function at the top of each page to look for topics.
My Background
I started keeping bees as a hobbyist around 1966, and then went on to get university degrees in biological sciences, specializing in entomology. In 1980 I began to build a migratory beekeeping operation in California, and currently run around 1000-1500 hives with my two sons, from which we make our livings (update: Eric and Ian are in the process of taking over the operation-allowing me more time for research).

In 1993, the varroa mite arrived in California, and after it wiped out my operation for the second time in 1999, I decided to "hit the books" and use my scientific background to learn to fight back. I started writing for the American Bee Journal in 2006, and have submitted articles nearly every month since then (see "Articles by Publication Date").

My writing for the Journal brought me requests to speak at beekeeping conventions, which has also allowed me the chance to visit beekeepers from all over North America and several other continents. I read most every scientific study relating to beekeeping, and regularly correspond with beekeepers and researchers worldwide.

What I try to do in my articles and blogs is to scour scientific papers for practical beekeeping applications, and to sort through the advice, opinion, and conjecture found in the bee magazines and on the Web, taking no positions other than to provide accurate information to Joe Beekeeper, following the suggestion in 1922 by New Zealand beekeeping author Isaac Hopkins:

That scientific accuracy, as opposed to rule of thumb, or guess-work methods, is much needed in commercial production to attain the success we should aim for, will be acceded by all intelligent beekeepers. There are many, however who do not realise this, or at all events, do not sufficiently appreciate the principle in their practice, but are content muddle along in a slipshod fashion to their great loss. From THE BEE WORLD February 1922

I regularly update the articles on this site as new information becomes available, and solicit constructive criticism or comments. Perhaps the best venue for such discussion is at the Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology. Be sure to subscribe to updates, and I'll email you monthly when I add content to the site https://scientificbeekeeping.com/scientific-beekeeping-newsletter/

Please Donate Here

It is the appreciative feedback that I receive from beekeepers (and researchers) worldwide is what keeps me going (thank you). If you find this website to be of value, please support it (and my independent research projects) with your donations. You can donate via Paypal below. Notice: I will, for tax purposes, treat your donation as a "gift" - given with "detached and disinterested generosity" out of "affection, respect, admiration, charity or like impulses."

Or Personal checks can be mailed directly to me at:

Randy Oliver
14744 Meadow Dr.
Grass Valley, CA 95945

Be sure to specify whether the check is a "Gift" or whether you are going to claim it as a deductible "Expense."

Thank you!

In order to be notified by email of updates and additions to this website, please sign up at ScientificBeekeeping Updates (I will not share your personal info or email with anyone, nor clog your inbox; I update once every few months at best).
I get a lot of questions about my research into extended-release oxalic acid. This treatment is not yet approved for use in the U.S., but I suspect that it will be a game-changer for managing varroa. Researchers can find details on how I created the test sponges for my 2020 trials at the end of Mite Control While Honey is on the Hive: Part 4
I've created a very useful varroa control model for all to use-check it out here. It is designed to run in Excel, and can be used to run simulations for mite management in your own operation.

Nicole from Heritage Acres interviewed me about the state of bees, breeding for mite resistance, and extended-release oxalic acid, treatment-free beekeeping, mite drift, and my recent research. You can listen to it at this podcast

My assistant Brooke Molina shot a quick video of me demonstrating how to use my home-made plastic cups to perform a swirl-type mite wash-showing how it takes less than 4 minutes per hive. Randy's Mite Wash Video

Extended-release oxalic acid

There is a crying need for a safe and effective varroa treatment for use during hot weather, when there are honey supers on the hive. I am working with USDA-ARS to get this application method approved by EPA. My latest update is at: Extended-Release Oxalic Acid Progress Report
An objective assessment of the neonics
I was recently asked to write an assessment of the neonics targeted for the nursery trade group-the University of California Nursery and Floriculture Alliance. It's brief and simple.

You can read it here: link

My colony age distribution chart

I get a lot of requests for the colony age distribution chart that I created from Lloyd Harris' data from Manitoba hives. Thanks to beekeeper Kat Satnik for pointed out a typo in previous versions. You can download a copy here.
Mite control updates 25 January 2018
Many of you have noticed the recent discovery that lithium salts may be of use in varroa control. I've gotten some lithium citrate and will be testing this season. It is currently legal to feed colonies a lithium salt as a nutritional supplement, but I cannot recommend putting it into your hives prior to further formal testing.

Re oxalic acid in glycerin (oxalic shop towels), I've made big strides in developing protocols for incubator trials this winter to test various formulations for best efficacy against the mites, coupled with minimal adverse effects to the bees.

These cup cages in my home incubator allow me to place precise amounts of various oxalic acid solutions on a measured square of cellulose fabric (note the blue piece of towel in the left hand cage) sized to be proportional to the surface area of the combs in a hive (using a piece of beeswax-coated plastic foundation as proxy). The screens at the bottoms of the cups allow me to measure the percentage of mites killed by the treatment.

I've also recently perfected a protocol that allows me to quickly titrate the amount of oxalic acid that actually gets transferred to the bees' bodies (note the pink indicator solution in the cup with bees). I've only run one formal trial using this method so far, but it shows great promise for me to be able to quickly screen for the optimal application method for distributing oxalic acid within the hive.

I thank you all for your donations in support of this research. I will continue to publish and post updates.
The 2017 Eclipse
Thanks to Idaho beekeepers Steve Sweet and Kevin Duesman for inviting Stephanie and I to join the Treasure Valley Beekeepers Association in camping out and viewing the eclipse directly under the path of totality!

We also shared the experience with some other bee researchers-Annette Bruun Jensen (from Denmark), Dennis vanEngelsdorp, and Steve Sheppard.
Update 10 March 2017 to the OA shop towel link below
There has been huge interest in my article from the Jan ABJ on extended-release oxalic acid dissolved in glycerin, and applied on shop towels. Please go to this link for updates: https://scientificbeekeeping.com/oxalic-shop-towel-updates/
Updates: Jan 29, 2016
California almond season is upon us! We've had it easy the past few seasons in almonds, since the lack of rain during our drought kept the orchards relatively dry. Not so this year! The orchards are a mess, and many are impassable.

My sons Eric and Ian, and I spent the past week welding up our new boom loader (original design, on the truck to the far right, largely constructed while working under a tent during the rain). We got a 3-day break in the rain this week, and used the window of opportunity to start moving our hives into the most problematic orchards. I took the photo of Eric and Ian with our three trucks as we arrived in the morning for offloading. It was relatively dry upon arrival, but it started raining shortly thereafter, and was a sloppy mess by the time we had finished unloading two hours later (after having to replace one loader motor, and swap a battery between the trucks-the usual almond problems).

The drought made beekeeping really tough last season, and we had to feed a record amount of pollen sub and syrup to our colonies in late summer and fall. Varroa only added to our problems. But we poured TLC (and dollars) into our hives, with the result that our colonies are looking OK for almonds (knock on wood).

I've added several new articles to the website, continuing on Colony Buildup and Decline, as well as investigating the fermentation of beebread (see https://scientificbeekeeping.com/articles-by-publication-date/).

I also updated my ppt on oxalic acid.

Beekeeper Jeff Anderson (and coplaintiffs) have recently filed a lawsuit against EPA to remove the current loophole that allows growers to plant pesticide-treated seed without the normal restrictions regarding pesticide application. EPA interpreted existing law as such:
Treated seed (and any resulting dust-off from treated seed) may be exempted from registration under FIFRA as a treated article and as such its planting is not considered a "pesticide use."
The above loophole has allowed serious problems with planting dust to remain unresolved. The lawsuit explains that the current EPA guidance document:
states there will not be investigation or enforcement against any of their bee kills or other harm caused by neonicotinoid-coated seeds or resulting contaminated dust because the kills and other harm incidents are "not considered a 'pesticide use.'"

Although I am not of the anti-neonic camp, and feel that seed treatments are perhaps the best use of neonics, they are indeed potent insecticides, and anyone (including the guy pulling the seeder) should have training in pesticide application, and follow restrictions to reduce pesticide drift. Thus I feel that beekeepers should support Jeff in this important lawsuit. Read more at: (Broken Link!) http://pollinatorstewardship.org/?p=3903

On the subject of pesticides, Dr. May Berenbaum has recently published the most succinct summary of the history of insecticide use that I've had the pleasure to read. Read it at: (Broken Link!) Does the Honey Bee "Risk Cup" Runneth Over?

We're now pushing 30 years with varroa, and from the look of it, in many operations varroa is winning. Lately I've been giving presentations on "A New Era in Mite Management," which I plan to spin into a series of articles.

I've also got a backlog of research trials that we've done (funded by the donors to ScientificBeekeeping), but have not yet had time to publish. There just haven't been enough hours in my days, due to building our operation and my many speaking engagements.

The good news is that we've finally reached the point that my sons are getting ready to take over the reins of our business (now at around 1200 hives), which I hope will free up time for me to catch up on the home front and concentrate on beekeeping research (as well as to improve the website).
Updates: Jan 9, 2016
A recently-filed lawsuit by beekeeper Jeff Anderson deserves our support, in order to close a huge loophole in pesticide regulation. Currently, the EPA does not classify pesticides applied on treated seed as pesticide "applications," and are thus exempt from the restrictions and liability due to drift or misuse as are other pesticide applications. The registration of seed treatments as pesticide applications will allow better monitoring of the overall environmental impact and fate of seed-applied pesticides (not only the neonics). For more information, see: (Broken Link!) Pollinator Stewardship News.

Also, see my updates on oxalic acid at Varroa treatments
Updates: Nov 2
There have been a couple of excellent and objective reviews of our state of knowledge on the effects of neonicotinoids on bees. Both are open access. The lay reader may wish to simply read the summaries in the second link.
A restatement of the natural science evidence base concerning neonicotinoid insecticides and insect pollinators A restatement of recent advances in the natural science evidence base concerning neonicotinoid insecticides and insect pollinators
I've updated my analysis of the recent paper Neonicotinoid pesticides severely affect honey bee queens.

I also suggest the reading of an excellent Master's Thesis by Julia Goss of the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences: Neonicotinoids and Honeybee Health. Julia tracked varroa, nosema, and virus levels in 96 colonies, equally divided between 16 fields of oilseed rape, half seed treated with clothianidin, half as untreated controls. She measured parasite levels before (June) and after flowering of the crop (late July-early August). Results: despite the confirmed exposure of the Test colonies to clothianidin at much higher rates than we ever see in North America, there were no differences in any of the parasite levels following exposure to the insecticide.

Update: August 23: I was asked to comment on Harvard Medical School's Dr. Lu's recent paper on neonics in Massachusetts. This may be of interest to those re a general discussion of the issue of good science vs. poor science. Read it at A Review of Dr. Lu's Latest.

Update June 26: I added a post that I made to Bee-L on monitoring varroa at Monitoring Varroa.

Update May 9: I've updated First Year Beekeeping, an added Oxalic acid dribble tips.

April 29: I've been derelict in updating the website, and have about 12 articles to post. A number of ABJ readers have asked me to post the following graphic from one of my recent articles.

You can view a full-sized version at Colony Demograph y.

I occasionally comment on bee issues or the news, or link to interesting blogs by others on beekeeping, bee biology, or the environment.
The "Flow Hive"
In recent months there has been a great deal of buzz about the "Flow Hive," developed by a father/son team of Australian beekeepers. The device consists of an arrangement of molded plastic parts that act as foundation upon which the bees build honey combs, but which can then be shifted by the turn of a handle to break open the cells of ripe honey and allow it to drain out of the hive through tubes. Although innovative, it is similar to a patent from 1939 ( http://www.freepatentsonline.com/2223561.pdf).

The Flow Hive is likely the most well-funded beekeeping device ever brought to market, due to its inventors incredible media-savvy marketing via crowd sourcing on the internet. By means of producing brilliant and compelling fundraising videos, they have raised enough money to bring their product to market. Kudos to them!

I suspect that much of their funding has come from non beekeepers, who have always been fascinated by the promise of hive from which liquid honey could be directly taken without the need for actually handling bees.

The question regarding the Flow Hive is whether it will turn out to be practical, especially with regard to cost and whether it will stand up to repeated use. Longtime beekeepers tend to be skeptical, since we've seen so many beekeeping inventions come and go over the years.

But who knows? I'm as eager as anyone to see whether the Flow Hive proves to be a revolution in beekeeping. We'll see once the completed hives get delivered to buyers. I wish the developers the best of luck. Only time will tell whether the device actually flies or flops.
Neonics in Ontario
A recent hotbed of anti-neonic activism is Ontario, Canada, in which an unlikely coalition of a few beekeepers and some media-savvy NGO's is pushing the government to ban these insecticides. Let me state very clearly that I myself support organic and sustainable farming, use of Integrated Pest Management, and greatly reduced use of pesticides. That said, I feel that any pesticide regulations, and agricultural recommendations, should be based upon sound science.

An exemplar of this philosophy is Dr. Terry Daynard, formerly a professor and Assistant Dean of the Ontario Agricultural College, and currently a farmer himself. Daynard recently received the "2014 Farm & Food Care Champion" award from Farm and Food Care.org, with the introduction that "Daynard is a champion of agriculture in many ways. He is respected as a farmer, scientist, innovator and agricultural advocate, speaking up and advocating sound science even in the presence of criticism by those that don't agree with him."

Dr. Daynard applies a sound and scientific assessment of how misinformation can taint well-intentioned environmental regulation in his blog " Critique of "A Proposal for Enhancing Pollinator Health.""

We all want to minimize agriculture's negative effects on the environment. This includes greatly reducing our reliance upon pesticides. But such reduction needs to evolve as we learn (or re learn) alternate and more sustainable strategies for growing food. This is best done by rational and sober scientific assessment of current and alternative practices. I commend Dr. Daynard pointing this out.

I'm also impressed by a recent blog by Dr. David Zaruk, who is a Risk Governance Analyst at Risk Perception Management and an Assistant Professor Adjunct in Communications at Vesalius College, VUB, and Facultés universitaires St-Louis in Brussels. He blogs under the name of the "Risk Monger." He recently posted about the real-life agricultural and ecological consequences of the politically- (as opposed to scientifically-) motivated suspension of neonic seed treatments in the EU. http://risk-monger.blogactiv.eu/2014/09/30/the-save-the-bees-ban-failed-crops-and-another-precautionary-fail-who-is-to-blame/

Read previous blogs here:
https://scientificbeekeeping.com/news-and-blogs-page/
Dec 2, 2013 If you have interest in the recent petitions to ban the neonics, I recommend reading a letter to the respected journal Nature by a British bee researcher, Lynn Dicks, in which she points out the problems with hurried setting of policy based upon political pressure rather than upon careful scientific evaluation of the evidence http://www.nature.com/news/bees-lies-and-evidence-based-policy-1.12443

Such a careful evaluation of all evidence is what I'm all about, even if that is unpopular with those who don't want to be confused by the facts. I currently feel that the problem with planting dust from corn seeding has finally reached the point where the manufacturers either have to take responsibility for compensating beekeepers who suffer losses due to the application of their products, or EPA and PMRA need to restrict the use of neonic seed treatments to only planters that pass dust emission certification. However, I feel that to date there is not enough evidence to call for a complete ban on the neonics-there are simply too many beekeepers successfully keeping healthy hives in areas of seed-treated crops. Clearly this is a hot issue, and the neonics, along with all pesticides need to be closely watched and regulated. It appears to me that our regulatory agencies are doing a good job at this, even if progress seems to be excruciatingly slow.

The most recent blog of interest is on the real people involved in biotechnology (GMO's). Steve Savage writes:

"As with any new technology, the development and commercialization of biotech crops is a story about people. Its a story about people with ideas and vision; people who did hard and creative work; people who took career or business risks, and people who integrated this new technology into the complex business of farming... Their story is important, but it tends to get lost in much of the conversation about biotech crops.

Many narratives about "GMOs" leave out the people side, presenting it instead as some faceless, monolithic phenomenon devoid of human inspiration, intention and influence. Thats not how it happened. Other narratives about "GMOs" demonize those who made biotech crops a reality. Such portrayals are neither fair or accurate. The real stories of these people matter, because trust in a technology is greatly influenced by what people believe about those behind it."

Read the rest at:
http://appliedmythology.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-people-side-of-gmo-crops-part-i.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Scientific Beekeeping - Beekeeping Through The Eyes of a Biologist

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Firstly, I give permission for use of all material on this website for educational purposes so long as it is attributed to ScientificBeekeeping.com. This is not a "How You Should Keep Bees" site; rather, I'm a proponent of "Whatever Works for You" beekeeping.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | In San Francisco, hotels welcome bees as honored guests

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
San Francisco hotel welcomes bees as guests.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
To many people, honey bees symbolize prosperity, sustainability and environmentalism. But as a honey bee researcher, I have to tell you that only the first item on that list is defensible. Although they are important for agriculture, honey bees also destabilize natural ecosystems by competing with native bees-some of which are species at risk.

The rise in hobby beekeeping, now a trendy activity for hundreds of thousands of Americans, followed strong awareness campaigns to "save the bees." But as a species, honey bees are least in need of saving. Media attention disproportionately covers them over native pollinators, and murky messaging has led many citizens-myself once included-to believe they are doing a good thing for the environment by putting on a beekeeper's veil. Unfortunately, they are probably doing more harm than good.

"Beekeeping is for people; it's not a conservation practice," says Sheila Colla, an assistant professor and conservation biologist at Toronto's York University, Canada. "People mistakenly think keeping honey bees, or helping honey bees, is somehow helping the native bees, which are at risk of extinction."

Colla recently published an analysis of nearly a thousand comments submitted by citizens in response to Ontario's draft Pollinator Health Action Plan -a proposal that involved a plan for stricter neonicotinoid pesticide regulations. Despite intense public interest in bees and pollination and strong support of tighter pesticide regulations, Colla and her colleagues found that citizens had a surprisingly poor understanding of the diversity of pollinators and their roles in pollination.

"The focus on neonics [a kind of pesticide] and honey bees has taken a ton of resources away from conserving wild pollinators from their most important threats," Colla says. She is justifiably frustrated at the misappropriated attention on saving honey bees when, from a conservationist's point of view, native bees are the ones in more dire need of support.

And while honey bee-centric businesses often support initiatives that benefit native bees, such as developing bee-friendly habitat, the financial contributions pale in comparison to what could be achieved if funds were applied to these initiatives directly. "Beekeeping companies and various non-science-based initiatives have financially benefitted from the decline of native pollinators," Colla explains. "These resources thus were not allocated to the actual issue people are concerned about."

For some reason, maybe because they are small, honey bees are not generally viewed as the massively distributed livestock animal that they are. There are millions of honey bee colonies in North America, 2.8 million of which are in the U.S. Approximating around 30,000 bees per colony (the size of a pollination unit), that's roughly a billion honey bees in Canada and the U.S. alone-almost triple the number of people.

High densities of honey bee colonies increase competition between native pollinators for forage, putting even more pressure on the wild species that are already in decline. Honey bees are extreme generalist foragers and monopolize floral resources, thus leading to exploitative competition-that is, where one species uses up a resource, not leaving enough to go around.

But determining honey bees' influence on natural ecosystems requires empirical testing. It is possible, for example, that alternate foraging habits of native bees-differences in their active times of day or preferred plants, for example-could lead to little effective competition. Honey bees are so ubiquitous, though, that it has been hard to test exactly how their introduction, and subsequent resource monopolization, affects ecosystem networks.

Not so for the Canary Islands. Alfredo Valido and Pedro Jordano, researchers from the Spanish National Research Council in Tenerife and Sevilla, respectively, saw an opportunity to use these islands-a Spanish archipelago off the northwestern coast of Africa-to study how the introduction of honey bees affects the native pollinating community.

In the highlands of the islands' Teide National Park, thousands of honey bee colonies are introduced seasonally for honey production and removed again at the end of the nectar flow, creating an excellent scenario for experimentation. Their results, published in Scientific Reports, do not make honey bees look like the sustainability celebrities they have become.

Bringing in honey bees reduced the connectedness of the plant-pollinator networks. Nestedness and modularity, two indicators of ecosystem resilience, also declined. While some plant species enjoyed higher fruit set, fruits sampled nearest the apiaries contained only aborted seeds. "The impact of the beehives is so dramatic," says Valido, "You can detect disruption between plants and pollinators just the day after beehive installation."

"By introducing tens or hundreds of beehives, the relative density of honey bees increases exponentially compared with wild native pollinators," Valido explains. This causes a drastic reduction of flower resources-pollen and nectar-within the foraging range. "Beekeeping appears to have more pervasive, negative impacts on biodiversity than it was previously assumed," says Jordano.

Valido and Jordano suspect that their findings on the Canary Islands are generally applicable to other ecosystems where honey bees are introduced, but they note that the specific impact of beekeeping in other locations may differ.

Indeed, honey bees are not always the top competitor in a pollinator network: Whether they succeed at outcompeting the native bees depends on other factors. For example, Nicholas Balfour and his colleagues at the University of Sussex, England, found that native bumble bees were superior competitors on the tubular flowers of lavender, owing in part to their longer proboscis (tongue).

In still other ecosystems, honey bees appear not to be as influential as in the Canary Islands. After introduction in northern Patagonia, nonnative bumble bees and honey bees overtook the native bees as the most frequent floral visitors, but this had no effect on the native bees' actual visitation rates.

While every ecosystem has its own quirks-with different pollinator players and participating plants-pollination network studies conducted closer to home tend to agree with the findings in the Canary Islands. "There have been studies in North America showing pollination system disruptions by honey bees," says Colla. "Honey bees also are very effective at pollinating certain weedy species, which changes the overall plant communities."

Many of those weedy species are also invasive, including Scotch broom, dandelions, Himalayan blackberry and Japanese knotweed, among others. And beekeepers secretly love invasive plants. Their intense proliferation provides a lucrative and predictable nectar flow-perfect for the honey bees, and beekeepers, to capitalize on-but the plants, too, disrupt native ecosystems.

Even with this boost of forage, there is sometimes still not enough to go around amongst honey bees, let alone native bees. In the lower mainland surrounding Vancouver, Canada, I kept a small research apiary with 15-20 hives. It was my first year keeping research colonies in a high-density area, and I have never struggled so much to keep my bees alive.

The hives were riddled with diseases. I even euthanized one colony with symptoms of American foulbrood-standard protocol, as it's one of the most destructive, contagious diseases that honey bees face. Despite being entirely free of Varroa destructor -a devastating parasitic mite-at the start of the season, the hives required miticide treatments by late summer. And the colonies did not produce a crop of honey.

Colony densities in some locations have become too high, facilitating the spread of disease and exacerbating problems with poor nutrition. If it was this hard to keep my honey bees healthy, I'm not sure I can bear to think about the wild bees.

But think about them, we must. I used to believe that honey bees were a gateway species, and that concern over their health and prosperity would spill over onto native bees, benefitting them, too. While this may have happened in some cases, evidence is mounting that misguided enthusiasm for honey bees has likely been to the native bees' detriment. Beekeeping doesn't make me feel good, anymore. In fact, quite the opposite.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
They’re important for agriculture, but they’re not so good for the environment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Bees, butterflies, and other pollinators need nectar as their primary food source, and female bees collect pollen as food for their offspring. Native plants, which are adapted to local soils and climates, are the best sources of nectar and pollen. Most native plants are low-maintenance and don’t nee…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The NAPPC Honey Bee Health Task Force

The North American Pollinator Protection Campaign (NAPPC) is a collaborative group of scientists, government agencies, NGO's, private industries and agricultural and environmental concerns that work together to bring the plight of pollinators to national attention and to be the most trusted resource for information and behaviors in support of pollinating animals and the plants with which they interact. NAPPC works for all species of pollinators across the whole of North America. NAPPC partners have formed specialist task forces to address all the issues that face pollinators, and one such group is the NAPPC Honey Bee Health Task Force.

The NAPPC Honey Bee Task Force has several functions, determining each year the recipients of honey bee health grants that have for the past twelve years supported research in honey bee genetics, pesticide exposure, nutrition, and management. In addition, the task force is dedicated to providing the latest findings and perspectives on honey bee health to the public, policy makers and the press. The following honey bee health issues have been provided by that task force. We hope you find them useful, and we welcome questions and comments to info@nappc.org.

Honey Bee Health

So much of our agricultural productivity is dependent on the European honey bee ( Apis mellifera) that it is no wonder that our attention is drawn to their plight. When the honey bee suffers, so does agriculture, and so, potentially do all who depend on the bounty that comes from animal pollinated angiosperms, the flowering plants from which we derive many of our most delicious and health-giving fruits and vegetables.

While honey bees are clearly not the only hard working pollinators that deliver a bounty to humans and other animals, their recent deaths from Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) starting in 2006 have captured the world's attention. To date, CCD has been defined as a series of symptoms, but the cause and the cure have remained complex and elusive. CCD is not the only problem facing honey bees; in fact, in 2010 the overwintering losses were at the same unsustainable rates of over 30% but the cause seemed to be less from CCD than from other problems. Below is a list of the variety of issues facing honey bees.

The North American Pollinator Protection Campaign Scientists Report on Honey Bee Stressors

Parasites

The Varroa mite (Varroa destructor)
Is an external parasite that has spread from its original host, the Asian honey bee Apis cerana, to nearly all Western honey bees (Apis mellifera) worldwide. Virtually all European honey bees are highly vulnerable to Varroa mites, although some honey bee strains (VSH, Russians) show partial resistance to the mites. This mite weakens honey bees by sucking hemolymph ("blood") from its host and by transmitting bee pathogens. A female mite reproduces by invading the cell of a bee larva just before capping. Once inside, the female lays eggs to produce offspring that feed together on the developing bee. The mother mite and her adult daughters emerge from the cell with the young adult bee host. Eventually, at high infestation rates, the mites overwhelm and kill the host colony. Beekeepers control Varroa mite populations by monitoring mite infestation rates and applying chemical treatments when mite populations become too large. Due to increased concerns over the effects of miticides on bees and mite resistance to commercial miticides, researchers are developing alternative approaches ("softer" chemical treatments, the genetics of mite resistance in honey bees, mite pheromones and hormones, and physical treatments) to control this mite.

Nosema ceranae
This microscopic fungus can weaken or even kill colonies when the majority of workers become infected. Spores of the fungus survive on wax combs and stored food inside colonies. When workers eat these spores the fungus invades the lining of the intestine. Highly infected bees cannot digest efficiently and die earlier. Beekeepers use antibiotics and disinfection of hives to control this disease.

Viruses

Thus far, more than 20 honey bee viruses have been identified. These viruses can impact bees in multiple ways, including killing developing larvae and pupae, decreasing the lifespan of adult bees, causing spasms and tremors, reducing cognitive skills, and impairing wing development so that bees cannot fly. Most honey bee colonies have multiple viruses, and the levels of these viruses can fluctuate throughout the year. Exposure to other stressors, particularly Varroa parasitization, can immunosuppress bees so that the effects of the viruses are more dramatic. The only treatment for viruses thus far is to feed the colony a solution of virus-specific RNA that enhances the bees' immune responses to these particular viruses, but these treatments only suppress the viral infections, and do not eradicate them. Other approaches that are being investigated include breeding bees with genetic resistance to the viruses.

Bacterial Diseases

American foulbrood (Paenibacillus larvae)
American foulbrood is an infection that kills young bees (brood) inside the wax cells in which they develop. This dead brood becomes a source of infection spread by workers nursing young brood. Some bees can detect and remove the diseased brood and this stops the disease from spreading. Beekeepers also use antibiotics to prevent the disease.

Pesticides

Pesticides are usually man made chemicals designed to kill pest organisms, that may injure plants or animals including humans. Pests cause economic damage by reducing crop yields directly or by producing crop, or ornamental plant diseases, or by competing with crops, or by reducing animal and human health, or by damaging buildings and structures. Pesticides are categorized according to their intended use as well as by their chemical composition. Pesticides are widely used and are divided into insecticides/acaricides, used to control insects and mites or ticks, fungicides used to control plant diseases; rodenticides, used to control rodents; and herbicides used to prevent weeds from competing with crops, grasses or ornamental plants. Pesticides usually contain an active ingredient, with a known mechanism for killing the target pests. Pesticides vary widely in their safety to humans and the environment and are sold as a formulation with added ingredients that augment the action of the active material when mixed in water for application. More than 1200 chemicals are registered for use in the United States and are used in some 18,000 separate products sold under a variety of trade names. People who apply the more toxic pesticides must have training and a state issued license to use these materials.
Some insecticides have warnings or bee hazards on their label because they are toxic to honey bees, causing honey bee deaths. If the insecticide has a sub-lethal affect on honey bees it may result in reduced larval survival, altered foraging behavior or shortened lifespan of adult bees. The extent of the sub-lethal affects is still unknown.

Click here to view a PDF list of recent published pesticide resources including recent work on neonicotinoids.

Nutrition

Honey bee colonies are healthier and stronger with access to pollen from diverse sources of flowering plants. However, floral diversity in landscapes has been reduced by intensive agriculture (single crops, few flowering weeds, limited hedgerows) and urbanization. In recent years, the pollination of early crops (such as almonds in California in February) has further increased the demand for strong colonies at times of year with few floral sources. Furthermore, changes in climate patterns may also affect seasonal availability of flowering plants. This requires beekeepers to use artificial sources (sugar syrup, corn syrup, and pollen substitutes) to try to meet the increased nutritional demands of their colonies.

Genetics

Honey bee colonies are headed by a single queen who mates with an average of 12 males, and thus honey bee colonies are extremely genetically diverse. Several studies have demonstrated that genetic diversity improves the disease resistance and productivity of colonies, including their overwintering ability. Furthermore, strains of honey bees can have different traits - some forage for more pollen, while others are more adept at hygienic behavior, in which diseased or parasitized brood is removed. Several breeding programs are underway to develop stocks of bees that are more resistance to diseases and parasites, are better at overwintering in specific climates, and are productive and gentle.

Queen Quality

The honey bee queen is responsible for producing all the workers in the colony, and she lays up to 1500 eggs a day. Poor quality queens can severely impact colony health. Queens with low egg-laying capacity can limit the numbers of health workers produced, while unhealthy queens can die or be killed by workers, causing a break in brood rearing that again limits colony growth and productivity. Poor quality queens are consistently cited by beekeepers as a major factor underlying colony failure, and a longitudinal study of colonies indicated that loss of a queen or lack of laying by a queen was one of the two factors linked to colony loss. Several factors seems to impact queen quality, including rearing conditions and mating number.

Management

Proper management of honey bee colonies is a critical component of their health and productivity. Many of the stressors listed on this page can be mitigated by using the proper techniques. Beekeepers need to place their colonies is appropriate locations, which allow access to adequate foraging sites and are distant from areas where pesticides are being applied (honey bees can forage up to 5 km away from their colonies). Beekeepers can provide supplementary nutrition, in the form of sucrose solution or protein patties, during periods of low nectar flow. Beekeepers can monitor for pests, such as Varroa mites and Nosema microporidia, and use chemical or non-chemical methods to control these as needed. Beekeepers can minimize exposure to pathogens, such as viruses and bacteria, by systematically replacing used brood comb with fresh comb. Using genetic stocks of bees that more resistant to pests and pathogens is also an excellent way to reduce complications from these two stressors. Finally, rapid supercedure of poor quality queen honey bees can lead to colony losses, and thus purchases queens from excellent sources or rearing queens locally can improve colony productivity and health. For more information, please see the Honey Bee Best Management Practices guide that has been developed by the Managed Pollinator Coordinated Agriculture Program (CAP) and Project Apis m (PAm):
http://www.extension.org/pages/33379/best-management-practices-bmps-for-beekeepers-pollinating-californias-agricultural-crops

Reviews on Honey Bee Health

The Plight of Bees- Environmental Science and Technology Dennis vanEngelsdorp, Marina Doris Meixner A historical review of managed honey bee populations in Europe and the United States and the factors that may affect them. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology 103 (2010) S80-S95 Solving the Mystery of the Vanishing Bees- Scientific American: April 40-47. Nosema ceranae The Inside Story Nosema Microsporidia: Friend Foe and Intriguing Creatures Higes M, Martín-Hernández R, Botías,C, Garrido-Bailón E, González-Porto AV, Barrios L, del Nozal MJ, Bernal JL, Jiménez, JJ, García-Palencia, P, Meana, A. 2008 Honey Bee Disorders: Bacterial Diseases Honey Bee Nutrition USDA 2011 Colony Collapse Disorder Annual Report

USDA and EPA Release New Report on Honey Bee Health - Release Date: 05/02/2013

Download this PDF to learn more about global Honey Bee colony disorders and other threats to insect pollinators.

"Introduction
Current evidence demonstrates that a sixth major extinction of biological diversity event is underway.1. The Earth is losing between one and ten percent of biodiversity per decade2, mostly due to habitat loss, pest invasion, pollution, over-harvesting and disease3. Certain natural ecosystem services are vital for human societies. Many fruit, nut, vegetable, legume, and seed crops depend on pollination. Pollination services are provided both by wild, free-living organisms (mainly bees, but also to name a few many butterflies, moths and flies), and by commercially managed bee species. Bees are the predominant and most economically important group of pollinators in most geographical regions. The Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO)4 estimates that out of some 100 crop species which provide 90% of food worldwide, 71 of these are bee-pollinated. In Europe alone, 84% of the 264 crop species are animalpollinated and 4 000 vegetable varieties exist thanks to pollination by bees 5. The production value of one tonne of pollinator-dependent crop is approximately five times higher than one of those crop categories that do not depend on insects. Has a "pollinator crisis" really been occurring during recent decades, or are these concerns just another sign of global biodiversity decline? Several studies have highlighted different factors leading to the pollinators' decline that have been observed around the world. This bulletin considers the latest scientific findings and analyses possible answers to this question. As the bee group is the most important pollinator worldwide, this bulletin focuses on the instability of wild and managed bee populations."
Excerpts from the PDF

Honey Bee and Wild Bee Interaction

Honey Bee and Wild Bee Interaction

Updated April 2, 2012 - www.pollinator.org

The following list of peer reviewed publications has been generated by members of the pollinator LISTSERV. Some of these studies report tests of native bee/honey bee interactions, others provide background and insight into potential interactions. If you have an additional study to add to this list please email info@pollinator.org. We are also in the process of developing a new 2012 NAPPC Task Force that will take on this issue. If you are interested in chairing or participating in this task force please contact Vicki Wojcik, vw@pollinator.org.

Peer Reviewed Publications

1. Aizen MA and Feinsinger P (1994) Habitat Fragmentation, Native Insect Pollinators, and Feral Honey Bees in Argentine 'Chaco Serrano'. Ecological Applications 4(2) 378-392

2. Badan EI and Vergara CH (2011) Potential negative effects of exotic honey bees on the diversity of native pollinators and yield of highland coffee plantations. Agricultural and Forest Entomology 13:365-372

3. Burkle LA and R. Alarcón (2011)The future of plant - pollinator diversity: understanding interaction networks across time, space, and global change. American Journal of Botany 98(3): 528-538.

4. Cairns CE, Villanueva-Gutiérrez R, Koptur S, Bray DB (2005) Bee populations, forest disturbance, and africanization in Mexico. Biotropica 37 (4):686-692.

5. Dohzono I and Yokoyama J (2010) Impacts of alien bees on native plant-pollinator relationships: A review with special emphasis on plant reproduction. Applied Entomology and Zoology 45:37-47.

6. Eickwort GC and Ginsberg HS (1980) Foraging and mating behavior in Apoidea. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 25:421-46

7. Ginsberg HS (1981) Historical development of bee foraging patterns in central new york state Psyche 88:337-346

8. Ginsburg HS (1983) Foraging ecology of bees in an old field. Ecology 64: 165-175.

9. Goulson D (2003) Effects of introduced bees on native ecosystems. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 34: 1-26.

10. Goulson D, J C Stout, A R Kells Journal of Insect Conservation (2002) Do exotic bumblebees and honeybees compete with native flower-visiting insects in Tasmania ? Journal of Insect Conservation 6(3): 179-189

11. Knowles D (1983/4) Flying jewels. Geo 5:46-57

12. Kremen C, Williams NM, Thorp RW (2002) Crop pollination from native bees at risk from agricultural intensification. PNAS 99 (26) 16812-16816.

13. National Research Council of the National Academies (2006). Status of Pollinators in North America. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

14. Paton DC (1985) Food supply, population structure, and behaviour of New Holland honeyeaters Phylidonyris novaehollandiae in woodlands near Horsham, Victoria. Pages 222-230 in Keats, A, et al, eds. Birds of eucalypt forests and woodlands: ecology, conservation and management. Sydney (Australia): Royal Australian Ornithologists Union and Surrey Beatty and Sons.

15. Paton DC (1993) Honeybees in the Australian environment. Bio Science 43: 95-103

16. Pearson J FW. (1933) Studies on the ecological relations of bees in the Chicago region. Ecol. Monogr. 3:375-441.

17. Potts, SG, JC Biesmeijer, C Kremen, P Neumann, Oliver Schweiger and WE Kunin. (2010) Global pollinator declines: trends, impacts and drivers. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 25 (6) 345-355.

18. Pyke GH and Balzer L (1985) The effects of the introduced honey bee (Apis mellifera) on Australian native bees. Occasional paper nr 7. Sydney (Australia): New South Wales National Prks Wildlife Service.

19. Roubik DW and Villanueva-Gutiérrez, R (2009) Invasive Africanized honey bee impact on native solitary bees: a pollen resource and trap nest analysis. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 98: 152-160.

20. Roubik DW, Moreno E, Vergara C, Wittmann D (1986) Sporadic food competition with the African honey bee: projected impact on neotropical social bees. Journal of Tropical Ecology 2: 97-111.

21. Roubik, DW and H Wolda (2001) Do competing honey bees matter? Dynamics and abundance of native bees before and after honey bee invasion. Popul Ecol 43:53-62

22. Sáez A, Sabatino M, and Aizen MA (2012) Interactive Effects of Large- and Small-Scale Sources of Feral Honey-Bees for Sunflower in the Argentine Pampas PLoS One 7(1): e30968.

23. Schaffer WM, Jensen DB, Hobbs DE, Gurevitch J, Todd JR and M. Schaffer V (1979) Competition, foraging energetics and the cost of sociality in three species of bees. Ecology 60: 976-987.

24. Steffan-Dewenter I and Tscharntke T (2000) Resource Overlap and Possible Competition between Honey Bees and Wild Bees in Central Europe. Oecologia 122(2):288-296

25. Stout JC and Morales Cl (2009) Ecological impacts of invasive alien species on bees. Apidologie 40: 388-409.

26. Sugden EA and Pyke, GH (1991) Effects of honey bees on colonies of Exoneura asimillima, an Australian native bee. Australian Journal of Ecology 16: 171-181.

27. Thomson DM (2004) Competitive interactions between the invasive european honey bee and native bumble bees. Ecology 85(2):458-470

28. Thomson DM (2006) Detecting the effects of introduced species: a case study of competition between Apis and Bombus. OIKOS 114: 407-418

29. Villanueva-Gutiérrez R, Roubik, DW, Colli-Ucán W(2005) Extinction of Melipona beecheii and traditional beekeeping in the Yucatán peninsula. Bee World 86 (2): 35-41

30. Wenner AM, Thorp RW and Barthell JF. Removal of european honey bees from the Santa cruz island ecosystem. Pages 327-335 in Damiani, C.C. and D.K. Garcelon (eds.). 2009. Proceedings of 327 the 7th California Islands Symposium. Institute for Wildlife Studies, Arcata, CA.

31. William M. Schaffer WM, DW. Zeh, SL Buchmann, S Kleinhans, MV Schaffer and J Antrim (1983) Competition for Nectar between Introduced Honey Bees and Native North American Bees and Ants Ecology 64(3): 564-577

Reports and other resources

1. Morkeski A and Averill AL (2010) Wild Bee Status and Evidence for Pathogen Spillover with Honey Bees CAP Updates: 12: http://www.extension.org/pages/30998/w ild-bee-status-and-evidence-for-pathogen-spillover-with-honey-bees

2. Thorp RW, Wenner AM and Barthell JF (1999) Pollen and nectar resource overlap among bees on Santa Cruz Island, click here to view.

Honey Bee Life Cycles

Individual Worker Honey Bee Life Cycle The entire bee hive has an annual cycle from spring to fall, with a less active winter phase. Individual bee life cycles occur throughout this colony cycle. It takes more than 20 days for an egg to develop into a worker bee. Once hatched, each worker bee lives for about 40 days. Half of a bee's life is spent in the hive working, the other half is spent outside of the hive foraging.

Larval Worker Honey Bee Life Cycle The queen bee lays an egg into an empty cell - this is different than solitary bees that lay their eggs on a pollen ball. The egg hatches into a larva that is fed by worker nurse bees. After about 5-6 days the larva will turn into a pupa. Nurse bees put a cap on the cell once there is a pupa to protect the developing adult. After about 10-12 days the pupa will emerge. Temperature plays a big role in how insects develop. This is why the number of days from egg to larva to pupa to adult can vary slightly.

Adult Worker Honey Bee Life Cycle After the adult emerges she beings take on tasks in the hive. She spends the first few days cleaning cells (day 1 and 2), then she takes on the role of nurse (day 3 to 11) where she feeds developing larvae. After feeding duty she works to caps cells with wax that she produces (day 12-17). Her final days working in the hive are spent guarding the front entrance (day 18-21). After about three weeks in the hive she transitions to the role of forager and goes out to collect food for the colony (23 days and beyond).

The total worker bee life span from laid egg to the death of the adult averages 7 to 9 weeks. It takes 3 weeks for the egg to develop into a worker adult. The adult then lives for 4 to 6 weeks. Some worker bees that are produced in the fall live longer than 9 weeks because they spend the winter in e hive and have early foraging duties in the spring.

Solitary Bee Life Cycle

I ndividual Solitary Bee Life Cycle

An egg is laid by a female solitary bee on top of a pollen ball.

After a few days the egg will hatch and become a larva that quickly eats the food source left by the female.

The larva grows and eventually becomes a pupa. The pupa is the transformation stage when cells in the body rearrange and mature and the bee starts to look like the adult bees we are familiar seeing. The pupa hatches from its case and then emerges from the nest by chewing its way through leaves or mud.

An adult bee emerges from the nest! This bee then mates and the cycle is ready to start all over again.

Once a female has mated she works all day foraging, visiting flowers collecting pollen and nectar that she will use to build pollen balls. A female solitary bee makes 15-20 flower visits to complete just one cell in a nest. Pollination occurs as the female bumps into the flower's anthers and stigma during these visits.

Once a female has built all of her cells in one nest she seals off the end and leaves to start another nest.

Colony Life Cycle

COLONY CYCLE (see illustrations to the right) Winter (not shown) A bee hive has a season cycle the repeats from year to year. During the winter a hive is dormant. The bees in the colony surround the queen and keep her warm. The colony survives the winter by feeding off of honey stores that were collected the previous year.

Spring (1) When the weather gets warmer and spring flowers start to bloom the colony becomes more active (1). Overwintering foragers leave the hive to collect pollen and nectar; the queen has been laying eggs (between 1500 to 2000 each day) and the colony is ready for spring.

Summer (2 and 3) In early summer (2) the colony is very active. Foragers leave daily to collect pollen and nectar and many new worker bees emerge. By late summer the colony has grown very large and strong (3). Workers start to produce new queen cells that will produce new queen bees (in warmer climates this can occur earlier in the spring as well). After the new queens hatch, they leave the colony, each taking some worker bees with them. This is called swarming.

Fall (4) By the fall (4) the flowers have stopped blooming and are producing fruit. The colony works on storing food and foraging for nectar slows. Foragers look for water and take cleansing flights throughout the winter. The worker bees and the queen will spend the winter feeding off of their stored honey, waiting for the spring bloom of flowers.

Pollination in a Plant's Life Cycle

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The North American Pollinator Protection Campaign (NAPPC) is a collaborative group of scientists, government agencies, NGO's, private industries and agricultural and environmental concerns that work together to bring the plight of pollinators to national attention and to be the most trusted resource for information and behaviors in support of pollinating animals and the plants with which they interact.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela - Helping the bee and its habitat before the food chain gets stung

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Intervening on the bee’s behalf as its habitat dwindles.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Protecting Honey Bees and Wild Pollinators From Pesticides

Beyond Pesticides advocates for widespread adoption of organic management practices as key to protecting pollinators and the environment, and has long sought a broad-scale marketplace transition to organic practices that legally prohibits the use of toxic synthetic pesticides, and encourages a systems-based approach that is protective of health and the environment. Learn more (below) on the role that pesticides play in pollinator decline, and actions you can take to BEE Protective. For information on growing plants to protect pollinators, see our Pollinator-Friendly Seeds and Nursery Directory. Use the Bee Protective Habitat Guide to plant a pollinator garden suited for your region, and consider seeding white clover into your lawn; learn more from Taking a Stand on Clover.

For an overview, watch our short-film, Seeds that Poison, below. The video highlights the hazards associated with a major use of bee-toxic pesticides — seed coatings — and puts the problem in the broader context of environmental contamination, while suggesting a course for change. Please use the video in conjunction with the resources cited below.

Background

Since 2006, honey bees and other pollinators, in the U.S. and world-wide,
have experienced ongoing and rapid population declines. This continuing
crisis threatens the stability of ecosystems, economies, and the food
supply: one in three bites of food is dependent on pollinator services.

In 2013, Beyond Pesticides joined with beekeepers and environmental allies in a lawsuit challenging EPA's approval of two neonicotinoid pesticides. These highly toxic, persistent, and systemic chemicals have been widely implicated as leading factors in pollinator declines. For a primer on the pollinator crisis, see the lawsuit's Press Release. Also, read the 2013 Lawsuit, Appendix A: Clothianidin, and Appendix B: Thiamethoxam.

Follow the links below for more in-depth information on this important issue, and view Beyond Pesticides' latest pollinator-related Daily News Blog articles (right).

BEE Protective

In order to move action forward on the pollinator crisis, Beyond Pesticides and The Center for Food Safety launched the BEE Protective campaign, a national public education effort that supports local actions to protect honey bees and other pollinators from pesticides and contaminated landscapes.

BEE Protective includes a variety of educational materials to help encourage municipalities, campuses, and individual homeowners to adopt policies and practices that protect bees and other pollinators from harmful pesticide applications, and create pesticide-free refuges for these beneficial organisms. In addition to scientific and regulatory information, BEE Protective also includes a model community pollinator resolution and a pollinator protection pledge. Pollinators are a vital part of our environment and a barometer for healthy ecosystems. Let's all do our part to BEE Protective of these critical species.

Resources and Educational Materials: Make use of the resources below as you advocate to BEE Protective! Feel free to make copies and hand them out in your community!

Cultivating Plants that Poison Bees, Butterflies, and Birds: a special, in-depth report on systemic pesticides

The Well-Stocked Hardware Store: a guide to help hardware stores transition to selling organic products, as well as Beyond Pesticides' video, Making the Switch, featuring Eldredge Hardware of York, Maine

Pesticides and Pollinators factsheet: toxicity and regulatory information, and environmental and health impacts

Pollinator Friendly Seed Directory: retailers and nurseries that have committed to not selling seeds and plants laced with bee-harming neonicotinoids. Download our brochure to print (two-sided), fold, and take with you!

Beekeeping Policies — Advocacy information for backyard and commercial beekeepers: designed for backyard and commercial beekeepers, this brochure provides information on how to advocate for and pass local policies that protect bees

Pesticide Enforcement and Compliance: Examining State and Federal Response to Bee Decline: a factsheet offering useful steps in reporting a bee incident and information about how to engage in local policy decisions; it also outlines local and federal enforcement abilities

Backyard Beekeeping factsheet: Learn how to get started with your own backyard beehive. For more information, see our page on Beekeeper Resources.

Honey Bees and Pesticides — a one-page factsheet: Get the basic facts on honey bee declines. This simple, easy-to-read factsheet is a great introduction to the issue; please share it with your networks.

No Longer a BIG Mystery: This Beyond Pesticides report summarizes the science behind bee declines. It provides scientific evidence demonstrating that pesticides, especially the neonicotinoid class of insecticides, have sublethal and chronic impacts on bee behavior, immune systems, and colony longevity.

BEE Protective Habitat Guide: A comprehensive guide to pollinator-friendly flowers you can plant in your region. Bring it to your workplace or school, or use it to create a pollinator garden on your own backyard!

Economic Value of Commercial Beekeeping: The dramatic decline of honey bees also has a significant impact on the U.S. agricultural economy, including food availability and pricing. Learn about how the honey bee crisis could affect your food choices and budget.

Managing Landscapes with Pollinators in Mind: How we manage various ecosystems and landscapes plays a critical role in long-term pollinator health.

Protecting Honeybees and Wild Pollinators: Widening the scope from honey bees, this pamphlet delves into the effects pesticides have on the numerous other pollinators that provide critical ecosystem services.

Bees, Birds and Beneficials: An expanded look at the range of harmful impacts threatening pollinators and wildlife. Delve into the issue of systemics and genetic engineering-induced habitat loss. Read about the organic path forward that is needed to protect the natural world.

BEE Protective . . . for Kids! Birds, Bees and Other Beneficial Organisms: Get kids excited and learning about pollinators and their health — with coloring, a word search, and fun pollinator facts!

Help the Honey Bees — Products to Avoid: Learn which home and garden pesticides are most harmful to bees!

Managing Pests Safely without Neonicotinoids: How to integrate bee protection into your pest control practices, in homes, schools, and other indoor and outdoor areas.

Back to top

BEE Protective in Your Community

You can make your town or school or college campus pollinator friendly by working to curtail or eliminate the sale and/or use of bee-harming neonicotinoid pesticides.

Build the buzz in your community to make changes that will protect your local pollinator population. Get the Model Community Pollinator Resolution in the hands of local elected officials, school administrators, businesses, or municipal administrators.

Display a Pesticide-Free Zone sign for your yard, and show your neighbors that pesticide-free spaces are important for health and the environment.

When gathering support, keep in mind these important tips on grassroots organizing.

Consider going door to door with a petition to get your message across, or start one online though websites such as change.org.

Recall sucesses in other communities for inspiration and encouragement. Consider the achievements of Eugene, OR, Spokane, WA, and Shorewood, MN, as well as the "Bee-Safe" communities in Boulder, CO that got more than 150 contiguous homes to pledge to stop using bee-harming pesticides.

Need some additional pointers, or already had sucess getting your community or campus to go pesticide free? Contact the BEE Protective campaign at [email protected] or 1.202.543.5450 and let us know!

Back to top

Pollinator Alerts

Help Beyond Pesticides grow the pressure on all fronts by asking retailers, administrators, and elected officials to take action to eliminate or curtail the sale and use of neonicotinoid pesticides.

Help us build a network of safe spaces for pollinators across the country. Sign the Pollinator Pledge declaring your property as pesticide free, organic, and pollinator friendly.

Tell Your Member of Congress to Support the Saving America's Pollinators Act. Capitol Hill is buzzing about a new bill that aims to provide long overdue protections for America's imperild pollinators.

Bees can't wait 5 more years. And neither can we. Join our campaign to ban bee-harmful neonicotinoid pesticides.

Tell Retailers to Stop Selling "Pre-Poisoned" Plants. Beyond Pesticides helped to release a new first-of-its-kind report, with Friends of the Earth and other allies, which reveals that the world’s most popular pesticides, neonicotinoids (neonics), are implicated as a key factor in global bee die-offs, and may be lurking in our own gardens.
Back to top

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Beyond Pesticides advocates for widespread adoption of organic management  practices as key to protecting pollinators and the environment, and has long sought a broad-scale marketplace transition to organic practices that legally prohibits the use of toxic synthetic pesticides, and encourages a systems-based approach that is protective of health and the environment. Learn more (below) on the role that pesticides play in pollinator decline, and actions you can take to BEE Protective.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Honey bees - wild and domestic - perform about 80 percent of all pollination worldwide. A single bee colony can pollinate 300 million flowers each day. Grains are primarily pollinated by the wind, but fruits, nuts and vegetables are pollinated by bees. Seventy out of the top 100 human food crops - which supply about 90 percent of the world's nutrition - are pollinated by bees.

"In the last four years, the chemical industry has spent $11.2 million on a PR initiative to say it's not their fault, so we know whose fault it is."
Jon Cooksey, writer, director, How to Boil a Frog.

What's Killing the Bees - and Why It Matters

Worldwide bee colony collapse is not as big a mystery as the chemical industry claims.

The systemic nature of the problem makes it complex, but not impenetrable. Scientists know that bees are dying from a variety of factors-pesticides, drought, habitat destruction, nutrition deficit, air pollution, global warming and more. Many of these causes are interrelated. The bottom line is that we know humans are largely responsible for the two most prominent causes: pesticides and habitat loss.

Worker bees (females) live about six weeks in summer and several months in the winter. Colonies produce new worker bees continuously during the spring and summer, and then reproduction slows during the winter. Typically, a bee hive or colony will decline by 5-10 percent over the winter, and replace those lost bees in the spring. In a bad year, a bee colony might lose 15-20 percent of its bees.

In the U.S., winter losses have commonly reached 30-50 percent, in some cases more. In 2006, David Hackenberg - a bee keeper for 42 years - reported a 90 percent die-off among his 3,000 hives. U.S. National Agricultural Statistics show a honey bee decline from about 6 million hives in 1947 to 2.4 million hives in 2008, a 60 percent reduction.

The number of working bee colonies per hectare provides a critical metric of crop health. In the U.S. - among crops that require bee pollination - the number of bee colonies per hectare has declined by 90 percent since 1962. The bees cannot keep pace with the winter die-off rates and habitat loss.

Pesticides and Bees

Biologists have found more than 150 different chemical residues in bee pollen, a deadly "pesticide cocktail" according to University of California apiculturist Eric Mussen. The chemical companies Bayer, Syngenta, BASF, Dow, DuPont and Monsanto shrug their shoulders at the systemic complexity, as if the mystery were too complicated. They advocate no change in pesticide policy. After all, selling poisons to the world's farmers is profitable.

Furthermore, wild bee habitat shrinks every year as industrial agribusiness converts grasslands and forest into mono-culture farms, which are then contaminated with pesticides. To reverse the world bee decline, we need to fix our dysfunctional and destructive agricultural system.

Solutions That Save the Bees

Common sense actions can restore and protect the world's bees. Here's a strong start:

1. Ban the seven most dangerous pesticides.

2. Protect pollinator health by preserving wild habitat.

3. Restore ecological agriculture.

Ecological farming is the overarching new policy trend that will stabilize human food production, preserve wild habitats, and protect the bees. The nation of Bhutan has led the world in adopting a 100 percent organic farming policy. Mexico has banned genetically modified corn to protect its native corn varieties. Eight European countries have banned genetically modified crops and Hungary has burned more than 1,000 acres of corn contaminated with genetically modified varieties. In India, scientist Vandana Shiva and a network of small farmers have built an organic farming resistance to industrial agriculture over two decades.

Ecological, organic farming is nothing new. It is the way most farming has been done throughout human history. Ecological farming resists insect damage by avoiding large monocrops and preserving ecosystem diversity. Ecological farming restores soil nutrients with natural composting systems, avoids soil loss from wind and water erosion, and avoids pesticides and chemical fertilizers.

By restoring bee populations and healthier bees, ecological agriculture improves pollination, which in turn improves crop yields. Ecological farming takes advantage of the natural ecosystem services, water filtration, pollination, oxygen production, and disease and pest control.

Organic farmers have advocated better research and funding by industry, government, farmers, and the public to develop organic farming techniques, improve food production, and maintain ecological health. The revolution in farming would promote equitable diets around the world and support crops primarily for human consumption, avoiding crops for animal food and biofuels.

What the U.S. Can Learn From Europe About Saving the Bees

In Europe, Asia and South America, the annual bee die-off lags behind the U.S. decline, but the trend is clear and the response has been more appropriate. In Europe, Rabobank reported that annual European die-offs have reached 30-35 percent and that the colonies-per-hectare count is down 25 percent.

A European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) scientific report determined that three widely used pesticides - nicotine-based clothianidin, imidacloprid and thiametoxam - pose "high acute risks" for bees. The nicotinoid pesticides-used in soils, on foliage, and embedded in seeds-persist at the core of the toxic pesticide cocktail found in bee hives.

A Greenpeace scientific report identifies seven priority bee-killer pesticides-including the three nicotine culprits-plus clorpyriphos, cypermethrin, deltamethrin, and fipronil. The three neonicotinoids act on insect nervous systems. They accumulate in individual bees and within entire colonies, including the honey that bees feed to infant larvae. Bees that do not die outright, experience sub-lethal systemic effects, development defects, weakness, and loss of orientation. The die-off leaves fewer bees and weaker bees, who must work harder to produce honey in depleted wild habitats. These conditions create the nightmare formula for bee colony collapse.

Bayer makes and markets imidacloprid and clothianidin; Syngenta produces thiamethoxam. In 2009, the world market for these three toxins reached more than $2 billion. Syngenta, Bayer, Dow, Monsanto, and DuPont control nearly 100% of the world market for genetically modified pesticides, plants and seeds.

In 2012, a German court criminally charged Syngenta with perjury for concealing its own report showing that its genetically modified corn had killed livestock. In the U.S., the company paid out $105 million to settle a class-action lawsuit for contaminating the drinking water for over 50 million citizens with its "gender-bending" herbicide Atrazine. Now, these corporate polluters are waging multi-million-euro campaigns to deny responsibility for bee colony collapse.

In May, the European Commission responded, adopting a two-year ban on the three necotinoid pesticides, and later added the non-neonicotinoid fibronil. Scientists will use the two years to assess the recovery rate of the bees and a longer-term ban on these and other pesticides.

Meanwhile, the U.S. dithers and supports the corporations that produce and market the deadly pesticides. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continues to allow the use of neonicotinoid pesticides, in spite of a U.S. Department of Agriculture report warning about the dangers of the bee colony collapse.

Also in 2014, President Obama signed the now infamous "Monsanto Protection Act" - written by Monsanto lobbyists - which gives biotech companies immunity in federal U.S. courts from damages to people and the environment caused by their commercial compounds.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Honey bees - wild and domestic - perform about 80 percent of all pollination worldwide. A single bee colony can pollinate 300 million flowers each day. Grains are primarily pollinated by the wind, but fruits, nuts and vegetables are pollinated by bees.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Honey Bees Make Honey ... and Bread? | Deep Look

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
This Vibrating Bumblebee Unlocks a Flower's Hidden Treasure |  Deep Look

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bee extinction: Why we're saving the wrong bees

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Thank you Bees, Butterflies, and Bats.pdf

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Honeybees are amazing and adorable, and they suffer when people spray pesticides or mow down wildflowers. We've heard plenty in recent years about collapsing bee colonies.

So Jonas Geldmann, at the University of Cambridge, says he understands how the honeybee became a symbol of environmental conservation.

But he still doesn't like it.

"Lots of conservation organizations are promoting local honey, and even promoting sponsorships of honeybees and that kind of stuff, and that increasingly annoyed me," he says.

It annoyed him because the honeybee is perhaps the one type of bee that we should worry about the least. Honeybee hives aren't natural, and they don't help the environment. In fact, they may harm it.

There are thousands of bee species. Almost all of them live in the wild, hiding away in the ground or in odd cavities, like hollow plant stems. They play a vital role in the ecosystem, pollinating flowering plants. Many are in peril; some species have disappeared.

Researcher Nigel Raine has a whole array of wild bees impaled on pins in his laboratory at the University of Guelph, in Canada. Many are tiny. Raine says that gardeners often assume they're flies. "If you sit down and say, 'No, that's a small, solitary bee; that's a metallic green one' - when you show them a metallic green bee in their yard, they say, 'Wow! That's amazing!' "

And then there's the honeybee: originally imported from Europe, raised and managed by beekeepers in order to make honey or to pollinate crops like almonds. It's an agricultural animal, in the same way that sheep and cattle are.

When flowers are abundant, there is plenty of pollen for both honeybees and their wild cousins. But in many landscapes, or when an orchard stops blooming, farmed honeybees can compete with wild bees for food, making it harder for wild species to survive.

Basically, a healthy environment needs bees - but not honeybees, Geldmann says. This week, he published a commentary in the journal Science trying to spread the word to a wider audience. "The way we're managing honeybees, in these hives, has nothing to do with nature conservation," he says.

Scientists who study bees already understand this. But they struggle with how to talk to the public about it.

"We're on a learning curve, all of us," says Marla Spivak, at the University of Minnesota, one of the country's most prominent bee researchers. "It's like honeybees were the portal - the door to much larger issues, conservation issues in general."

Concern for honeybees helped more people understand why it's important to have more land covered with wildflowers and trees - and free from pesticides, Spivak says. Such a landscape is good for both honeybees and wild bees.

"My preference is not to pit one bee against another," Spivak says. "I would prefer to live on a planet where there are bountiful flowers to support all of our bees."

But the bee that needs our help the most may be that tiny green bee in your garden and not the honeybee.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Honeybees Help Farmers, But They Don't Help The Environment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Honeybees are amazing and adorable, and they suffer when people spray pesticides or mow down wildflowers. We've heard plenty in recent years about collapsing bee colonies. So Jonas Geldmann, at the University of Cambridge, says he understands how the honeybee became a symbol of environmental conservation. But he still doesn't like it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A yearlong fight between a Florida county and the state over backyard beekeeping ended when the county dropped the case, to the relief of honeybee hive hobbyists called "wannabees."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Honeybees finding it harder to eat at America's bee hot spot

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Honeybees in the Northern Great Plains are having a hard time finding food, as conservation land is replaced with agriculture.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Neonicotinoids are a new class of insecticides chemically related to nicotine. The name literally means "new nicotine-like insecticides". Like nicotine, the neonicotinoids act on certain kinds of receptors in the nerve synapse. They are much more toxic to invertebrates, like insects, than they are to mammals, birds and other higher organisms.

One thing that has made neonicotinoid insecticides popular in pest control is their water solubility, which allows them to be applied to soil and be taken up by plants. Soil insecticide applications reduce the risks for insecticide drift from the target site, and for at least some beneficial insects on plants.

There are several different kinds of neonicotinoid insecticides. The first neonicotinoid to reach the market was imidacloprid, a common ingredient in Bayer Advanced Garden insecticides. This product can be sprayed on the plant, but is often more effective (especially on sucking insects) when applied to the soil. Dinotefuran (Safari) is another, more highly water-soluble, neonicotinoid that is especially good on sap-feeding insects.

To find out whether an insecticide you see on the shelf of your hardware, pest control supply or garden center is a neonicotinoid, look on the list of active ingredients. If you see one of the following names listed, the insecticide includes a neonicotinoid:

In addition to being effective against sap-feeding pests, neonicotinoids provide good control against certain beetles (like white grub larvae in lawns), fleas (Advantage flea control products, and nitenpyram pills for pets), certain wood boring pests, flies (fly baits), cockroaches and others.
Environmental concerns
Initially neonicotinoids were praised for their low-toxicity to many beneficial insects, including bees; however recently this claim has come into question. New research points to potential toxicity to bees and other beneficial insects through low level contamination of nectar and pollen with neonicotinoid insecticides used in agriculture. Although these low level exposures do not normally kill bees directly, they may impact some bees' ability to foraging for nectar, learn and remember where flowers are located, and possibly impair their ability to find their way home to the nest or hive. Despite the controlled studies completed to date, the actual impact of neonicotinoid insecticides on honey bees in the field are difficult to measure. It is still not known whether these effects explain bee colony collapse disorder, or have had any effect in agriculture or, especially, in urban areas.

The relative infrequency with which bees are expected to encounter neonicotinoid insecticides in urban landscapes suggest that the impact of these insecticides in backyard gardens, when used appropriately, is probably minor. To keep risk to bees and other beneficials low, however, a few simple steps should be taken: (1) follow the label directions carefully, (2) restrict neonicotine applications to the soil, or during times when bees are not foraging (e.g., in the evening), and (3) treat only those individual plants which need treatment for a known pest infestation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is a neonicotinoid? - Insects in the City

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Neonicotinoids are a new class of insecticides chemically related to nicotine. The name literally means "new nicotine-like insecticides". Like nicotine, the neonicotinoids act on certain kinds of receptors in the nerve synapse.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Recent bans in Europe attest to the growing concerns surrounding pesticide use and honeybee decline. EPA had identified over 70 pesticides that are highly toxic to bees. Here are the main classes of pesticides that have been linked with bee losses and pollinator decline.

Neonicotinoids
Neonicotinoids (neonics) are a class of insecticides that share a common mode of action that affects the central nervous system of insects, resulting in paralysis and death. Studies show that neonicotinoid residues accumulate in pollen and nectar of treated plants and represent a potential risk to pollinators. AS a result of this and their pervasive use, there is a major concern that neonics play a major contributing role in pollinator declines.

Neonicotinoids are also persistent in the environment, and when used as seed treatments, translocate to residues in pollen and nectar of treated plants. A little as one seed is enough to kill a songbird. These pesticides also contaminate waterways and are highly toxic to aquatic organisms.

The case of the neonicotinoids exemplifies two critical problems with current registration procedures and risk assessment methods for pesticides: the reliance on industry-funded science that contradicts peer-reviewed studies and the insufficiency of current risk assessment procedures to account for sublethal effects of pesticides.

Sulfoxaflor
Registered first in 2013 with great controversy, sulfoxaflor is a new insecticide of the sulfoximine class and has a chemical profile similar to neonicotinoids. After a court decision, EPA reregistered sulfoxaflor in 2016 restricting applications in attempts to reduce exposure to bees. But even with reduced use sites, and restricted application timing, the systemic toxicity of sulfoxaflor ensures that these measures will not be adequately eliminating the use of this chemical.

Pyrethroids
This class of chemicals has also been shown to impair bee learning and foraging behavior. Pyrethroids are frequently associated with bee kills and have been found to significantly reduce bee fecundity, decrease the rate at which bees develop to adulthood, and increase their immature periods. Pyrethroids are widely detected in pollen.
Commonly used pyrethroids include Bifenthrin, Deltamethrin, Cypermethrin, Phenothrin, and Permethrin.

Fipronil
Widely used for indoor and turf pest control, fipronil is an insecticide that is highly toxic to insects. It is moderately toxic and has been linked to hormone disruption, thyroid cancer, neurotoxicity, and reproductive effects. Fipronil has been shown to reduce behavioral function and learning performances in honeybees.

Organophosphates
Organophosphates like malathion and naled, are used in mosquito control programs that can put bees at risk. Both are highly toxic to bees and other non-target organisms, and bee kills associated with ULV spraying have been reported. Residues on plants and other surfaces left behind from mosquito spraying indirectly expose bees to these pesticides. Pollen, wax, and honey have all been found to contain residues.
Commonly used organophosphates:
Malathion
Naled
Chlorpyrifos
Dichlorvos

For other bee-toxic pesticides, visit the Pesticide Gateway

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Recent bans in Europe attest to the growing concerns surrounding pesticide use and honeybee decline. EPA had identified over 70 pesticides that are highly toxic to bees. Here are the main classes of pesticides that have been linked with bee losses and pollinator decline.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Pesticides for aesthetic purposes are widely used on lawns, landscapes, parks, playing fields, and open space by the general public, city/town/county governments, and commercial companies. Many of these chemicals harm health and the environment with both immediate and long-term effects. The "40 Most Commonly Used Lawn and Landscape Pesticides" factsheets make the science on pesticide hazardous to people, pets, and the environment accessible and easy to understand. When used with information on organic land management practices (see Lawns and Landscape webpage and ManageSafe), land managers can adopt a healthy approach to lawn and landscape care.
To learn more about home/garden pest management, alternative products, and pesticide ingredients not listed on these factsheets please jump down to the Beyond Pesticides Resources Factsheets section following the document Health Effects Environmental Effects Using the Factsheets
Beyond Pesticides' infographic (below) offers a summary overview of each factsheet. Furthermore, access the full factsheet below:

Infographic

Empty cells in the factsheets may refer to either (i) insufficient data or (ii) a determination, based on currently available data, that the chemical is relatively nontoxic. The key following the chart includes information on how to interpret the categorization of specific compounds. The analysis supporting the adverse health and environmental effects identified in the factsheets are based on toxicity determinations in government reviews and university studies and databases. More in-depth information on the specific chemicals is available on the Gateway on Pesticide Hazards and Safe Pest Management. The factsheets and Gateway are organized by active ingredients in pesticides products (trade names; for example, glyphosate is the active ingredient in the product Roundup TM), so identify the active ingredients in the product(s) of concern by searching the web for the product label or company information and then find that active ingredient in the factsheets or the Gateway.

Chemical Exposure and Underlying Conditions

Acute and chronic exposure to chemicals like pesticides can cause a range of harmful effects. Even use in accordance with the pesticide product label directions can cause or promote:

Cancer

Neurotoxicity/Developmental and Learning Disabilities

Reproductive and Birth Defects

Respiratory Illnesses

Endocrine/Immune Disruption

Skin irritation/headaches/disorientation

Additionally, exposure to these toxic pesticides can weaken the body's immune response to illnesses, and initiate or promote underlying conditions and vulnerabilities-like respiratory issues such as asthma or endocrine disruption problems like diabetes.

The onset of the coronavirus pandemic in late 2019 further demonstrates (in even more jarring form) the harsh reality of pesticide exposure-as we learn that those with comorbidities are more vulnerable to the virus, resulting in disproportionate impact in essential workers and those with underlying conditions. With COVID-19 plaguing global health, it is especially important to eliminate exposure to toxic chemicals that pose the same health hazard or elevate pre-existing health conditions. Most pesticides (including disinfectants), similar to COVID-19, act on the respiratory system, exacerbating adverse inflammatory responses, and impair the immune and nervous systems. Therefore, a serious cumulative and in some cases synergistic effect may occur between the disease and toxic chemicals, worsening disease outcomes. (See Beyond Pesticides' webpage on Safer Disinfectants and Sanitizers, Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database, and Gateway on Pesticide Hazards and Safe Pest Management.)

Organic Land Management

While chemical land management focuses on treating problems caused by conventional management practices and chemical use, the organic approach is a preventive system that addresses root causes. In this context, unwanted organisms (pests, including insects and weeds) are the symptoms of a problem caused by poor soil health and management practices.

The key to a healthy lawn is healthy soil and proper mowing, watering, fertilizing and other cultural practices. Healthy soil contains high organic content and is teeming with biological life. Healthy soil supports the development of healthy and resilient turf and landscapes that naturally manage weeds, insects, and fungal diseases.

Furthermore, organic land management represents an economically viable approach for individual homeowners, landscapers, local parks departments, and school districts committed to the adoption of practices that protect health and the environment. (See Beyond Pesticides' Cost Comparison Document.)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pesticides for aesthetic purposes are widely used on lawns, landscapes, parks, playing fields, and open space by the general public, city/town/county governments, and commercial companies. Many of these chemicals harm health and the environment with both immediate and long-term effects.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The accumulated studies and data have found that honey bees and other pollinators, such as native bees, butterflies and birds, are in decline. Scientists studying the issue have identified several factors that are contributing to bee decline, including pesticides, parasites, improper nutrition, stress, and habitat loss. (See Beyond Pesticides' What the Science Shows.)

Pesticides have been identified in the independent scientific literature as a major contributing factor. Pesticides in the neonicotinoid (neonic) chemical class have been singled out as major suspects due to their widespread use as seed coatings, high toxicity to bees, "systemic" nature --neonic chemicals move through the plant's vascular system and are expressed in pollen, nectar, and guttation droplets-- and persistence. Neonicotinoids are highly toxic to honey bees and, while the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) acknowledges this fact, little is being done at the federal level to protect bees and other pollinators from these pesticides.

Neonicotinoid-coated seeds
The majority of corn, soybeans, and other food crop seeds are coated with toxic pesticides. Many seeds and flowers marketed as "bee-friendly" at garden centers are also contaminated with systemic chemicals. These pesticides emerge from the seed through the plant, and invade soil biology and surrounding waterways, causing indiscriminate poisoning and contamination.

Uses of Neonicotinoids
The most commonly used seed coatings are neonicotinoid insecticides. While seed coatings represent a significant use of these insecticides, they can also be applied through granules, foliar spray, or drenches around plant roots. With every type of use, neonic chemicals work their way into plants, their pollen, nectar, and sap droplets, making them poisonous to pollinators who feed on them. Birds, bees, butterflies and bats are indiscriminately poisoned when they forage in contaminated fields.

Hazards of Neonicotinoids
Since the introduction of systemic neonicotinoid pesticides, both honey bees and wild, native pollinators have experienced ongoing catastrophic declines. In some years, such as the 2015-2016 season, beekeepers experienced an average of 44% colony loss, with some beekeepers losing their entire business. The scientific literature shows that the use of these chemicals results in exposed pollinators suffering impaired foraging, navigational, and learning behavior, as well as increased susceptibility to mites and pathogens. This threatens the sustainability of the global food supply, particularly nutrient dense fruiting foods that depend on bees and other pollinators. According to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, of the 100 crop species that provide 90% of global food, 71 are pollinated by bees.

Neonicotinoids also contaminate over half of urban and agricultural streams across the U.S. and Puerto Rico, according to a report by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) that expands on a previous study finding the chemicals in Midwest waterways. These insecticides are very highly toxic to a range of aquatic organisms, including shrimp and aquatic insects. Reproductive effects are observed in several freshwater and estuarine/marine invertebrates. Developmental effects occur in benthic invertebrates living at the bottom of waterbodies, including the sediment surface and subsurface. In the regulatory arena at EPA, alarms began to go off when the agency found in its 2017 risk assessment for imidacloprid, the most widely used neonicotinoid, "[C]oncentrations of imidacloprid detected in streams, rivers, lakes and drainage canals routinely exceed acute and chronic toxicity endpoints derived for freshwater invertebrates." (USEPA. 2017) (See Beyond Pesticides report Poisoned Waterways: The Same Pesticide that Is Killing Bees Is Destroying Life in the Nation's Streams, Rivers, and Lakes.)

Effectiveness
The use of these chemicals is not only dangerous to the environment, but puts farmers at economic risk. Research finds that their use can undermine pest control efforts and cause "trophic cascades." One study found that when applied to seeds in an attempt to prevent pest slugs from eating seedlings, slugs were unaffected by neonicotinoid toxicity. However, they accumulated the chemicals in their body, and their main predator beetles died in consuming them. By creating an ecological imbalance, neonicotinoids allowed the pest slugs to proliferate.

A 2014 EPA analysis found that neonicotinoid seed treatments provide little to no benefit to farmers in managing insects or improving yield in soybean fields. And a comprehensive review by an international team of scientists, called the Task Force on Systemic Pesticides, found that the effectiveness of alternative pest management techniques eliminates the need to use neonicotinoids.

Regulatory status
Over the past year, major actions in Europe and Canada have been taken to ban or restrict the use of neonicotinoids. After the European Union (EU) instituted its initial moratorium on neonic applications to flowering crops in 2013, accumulated research led to a permanent extension of this ban to include all outdoor uses of these systemic insecticides in May 2018. Canadian regulators have issued interim decisions on several neonicotinoids, with recommendations that will significantly curtail their uses, but the country has stopped short of banning the chemicals all together.

In the United States, EPA issued very minor changes to neonicotinoid product labels in 2013, but has yet to take substantive action to restrict use. President Obama created a National Pollinator Health Strategy with a number of lofty goals, but there is no indication that the Trump Administration is continuing this work. However, state level action has been seen in Connecticut and Maryland, where consumer uses of neonicotinoids have been eliminated. Numerous local communities, universities, and retailers have also taken action to remove neonicotinoid pesticides from use in their land management practices or store shelves.

Litigation
A number of U.S. lawsuits have sought to protect pollinators from neonics and neonic-coated seeds. The lawsuit Ellis v. Housenger (EPA), originally filed in March 2013 by beekeeper Steve Ellis and a coalition of beekeepers and environmental groups including Beyond Pesticides, focused on EPA's failure to protect pollinators from dangerous pesticides and challenged EPA's oversight of the bee-killing pesticides, clothianidin and thiamethoxam, as well as the agency's practice of "conditional registration" and labeling deficiencies. The ruling in the case by a federal judge in May 2017 declared that EPA violated the Endangered Species Act (ESA) when it issued 59 neonicotinoid insecticide registrations between 2007 and 2012 for pesticide products containing clothianidin and thiamethoxam.
What You Can Do
There is an alternative to the indiscriminate poisoning of pollinators and ecosystems. A solution exists that is effective, productive, economically viable, and sustainable and does not require yet another new toxic pesticide or genetically engineered crop: organic land management. By respecting the environment, the complexity and benefits of interconnected ecosystems, organic agriculture protects pollinators and enhances the benefits we derive from the natural environment. See Beyond Pesticides' Eating With a Conscience database for more on why organic is the right choice, and the Bee Protective webpage for additional resources you can use to go organic and safeguard pollinator populations.

Join the effort to move your community to organic land management practices. See Beyond Pesticides' resources to assist in the adoption of organic policies and practices.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The accumulated studies and data have found that honey bees and other pollinators, such as native bees, butterflies and birds, are in decline. Scientists studying the issue have identified several factors that are contributing to bee decline, including pesticides, parasites, improper nutrition, stress, and habitat loss. (See Beyond Pesticides' What the Science Shows.)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela - Study: One pesticide doesn’t harm bees, but two do

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In late November, Senator Cory Booker [D-NJ] announced the Protect America's Children from Toxic Pesticides Act of 2021 (PACTPA), a measure that would ban dangerous insecticides, like paraquat, one of the most toxic herbicides in the world, from US agriculture. Booker's proposed legislation would update the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act of 1972 (FIFRA). This would ban the most damaging chemicals that have been proven to harm public health and the environment.

This isn't the first time this year that pesticides have made headlines. This past August the U.S. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it would finally ban chlorpyrifos, "one of the most toxic and widely used pesticides on the market" according to the Natural Resource Defense Council (NRDC).

But chlorpyrifos being taken off the market was a small success when removing pesticides from the agricultural industry-some well known toxic chemicals like dicamba, an herbicide that was under fire for being linked to causing cancer, came back on the market in October 2020 after being banned just months before.
[Related: Pesticides might be worse for bees than we thought.]
Insecticides are regularly used to kill or repel insects that could damage crops like fruits and vegetables, but the chemicals make their way miles and miles away from farms that grow the produce. Chlorpyrifos can be an especially harmful chemical-early exposure to chlorpyrifos has been linked to respiratory issues and lower lung function. Babies and children are exposed during critical ages for brain development, around the toddler stage, the chemical also increases the risk of developmental delays, learning disabilities, lower IQ scores, and ADHD, according to the NRDC.

Oftentimes these children are more likely to be from working class farming communities that may lack the resources to deal with significant developmental delays that affect behavior and ability to learn in school. "That low-income communities of color are disproportionately impacted by the health effects of chemical toxins such as chlorpyrifos is not news, nor is it an accident," journalist Amy Roost wrote in an op-ed for Talk Poverty.

However, some farmers are objecting to the EPA's ban. In August more than 80 agricultural groups filed an objection to the agency's ruling in hopes of keeping access to what they feel is a vital tool in farming-and without it yields could drop around 45 percent. A similar argument was made when dicamba was banned from use. The American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) and American Soybean Council (ASC), argued that cotton and soybean producers would face financial losses without the use of dicamba.

"It is upsetting that EPA has revoked such an important chemistry without input from USDA or other stakeholders," Mike Van Agtmael, a west Michigan cherry farmer, told farming news website DTN. "Chlorpyrifos is critical to the Michigan and Wisconsin cherry industries, as there are no other products that effectively control trunk borers. With more than 4 million cherry trees, Michigan grows 75 percent of the total U.S. production of tart cherries and roughly 20 percent of the total U.S. production of sweet cherries. Without this product, our growers risk losing a lot of trees, potentially jeopardizing their family farms."

But there are still risks when it comes to using pesticides on crops when it comes to yields-just in November a recent study showed that dicamba-resistant waterhemp, a problematic weed growing across the Cornbelt, has been growing in Illinois despite never being sprayed with the pesticide. In the case of chlorpyrifos, the ban means replacing the chemical by using multiple layers of pesticides that pests like soybean aphids have already become resistant to-costing more money for farmers and still releasing controversial chemicals out in the environment.
[Related: Pesticide testing is flawed-and it's harming our birds and bees.]
Despite all of the concerns surrounding chlorpyrifos, action towards banning and limiting it has been slow. Over the past seven decades since its introduction in the 1960s, the pesticide has been under review several times. It was phased out of household products like some bug sprays in the mid 90s. In 2012, the EPA created buffer zones for spraying pesticides to prevent exposure to surrounding communities, but spray travels and is found in produce miles away from the farm it was sprayed on. It was then revised for human health risks in 2014 and 2016 before undergoing a human risk assessment in 2020.

Professor Laurie Beyranevand, the director of the Center for Agriculture and Food Systems at Vermont Law School says that in an ideal world, the EPA could tackle banning toxic insecticides quicker and take a more precautionary approach often followed by the European Union. Some strict regulations in the EU date from more than a decade ago.

"[In the European Union, if you can't demonstrate that [a chemical] is safe, then we're not going to allow it to be used," Beyranevand says. "Whereas in the United States, we essentially take the approach that if you can't demonstrate that there's harm, then we're going to let you use it."

Miriam Rotkin-Ellman, a senior scientist for the NRDC, agrees that the EPA and other regulatory agencies should become more aggressive on banning chlorpyrifos and other similar pesticides to protect public health now that the dangers have been documented for some time.

"We need the agencies to do their part ... the EPA has the authority to look at the class as a whole," she says. "We shouldn't have to fight to enforce [regulations] and spend years and years in court to do that ... [the EPA should] take away the bad chemicals and provide support for agriculture that keeps people healthy."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Pesticides can hurt agricultural communities-so why do farmers fight back against bans?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In late November, Senator Cory Booker [D-NJ] announced the Protect America's Children from Toxic Pesticides Act of 2021 (PACTPA), a measure that would ban dangerous insecticides, like paraquat, one of the most toxic herbicides in the world, from US agriculture. Booker's proposed legislation would update the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act of 1972 (FIFRA).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Chlorpyrifos is an organophosphate insecticide, acaricide and miticide used to control foliage and soil-borne insect pests on a variety of food and feed crops.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Rare butterflies' habitats designated "no spray" zones in South Florida

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Are Pesticides And How Are They Used On Our Food?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Farm Basics #1099 Pesticides and Soil Microbes (Air Date 4-28-19)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Integrated Pest Management
(as defined by Beyond Pesticides)

IPM is a managed pest management system that:

eliminates or mitigates economic and health damage caused by pests;

minimizes the use of pesticides and the risk to human health and the environment associated with pesticide applications; and

uses integrated methods, site or pest inspections, pest population monitoring, an evaluation of the need for pest control, and one or more pest control methods, including sanitation, structural repairs, mechanical and living biological controls, other non-chemical methods, and, if nontoxic options are unreasonable and have been exhausted, least toxic pesticides.

Least Toxic Pesticides
(as defined by Beyond Pesticides)

Least toxic pesticides include:

The term 'least toxic pesticides' does not include a pesticide that is:

determined by EPA to be a possible, probable, or known carcinogen, mutagen, teratogen, reproductive toxin, developmental neurotoxin, endocrine disruptor, or immune system toxin;

a pesticide in EPA's toxicity category I or II; and

any application of the pesticide using a broadcast spray, dust, tenting, fogging, or baseboard spray application.

A well-defined Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a program that should be based on prevention, monitoring, and control which offers the opportunity to eliminate or drastically reduce the use of pesticides, and to minimize the toxicity of and exposure to any products which are used. IPM does this by utilizing a variety of methods and techniques, including cultural, biological and structural strategies to control a multitude of pest problems.

IPM is a term that is used loosely with many different definitions and methods of implementation. IPM can mean virtually anything the practitioner wants it to mean. Beware of chemical dependent programs masquerading as IPM.

Those who argue that IPM requires the ability to spray pesticides immediately after identifying a pest problem are not describing IPM. Conventional pest control tends to ignore the causes of pest infestations and instead rely on routine, scheduled pesticide applications. Pesticides are often temporary fixes, ineffective over the long term.

Non-toxic and least toxic control products are a major growth area and new materials and devices are increasingly available in the marketplace.

The Six IPM Program Essentials

Monitoring. This includes regular site inspections and trapping to determine the types and infestation levels of pests at each site.

Record-Keeping. A record-keeping system is essential to establish trends and patterns in pest outbreaks. Information recorded at every inspection or treatment should include pest identification, population size, distribution, recommendations for future prevention, and complete information on the treatment action.

Action Levels. Pests are virtually never eradicated. An action level is the population size which requires remedial action for human health, economic, or aesthetic reasons.

Prevention. Preventive measures must be incorporated into the existing structures and designs for new structures. Prevention is and should be the primary means of pest control in an IPM program.

Tactics Criteria. Under IPM, chemicals should be used only as a last resort only, but when used, the least-toxic materials should be chosen, and applied to minimize exposure to humans and all non-target organisms.

Evaluation. A regular evaluation program is essential to determine the success of the pest management strategies.

For more information on IPM. Click here for our Ten Myths Behind Pesticide-Dependent Pest Management in Schools. Click here for a pdf copy of What Is IPM?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
IPM is a managed pest management system that: eliminates or mitigates economic and health damage caused by pests; minimizes the use of pesticides and the risk to human health and the environment associated with pesticide applications; and uses integrated methods, site or pest inspections, pest population monitoring, an evaluation of the need for pest control, and one or more pest control methods, including sanitation, structural repairs, mechanical and living biological controls, other non-chemical methods, and, if nontoxic options are unreasonable and have been exhausted, least toxic pesticides.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A growing body of evidence in scientific literature shows that pesticide exposure can adversely affect neurological, respiratory, immune, and endocrine systems in humans, even at low levels. Children are especially sensitive to pesticide exposure because they (1) take up more pesticides (relative to their body weight) than do adults, and (2) have developing organ systems that are more vulnerable to pesticide impacts and less able to detoxify harmful chemicals. Fortunately, there are proven safe, effective, and affordable ways to maintain attractive lawns and playing fields without the use of toxic pesticides. Use the resources below, information on Hazards and Alternatives, and our Tools for Change page to help get the pesticides out of your community - whether it's at the municipal, park, school, or backyard level.

In Your Backyard

Show your neighbors that pesticide-free lawns are important for the health of your family, the environment, and the community. These painted metal signs (8" diameter) will not rust and will retain their bright colors for years. The sign comes with valuable information on organic lawn and garden management, pollinators, and how to talk to your neighbors about pesticides. You can get a head start by reading the Display a honey bee or ladybug yard sign. Pesticide-Free Zone Sign Owner's Manual. Signs are available for $13 each ($10 plus shipping for 10 or more) at our online store.

Go Organic! Create your own pesticide-free space in your backyard. See, in addition to the Owner's Manual linked above, Beyond Pesticides' factsheets for information on how to manage a weed-free yard and lawn: Read Your "Weeds": A Simple Guide to Creating a Healthy Lawn. Fall is the best time to intervene and make your yard free of toxic chemicals. Read our fall lawncare fact sheet, Organic Lawn Care 101, for specific information on how to prime your yard for next year!

In Your Community
40 Common Lawn Pesticides (Factsheets and Door Hangers), Pesticide Policies & Training

ur NEW: Educate. It's critically important to make people aware of both the hazards associated with cosmetic lawn care pesticides and the availability of alternative practices and products. Of the 40 most commonly used lawn pesticides, 26 are possible and/or known carcinogens, 24 have the potential to disrupt the endocrine (hormonal) system, 29 are linked to reproductive effects and sexual dysfunction, 21 have been linked to birth defects, 24 are neurotoxic, 32 can cause kidney or liver damage, and 33 are sensitizers and/or irritants. Of those same 40 lawn pesticides, 21 are detected in groundwater, 24 have the ability to leach into drinking water sources, 39 are toxic to fish and other aquatic organisms vital to our ecosystem, 33 are toxic to bees, 18 are toxic to mammals, and 28 are toxic to birds.
Check out the NEW Beyond Pesticides' Infographic!

O Safe Lawn Doorknob Hanger is a tool to help spread the word about the dangers of lawn pesticides and the ever-increasing availability of alternatives. It's an easy, non-confrontational way to engage neighbors that may be using pesticides. You can request a free pack of 25 doorknob hangers by sending an email with your name and address to [email protected] . You can order larger quantities from our online store.

Enact a Policy. Many communities across the country have taken a stand against the use of toxic pesticides on their lawns and landscapes. In 2013, Takoma Park, Maryland became the first city to ban pesticides on both private and public property. In June 2014, Ogunquit, Maine decided to be the second. Beyond Pesticides worked with community members in Takoma Park to help pass the Safe Grow Act, and created educational materials to support the city's implementation of the ordinance. You can see Beyond Pesticides' Model Ordinance and Implementation Plan here. For a list of additional cities and communities that have enacted pesticide-free policies or have pesticide-free spaces, see Beyond Pesticides' Tools for Change page. As these localities show, there is growing community demand for local pesticide regulations that prevent the pollution of local waters and stop putting residents at risk of pesticide-induced diseases.

Take a course. Organic Land Care Basic Training for Municipal Officials and Transitioning Landscapers is taught by Beyond Pesticides' board member Chip Osborne, a professional horticulturist with 30+ years' experience, and an expert on building and transitioning turf to organic care.

We want to work with your community! For assistance in proposing a policy in your community, contact Beyond Pesticides at [email protected] or 1.202.543.5450.

This information is also available in Beyond Pesticides' brochure, Pesticide Free Zones in Your Community.

Organic Land Management: Practical Tools and Techniques
2014 National Pesticide Forum
With a "how-to" focus, this workshop provides people with practical advice on adopting organic
practices at home, and for local park and playing field management. This presentation was given
at "Advancing Sustainable Communities: People, Pollinators and Practices," Beyond Pesticides'
32nd National Pesticide Forum, April 11-12, 2014 in Portland, Oregon.

Healthy Lawns, Clean Water Forum

Below, you can find clips from the Healthy Lawns, Clean Water Forum, which took place in Exeter, New Hampshire on May 4, 2016. The forum addressed questions such as: Are fertilizers, pesticides, insecticides, herbicides, and neonicotinoids good for you, your food, or clean water? Featured speakers included Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides, Chip Osborne, a nationally renowned organic turfgrass expert, and John Bochert of Eldredge Lumber and Hardware in Maine.

Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides

Chip Osborne, Osborne Organics

John Bochert, Eldredge Lumber and Hardware

You can view the full Healthy Lawns, Clean Water Forum video here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A growing body of evidence in scientific literature shows that pesticide exposure can adversely affect neurological, respiratory, immune, and endocrine systems in humans, even at low levels. Children are especially sensitive to pesticide exposure because they (1) take up more pesticides (relative to their body weight) than do adults, and (2) have developing organ systems that are more vulnerable to pesticide impacts and less able to detoxify harmful chemicals.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Guy's Revolution: Pesticides in agriculture; there is another way

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Thousands of ducks released to protect Thai rice fields from pests

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Got a Pest Problem? Call the Quack Squad

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Control Pests and Diseases using Organic Methods

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
More than 80 agricultural groups filed formal objections last week to the Environmental Protection Agency's Aug. 30 rule to revoke all tolerances of chlorpyrifos. Stakeholders, by law, can object to pesticide tolerance changes or cancellations, and the EPA Administrator must then respond.

In the coalition letter, objectors from across the agriculture sector cited numerous concerns with EPA's revocation decision, including the processes EPA used and lack of scientific basis. EPA's own scientific record on chlorpyrifos shows there are many safe, high-benefit uses of the chemistry that do not pose a dietary or environmental risk. Regardless, the agency is opting to revoke tolerances for these safe, low-risk uses.

American Farm Bureau President Zippy Duvall called the EPA action shortsighted, saying, "Taking care of the land and our natural resources is a top priority for farmers, and this revocation rule actually makes it harder for us to do that. EPA veered from its own scientific evidence in a decision that could be damaging to the land, to farmers and to our efforts to fight food insecurity."

Additionally, EPA's rule revokes tolerances on crop uses where many growers have few or no pest management alternatives, leaving them exposed to hundreds of millions of dollars in irreparable crop damage. The revocation rule would also require food holders to provide retroactively-required application documents, which could result in the destruction of millions of dollars of safe food over a paperwork issue.

"It is upsetting that EPA has revoked such an important chemistry without input from USDA or other stakeholders. Chlorpyrifos is critical to the Michigan and Wisconsin cherry industries, as there are no other products that effectively control trunk borers. With more than 4 million cherry trees, Michigan grows 75% of the total U.S. production of tart cherries and roughly 20% of the total U.S. production of sweet cherries. Without this product, our growers risk losing a lot of trees, potentially jeopardizing their family farms," said Mike VanAgtmael, a west Michigan cherry grower and chairman of the Cherry Marketing Institute.

Kevin Scott, soy grower from Valley Springs, South Dakota, and American Soybean Association president said, "Chlorpyrifos is a vital tool in the soybean grower's toolbox, one which EPA has itself said poses no food or environmental risk of concern. Without it, many farmers may have to increase the amount of alternative pesticides they apply, as there are no one-to-one replacements for several pests chlorpyrifos helps control. EPA's action-counterproductive to the agency's intended mission-is undermining the ability of growers to be good environmental stewards."

Dan Younggren, a fifth-generation farmer from Hallock, Minnesota and president of the American Sugarbeet Growers Association also expressed that concern and said,

"The use of chlorpyrifos is essential in our ability to control the sugar beet root maggot (SBRM), thereby maximizing yields and ensuring stability of the U.S. food supply. Alternative chemistries, which are not as effective, will require more frequent applications and will increase GHG emissions. And, having one less chemistry in our Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategy could increase the likelihood of insecticide resistance. Without chlorpyrifos, we could experience significant yield losses of up to 45%, which would be economically devastating to our growers."

EPA also has failed to conduct required interagency reviews pertaining to its decision on the rule, which are required in this case because the rule could realistically lead to well over $100 million in additional costs to the food and agriculture economy; EPA is required to conduct interagency reviews if harm could be found to total more than this threshold.

The groups ask EPA to postpone implementation of the rule until these objections can be formally considered and addressed by the agency.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ag groups formally object to EPA chlorpyrifos rule

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
More than 80 agricultural groups filed formal objections last week to the Environmental Protection Agency's Aug. 30 rule to revoke all tolerances of chlorpyrifos. Stakeholders, by law, can object to pesticide tolerance changes or cancellations, and the EPA Administrator must then respond.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ag Groups Say EPA Chlorpyrifos Ban Would Cause Economic Damage to Several Crops

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Agricultural groups wrote a formal objection to EPA, making the case that the pesticide chlorpyrifos is vital to helping a variety of commodities reduce pest risks for crops. EPA revoked the feed and food tolerance levels for the pesticide, effectively banning its use for agriculture.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
After years of complaints by farmers about the harmful effects of the herbicide dicamba, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled that the sale and use of the pesticide is now illegal.

A weed killer, dicamba has been used for decades to kill weeds before crops were planted. Use of the herbicide skyrocketed in recent years after agribusiness giant Monsanto introduced genetically engineered soybean and cotton seeds that resist the herbicide, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) . And the Center for Biological Diversity says that over 25 million pounds of the dicamba formulas were set to be sprayed again this summer using the now-unlawful pesticide.

Controversy around the herbicide stems from its volatile nature, or its ability to drift from its application site, . The according to the University of Arkansas' Division of Agriculture EPA reports that in 2017 alone, more than 3.6 million acres of crops were negatively impacted by the spraying of the herbicide In a survey conducted by the Association of American Pesticide Control Officials (AAPCO ), 19 states reported nearly 1,400 cases of alleged dicamba injury in 2019, most of them coming from a group of 10 states with the highest soybean acreage.

"As an herbicide that is designed to kill plants, dicamba is extremely toxic not only to weeds, but to a wide range of broadleaf plants, bushes, trees, in both agricultural and non-agricultural landscapes," attorney for the Center for Food Safety (CFS) Sylvia Wu tells Food Tank.

Since 2017, the National Family Farm Coalition and the Natural Resources Defense Council have argued in court that excessive dicamba application on soybeans and cotton violates the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and should be vacated.

By 2018, farmers had filed more than 4,200 official complaints that alleged damage to at least 4.7 million acres of soybeans from the use of dicamba on Monsanto's genetically engineered soybean and cotton plants. The following year, 19 states reported nearly 1,400 cases of alleged dicamba injury.

Despite the reported damage, a growers coalition, including the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) and American Soybean Council (ASC), argued that soybean and cotton producers will face financial harm if they cannot use dicamba.

"Immediately banning use of existing stocks of [dicamba] would have financially devastating consequences on America's soybean growers," the grower coalition wrote in an amicus brief.

But Wu believes that the current use of dicamba is already costing millions of farmer's their livelihood.

"The approved over-the-top use of dicamba and resulting dicamba drift has damaged millions of acres of soybean fields and countless acres of damage to other crops such as grapes, tomatoes, tobacco, and fruit and ornamental trees," Wu tells Food Tank.

EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler said in a statement that the ban of dicamba "has threatened the global food supply." But the National Family Farm Coalition (NFFC) President Jim Goodman, does not believe the ban will make any difference in the food supply.

"We don't eat cotton. The small percentage of corn and soy that goes into "people food" is mostly in processed food. Canola crushed for oil is used, but losing those things is not getting rid of a major part of the diet," Goodman tells Food Tank.

Though approval of the herbicide has been canceled as a result of an appellate court decision, the EPA allowed farmers and pesticide applicators to use the existing stock of dicamba until July 31, 2020.

Wu is disappointed that the EPA extended the use of existing stocks of dicamba that were purchased and sold until July 31, in direct contradiction of the Court's ruling.

"Unfortunately for many farmers in the thirty-four states where dicamba use was approved, they will likely suffer dicamba drift damage for yet another season," she said.

Goodman also believes that this extension of dicamba use will lead to further dicamba registration approvals next year. "There is a real desire by this administration to overturn regulations and it seems the courts generally side with the chemical companies over the interests of the environment or innocent bystanders," he said.

But Goodman hopes that this ban will ultimately lead to a decrease in farmers utilizing potentially harmful pesticides.

"I believe if there is any hope for regulatory change or support for better farming systems it can only come from a new administration and only if they adopt some of the ideas supported by the Sanders or Warren wing of the Democratic party, like the Green New Deal."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Herbicide Dicamba Banned by U.S. Court of Appeals - Food Tank

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
After years of complaints by farmers about the harmful effects of the herbicide dicamba, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled that the sale and use of the pesticide is now illegal. A weed killer, dicamba has been used for decades to kill weeds before crops were planted.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Agroforestry: A solution to farming’s biggest problems?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Next Gen Farming Without Soil and 90% Less Water  | GRATEFUL

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How an Indoor Farm Uses Technology to Grow 80,000 Pounds of Produce per Week  — Dan Does

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Follow these safety tips to help take the sting out of bee attacks

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Honey bees (Apis mellifera) are considered the most beneficial insect to humans because of their ability to pollinate crops and the products they provide directly such as honey and wax. Honey bees contribute more than $16 billion annually to US agriculture and pollinate approximately one third of the crops we consume. In recent years, much has been written about the decline in the honey bee population; however, most declines have occurred in managed bee colonies. The status of wild honey bee colonies remains unknown. What is known, is that honey bees can become unwelcome guests, nesting in and around our homes, schools, and businesses. In addition, the presence of Africanized honey bees increases the chance of stinging attacks. For these reasons, people should know how to protect their homes and businesses from a honey bee infestation.

Bees vs. wasps

Honey bees are not the only stinging insects that can set up residence in a building. Social wasps, such as paper wasps, hornets, and yellow jackets, can also become pests in and around structures. It is usually easy to distinguish bees from wasps. Honey bees are generally hairy, with stout bodies and wide, ﬂattened hind legs for carrying pollen (see ﬁgure). Wasps are generally smooth or have scattered hairs, and have distinct "waists." Another way to tell the two types of insects apart is to ﬁnd their nest or hive. Honey bee colonies build wax combs in which to rear their young and store food. Social wasps form nests of paper-like material.

Texas A&M AgriLife Extension publications E-239, Paper Wasps, Yellowjackets and Solitary Wasps and ENTO-044, Mexican Honey Wasps provide more information on wasps.

The honey bee is a truly social insect that lives in colonies. The honey bee life cycle consists of egg, larva, pupa, and adult stage. Within a colony there is a single queen, thousands of workers and a few hundred seasonal drones. The queen is the only female that can lay fertilized eggs and can live 2 to 5 years. She controls the colony by releasing chemicals called pheromones. Without a queen, a colony will rapidly decline and eventually die.

Drones are the only male bees and there are many of them in healthy colonies during the spring and summer months. During winter months, drones may not be found at all because they consume more food than a colony can support in the cold season.

A honey bee colony consists mostly of worker bees. Workers are infertile females, but can lay unfertilized eggs if the queen is absent or declining. Workers perform many functions based on age. When they first emerge from their cells as adults, worker bees act as house cleaners. As they age, they progress through roles of nurses, construction workers, guards, and eventually foragers. Worker bees gather food and produce honey and wax. A healthy colony can have as many as 60,000 workers.

Africanized honey bees

Honey bees are native to Europe, Africa, and Asia. It is believed they were introduced to the Americas by European settlers in the early 16th Century. Since then, beekeepers have introduced many different strains of honey bee. Each strain (or race) has distinct characteristics, such as gentleness or good honey production, that can be used in breeding. Because all races are the same species, they can interbreed.

To improve honey production, an African race of honey bees was introduced by bee breeders in Brazil in the mid 1950's. This race was known to be very good at producing honey but was also known for its aggressive behavior. In 1957 some of these Africanized bees escaped from the breeding program and spread throughout South and Central America. Africanized bees entered South Texas in 1990.

Since then, Africanized honey bees have interbred with wild European honey bees and have spread throughout Texas. As of 2006, when formal testing programs were halted, Africanized honey bees had been detected in 163 of Texas' 254 counties. Today it is assumed that most feral bee colonies in Texas carry some genes of African descent and therefore may be aggressive.

Honey bee attacks

Africanized honey bees and European honey bees look the same to the untrained eye. Only DNA testing or microscopic measurements can determine whether a colony is of European descent or is some form of African hybrid.

The behavior of these two forms of bees is very different. Although even managed European honey bee colonies can be dangerous and attack anyone who gets too close to the hive, Africanized bees tend to be more sensitive to disturbance, send more bees to defend the nest, and tend to pursue for longer distances. Pets and livestock in confined areas near an Africanized honey bee nest are very vulnerable to attack because they cannot escape. Known honey bee colonies near confined animals should be killed and removed immediately.

If honey bees attack you, follow the ACE guidelines:

A - Alert others in the area

C - Cover head and face, do not block vision

E - Exit. Get into a car or house immediately and stay there. Do not stop to find the bee colony, do not waste time.

Do not "play dead," they will continue to sting as long as you are in their territory. If you see someone being attacked, do not attempt to wash the bees off with a water hose-get them and yourself out of the area.

Once you are safely away from the bees, remove stingers as quickly as possible. The sooner a stinger is removed, the less venom will be injected. If you experience hives, difficulty breathing, or other signs of an allergic reaction, seek medical attention immediately.

Managing foraging bees and swarms

Honey bees do not purposely seek out victims to sting. When their nest is threatened, however, they will not hesitate to sting an intruder. You can decrease your risk of being stung by learning more about honey bee behavior.

Foraging bees. A foraging bee is a worker that flies away from the nest to collect nectar, pollen, or water. Foragers have nothing to defend and are not likely to sting unless provoked. Bees visiting flowers and other food sources should not be disturbed.

To discourage honey bees from gathering around a home or business, remove or prevent their access to attractants such as ripe fruit, open soda cans, or anything sweet. Keep garbage receptacles covered and away from doorways. Bees tend to visit birdbaths or swimming pool decks in late summer when other water sources dry up. Once they collect water, bees will leave the area.

Honey bees are sometimes attracted to sugar water in hummingbird feeders. This may keep the birds from visiting the feeder. Special screens or nectar guards can be attached to hummingbird feeders to exclude bees but still allow the birds to feed.

Swarming bees. Honey bees may leave a nest site for a variety of reasons. Sometimes entire colonies leave a nest (abscond) because of overcrowding, heat, pest infestation, insufficient food or water in the area, or some other disturbance. Colonies may also split (swarm) as a mode of reproduction. In these cases, about one fourth of the old colony remains in the nest, while the rest of the adult bees and the old queen go on to establish a new nest. Swarming usually occurs in the spring or summer for various reasons, including overcrowding.

In both scenarios, worker bees leave the old nest site with a queen. Such swarms occasionally stop to rest or scout out an area for potential nesting sites. During rest stops the worker bees gather around the queen to protect her, while scout bees look for a new location to start a nest. Honey bees in resting swarms are relatively docile when left alone, and usually relocate within 48 hours. If such swarms are in sites away from people or buildings, they pose little threat and should not be disturbed. When bees abscond or swarm, they may settle near a home or area with high human traffic. Sometimes they may establish a nest inside the walls of the home, or in some other undesirable location.

Swarms that land near structures or high traffic areas should be managed. If you do not wish to kill the bees, a local beekeeper may be willing to do a live removal and relocation of the colony. Honey bee swarms are less likely to sting, but trying to manage them by yourself, for instance by spraying them with water, is not recommended.

Managing bees in buildings

The most important step in managing bees in buildings is prevention. To keep bees out in the first place, block all holes where pipes and wiring enter, cracks in window framing, knot holes in wood siding, weep holes in bricks, and cracks where wood and brick join. Most of these holes can be filled with caulking, but holes necessary for air flow should be blocked with wire screen. The screen mesh should be less than 1/8 inch. Chimneys should be properly capped. Removing a honey bee nest can cost hundreds of dollars, so prevention is the best, cheapest solution.

Honey bees that have moved into a structure should be destroyed as quickly as possible. The longer you delay, the more difficult the job is.

Hiring a professional

Collecting a swarm or managing a honey bee colony in a building should be left to professional pest control companies. They have the skill and equipment to do a proper job. The Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service, the Texas Apiary Inspection Service, fire departments and other government offices generally do not perform honey bee control or collect bees to determine if a colony is Africanized. However, your county extension office may be able to give you a list of local professionals. According to state law, if you are paying someone to remove a honey bee nest, the person must be a registered beekeeper or a licensed pest control professional. Registered beekeepers without a pest control license may charge to remove bees if they do not use pesticides. Pest control professionals must have a valid pest control license through the Texas Department of Agriculture and may or may not use pesticides.

Look for a company that is familiar with extermination and/or removal of honey bee nests. Failure to remove a honey bee nest from a structure can lead to big headaches later. The larger the nest, the more problems you may have with odor from dead bees and fermenting honey, staining, and other pests such as ants, cockroaches, carpet beetles, wax moths, and rodents. Traces of old comb are highly attractive to bees, and they will reinfest the building unless the nest is removed.

Experienced pest control companies know how to locate a honey bee nest and remove it with minimal damage to the structure. Large bee colonies may have to be treated more than once before they are eliminated. If there are any immature bees in the comb when pesticide is applied, they may continue to emerge up to 10 days after treatment.

Although some pest control companies repair any damage caused by nest removal, most prefer to recommend a contractor for that work. It is important to seal all entrances tightly once the bees are gone so that they will not reenter building.

Some pest control companies make the effort to remove the bees alive, although this is not always practical or possible. Removing bees alive generally takes more time and may cost more. Many pest control companies prefer to simply exterminate the colony and remove the old hive.

Honey bee removal

With media stories focusing on the decline of managed honey bees, some people prefer to save honey bee colonies and have them removed instead of eliminated. In some cases, an experienced beekeeper or licensed pest control professional can remove the honey bee colony alive. This process may take longer than extermination and if the entire nest is not removed, the colony may repopulate. Whether you choose extermination or live extraction is a personal decision, but you should be well informed about which is best for your budget and location.

The Texas Apiary Inspection Service maintains a list of the beekeepers that are registered to move honey bees between counties and have requested to be on a list of beekeepers who do bee removals. To see whether a beekeeper is properly registered and may charge for bee removal services, go to http://txbeeinspection.tamu.edu/bee-removal/. The Texas Apiary Inspection Service does not endorse any beekeepers on the list, nor warrant that persons on the list are qualified to do bee removal.

Managed bee colonies

It is illegal for anyone other than an apiary inspector to kill any managed colony of honey bees without the owner's permission. If a managed honey bee colony needs to be removed, contact the owner or the Texas Apiary Inspection Service at 979-845-9713.

For more information on honey bees, please visit http://honeybeelab.tamu.edu or http://txbeeinspection.tamu.edu.
Download a printer-friendly version of this publication: Honey Bees In and Around Buildings Do you have a question -or- need to contact an expert? Contact Your County Office

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Honey Bees In and Around Buildings - Are honey bees harmful?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Honey bees (Apis mellifera) are considered the most beneficial insect to humans because of their ability to pollinate crops and the products they provide directly such as honey and wax. Honey bees contribute more than $16 billion annually to US agriculture and pollinate approximately one third of the crops we consume.