Bayer releases list of adverse effects on imidacloprid ....

Extract
... data indicated that residues in some plants measured above 4,000 parts per billion. Lethal concentration of imidacloprid needed to kill 50 percent of a test population of honeybees is 185 parts per billion.

... imidacloprid residues remained relatively low for the first six months after application, but there was a dramatic increase that remained stable in some cases for more than 500 days after treatment

..................
http://www.capitalpress.com

See this story also at: http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/registratio ... 009-02.pdf

Asian citrus psyllid weapon re-evaluated
Action comes after Bayer CropScience releases list of adverse effects

Cecilia Parsons
Capital Press

Thursday, April 02, 2009

An important weapon in the citrus industry's fight to eradicate the Asian citrus psyllid is being re-evaluated by the state's department of pesticide regulation.

The agency has initiated a re-evaluation of 282 neonicotinoid products due to an adverse effects disclosure from the manufacturer, Bayer CropScience. At least one of those products is being used to treat the soil around sites where psyllids have been trapped in San Diego and Imperial counties.

The industry considers the psyllid a major threat due to its ability to carry the citrus greening disease that kills citrus trees.

The products can still be used and are under no additional restrictions as the re-evaluation continues.

The re-evaluation notice was posted on the Department of Pesticide Regulation website and DPR was accepting public comments until March 31. DPR spokesowman Lea Brooks said federal and state law require any new information about adverse effects be given to state regulators and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

The U.S. EPA confirmed it is conducting a similar re-evaluation of neonicotinoid pesticides.

Neonicotinoid pesticides have been registered for use on multiple crops in the U.S. since 1994. By 2006 there were 115 active registered products containing the neonicotinoid imidacloprid. The products include seed coatings, soil applications and foliar sprays.

A systemic insecticide, it does not kill on contact, but is taken up by the plants when applied through irrigation or on the soil. It kills targeted insects when they feed on the plant.

Brooks said the re-evaluation's goal is to determine the extent of the potential hazard and to identify ways to reduce or eliminate the problem.

The disclosure by North Carolina-based Bayer CropScience showed imidacloprid levels in leaves and blossoms varied depending on the application rate and type of plant, but the data indicated that residues in some plants measured above 4,000 parts per billion. Lethal concentration of imidacloprid needed to kill 50 percent of a test population of honeybees is 185 parts per billion.

Bayer CropScience data also indicated that when applied in the soil, imidacloprid residues remained relatively low for the first six months after application, but there was a dramatic increase that remained stable in some cases for more than 500 days after treatment. Brooks said studies by DPR showed treatment rates in the studies where high imidacloprid residue levels were found were similar to the rates on the labels for orchards.

Beekeepers nationwide and Bayer are aware of the re-evaluations, and their representatives are meeting to discuss the issue. Florida beekeeper David Mendes, who is vice president of American Beekeepers Federation, said there is ongoing dialogue with Bayer and the EPA on new ways to quantify material toxicity to honeybees.

Mendes is a member of National Honeybee Advisory Board, which has held meetings with Bayer. He said the current standards for measuring toxicity don't work well with the new formulations of pesticides. The goal, he said, is to find products that are safe for bees and have no long-term effects.

Many beekeepers think concentrations of the pesticide in pollen causes developmental problems in bee brood, Mendes told the Capital Press last year. He also conceded that much of the evidence against neonicotinoids is anecdotal. In California, some beekeepers have refused to place hives where they know the chemicals will be or have been applied.

Jack Boyne, director of communications for Bayer CropScience, said state and federal regulators routinely re-evaluate pesticides. California's re-evaluation was prompted in part, he said, on the concerns voiced by beekeepers and investigations into the cause of colony collapse disorder.

DPR spokeswoman Lea Brooks said state law requires the agency to continuously evaluate pesticides after they are in use. It also investigates when new information shows a pesticide may have caused, or is likely to cause, adverse effects on people or the environment.

Brooks said re-evaluation also gives the agency authority to ask for more studies and data when it has concerns about a pesticide.

Cecilia Parsons is a staff writer based in Ducor. E-mail: cparsons@capitalpress.com.

See this story also at: http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/registratio ... 009-02.pdf

It just goes to show we should never rely on politicians or commercial companies to 'tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth' about anything. Money talks at all levels and to blazes with consequences. We're going to be remembered as the society who didn't give a rats sparse about the planet or its inhabitants, or each other for that matter. This will be evidenced by a sick population who followed blindly caring less about what they ate as long as they got it cheaply and smartly wrapped, and more about designer clothes and holidays and how many cars in the drive. The others will be the company execs and politicians who filled their wallets and puffed their egos on the profits and who were never required to take responsibility.

It will all come out at some point, but likely as not there will be a good cover up, and you can bet the saying of the day will be 'it wiznae me'!

Posting from BEE-L server lists ...

Beekeepers do not have a problem with imidacloprid used for termites or roaches in Florida.
I was the first to report in American Bee Journal that most (if not all) above ground treated lumber contained imidacloprid and two fungicides.

I have seen articles in bee magazines using such wood in contact with the bees and equipment for sale in bee catalogues using imidacloprid treated lumber.
Water splashing on such equipment causes imidacloprid to leach out killing bees.

However I do not have a serious issue with the above ground imidacloprid treated lumber as long as all U.S. beekeepers learn what is in the lumber they are using in and around their bee hives.

The first time I saw the light coloured imidacloprid treated lumber was at the bee farm of a commercial beekeeper in Florida. The beekeeper asked me to find out what the chemical was. After a few calls ( and hang ups and waiting on hold for a very long time) to the plant in Georgia I discovered the new product was imidacloprid and two fungicides.

EPA final plan for Imidacloprid

Download the full version in .pdf format by clicking on the 'Adobe' icon at:
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/c ... 64809e7368

Excerpt from "EPA's Final Work Plan (FWP) for the registration review of imidacloprid"

> During the public comment period, the Agency received over 12,000 comments. The majority of those comments were received as a result of a letter writing campaign organized by Natural Resources Defence Council (NRDC) voicing concern that imidacloprid presents unacceptable risks to pollinators. The Agency received similar comments, i.e., concern over the risk to pollinators, from private citizens, honeybee keeper interests represented by the National Honey Bee Advisory Board (NHBAB), and environmental advocacy groups like Beyond Pesticides, NRDC, and Sierra Club.

Excerpts from the Office of Pesticide Programs Response to the Sierra Club:

As OPP's Director, I appreciate the opportunity to address the issues you raise and respond to your request that EPA suspend use of nicotinyl insecticides. OPP has been actively involved in pollinator protection, and we share your concern that pesticides may have a role in Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD).
For more than five years, EPA has required studies to evaluate sub-lethal effects of nicotinyl pesticides on bees as a requirement for registration. We have evaluated the potential for a variety of sub-lethal effects in these studies, such as behavioral effects and incidence of disease, that could cumulatively affect the functioning of hives.
These studies and information available in the open literature to date do not demonstrate a link between these effects and severe adverse impacts to bees, such as the incidence of CCD, that you identify in your letter.

Specifically, a survey of beekeepers conducted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) shows no consistent link between the use of neonicotinics or pesticides in general on the frequency or location of bee colony losses attributed to CCD.

Additionally, acute and chronic effects thus far demonstrated for most pesticides, including the neonicotinics, in both registrant submitted data and open literature, are not consistent with the sudden disappearance of bees that is considered diagnostic for CCD.

While the current battery of guideline toxicity tests on pollinators focuses on adult forage bees initially, higher tier testing (field pollinator tests) examines potential effects on adult bees and their brood. In each tier of testing, however, sublethal behavioral effects are monitored. None of these tests thus far have provided any evidence of adult bees abandoning the hive and leaving no trace of their whereabouts, as has been observed with CCD.

Our discussions with academic and government researchers studying this problem reaffirm that there is currently no evidence directly linking pesticides, including the neonicotinoid insecticides, to CCD or other serious impacts to colonies where they have become more susceptible to disease.

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/c ... 64809e7368
Docket Detail EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0844