The Effects of Vancouver City's Pesticide Spraying on Bees

     The Vancouver Park Board began it's annual pesticide spraying to remove the invasive Japanese beetle on April 3rd.  "April 3 2020 – The Vancouver Park Board is set to begin larvicide treatment to eradicate Japanese beetle larvae in more than 30 parks, boulevards, medians, and other city land beginning April 6."  This is the third year of treatment of an area that includes the West End, Downtown, Strathcona, Mount Pleasant, Fairview and Kitsilano neighbourhoods.  The spraying has been effective in reducing the population of this potentially devastating intruder.
  

     As stated the effects of the Japanese Beetle could be significant.  "Japanese beetle larvae feed on the roots of lawns and other plants.  Adults are heavy feeders, attacking the flowers, foliage, and fruit of more than 250 plant species, including roses, blueberries, and grapevines.  The damage they cause is significant compared to other pests like European chafer beetles." (from City of Vancouver)  Here is a mug shot of the deviant offender.

Japanese Beetle

     The pesticide they are using is the low impact, effective larvicide, Acelepryn which is produced by the agrichemical corporation Syngenta.  The active ingredient is the insecticide chlorantraniliprole.  The City claims there is "no" impact on anything other than the Japanese beetle ("will not impact people, pets, mammals, birds, bees, butterflies or other animals").  I heard this statement repeated over and over by representatives of the city to assure the public of safety.  From the provincial government, "Why is Acelepryn being used for Japanese Beetle in B.C.?  Japanese beetle is a new invasive pest found for the first time in B.C. in the False Creek area of Vancouver in 2017. This pest is a significant threat to agriculture in B.C. An eradication program is underway to address this threat. One component of the eradication program is a larvicide treatment in areas where the beetle is known to be present. Acelepryn was selected because it has a very favourable health and environmental profile, is also very effective against Japanese beetle larvae, and does not impact mammals, birds, bees, butterflies or other animals."  
     As a long time beekeeper and farmer who has heard these claims of bee friendly insecticides far too often in the past only to be proven later to have significant negative impact I had to check it out.  Most of the studies I read agreed that Chlorantraniliprole had little or no effect on bees or other critters.  It was often stated that bees would not be interested in turf which it is usually applied to since there was usually no flowers and that if there were flowers in the turf that the grass should be mowed before to remove the flowers and irrigated soon after. I've been running the Vancouver seawall for many years and the part by David Lam Park since it was built after expo.  During my runs I observed the grass portion of the park covered in small flowers which were being heavily foraged upon by bumble bees.  I observed them spraying on the flowers and foraging bumble bees while I ran by.  In addition to this bumble bees nest in the ground and it's likely their nesting areas are being sprayed.  We have found over the years a problem with studies that observe the effects on bees is that they are usually not long term and do not observe the sublethal effects (which over time become lethal).  Here are a few studies that shows a potential significant negative impact of  chlorantraniliprole on bee populations.

"BACKGROUND:

Pollinators such as the bumblebee, Bombus terrestris, fulfil a crucial role in agriculture. In this context, tests were conducted with the insecticide chlorantraniliprole (Coragen®) as a model compound active on the ryanodine receptor of insects.

RESULTS:

Chronic oral exposure via pollen induced lethargic behaviour in B. terrestris workers and their offspring (drones). Indeed, in nests exposed to 0.4 mg L(-1) , representing 1/100 of the concentration recommended for use in the field, workers and drones did not take their defensive position upon stimulation and they were less active than non-exposed insects. The different risk assessment tests used here demonstrated that contact and pollen exposure had no effect on bumblebee worker survival, whereas oral exposure via sugar water caused both acute (72 h LC50  = 13 mg L(-1) ) and chronic (7 week LC50  = 7 mg L(-1) ) toxicity. Severe sublethal effects on reproduction were recorded in nests orally exposed to pollen treated with chlorantraniliprole.

CONCLUSION:

The present study identified an important physiological endpoint of sublethal effects on reproduction, as this is associated with lethargic behaviour after oral intake. As such, this is a factor that should now be incorporated into future risk assessments. Secondly, it confirmed that the assessment of sublethal effects on behaviour is needed for adequate risk assessment of 'potentially deleterious' compounds with a neurogenic target, as is also pointed out in the recent European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) guidelines (from "Dietary chlorantraniliprole suppresses reproduction in worker bumblebees")."  
     Here is a study of the effects on honey bees (Honey bees long-lasting locomotor deficits after exposure to the diamide chlorantraniliprole are accompanied by brain and muscular calcium channels alterations).
     The point here is not to vilify Acelepryn as it is a much needed low impact larvacide (not no impact as stated by city sources) but to be clear and honest about the potential impact on other living things and to take the necessary steps to reduce that impact. All pesticides are toxic to some degree. The city field (Strathcona Park) adjacent to our apiary which at present houses both honey and blue mason bees is covered in clover and other assorted small flowers  much of the growing year and has not as yet been cut similar to David Lam Park during the spraying of past years. In past years I have requested that the Parks Board cut the field adjacent to our apiary early in the morning to minimize the killing of the honey bees but as of yet they continue to cut in the middle of the day when the fields are covered in bees. As someone who has dealt with and worked for the federal, provincial and city governments for many years this is not a surprise. Maybe some day .....

  

   
     On a happier note my hives and those of friends have wintered well and are thriving with the warm, dry weather.  The norm for us is 200 ml of precipitation for March and April and so far we have had 40 ml.  Good foraging weather.  Time for some early splits.  Speaking of which as a result of Covid-19 a number of the flights from New Zealand and Australia (our primary source of spring bees) have been cancelled substantially reducing the number of packages available to replace winter losses and for spring pollination (BCHPA).  The BCHPA is doing a survey to identify sources of spring bees in B.C.  There are plenty of available queens but a shortage of bulk bees.   Here is the survey.
     One positive aspect of the Covid-19 pandemic is substantially cleaner air worldwide with the reduction in industry and auto use as seen in gas prices (more supply than demand).

      This cleaner air should increase bee foraging efficiency as floral scent is masked by pollutants. "Results indicate that even moderate air pollutant levels (e.g., ozone mixing ratios greater than 60 parts per billion on a per volume basis, ppbv) substantially degrade floral volatiles and alter the chemical composition of released floral scents. As a result, insect success rates of locating plumes of floral scents were reduced and foraging times increased in polluted air masses due to considerable degradation and changes in the composition of floral scents. Results also indicate that plant-pollinator interactions could be sensitive to changes in floral scent composition, especially if insects are unable to adapt to the modified scentscape. The increase in foraging time could have severe cascading and pernicious impacts on the fitness of foraging insects by reducing the time devoted to other necessary tasks." (from a study "Air pollutants degrade floral scents and increase insect foraging times").  This reduced air pollution accompanied by the warm, dry weather mentioned earlier has created prime foraging conditions (urban irrigation has provided needed water).  A real fear is that countries will sacrifice environmental regulations to financially recover from the pandemic (China pushes coal power to fight economic slump). 
     The restriction of movement brought about by Covid-19 has meant difficulty moving bees or getting feed for bees (Chinese beekeeper kills himself after his colonies starve).  Hopefully this pandemic will be over soon.  Stay safe.

   

   

Neonicotinoids and Bees

   

    
     This video from Boulder County Beekeepers gives a good overview of the problems associated with neonicotinoid pesticides.  For years beekeepers worldwide have observed the detrimental effects of the systemic neonicotinoid pesticides on bees.  The studied effects are both lethal and possibly more important sublethal.  The accumulation of neonic pesticides in the hive effects the bee's nervous system and lowers their immune system making the bees more susceptible to diseases (Neonics weaken Bee immune system).  The effects go beyond this as recent evidence shows an accumulation of neonics in waterways adjacent to agricultural areas poses a risk to fish and birds in these ecosystems (Neonicotinoid Pesticides in Wetland Water).  In addition because of the monopolization of the seed market by the major agrochemical corporations farmers have difficulty finding seeds that don't contain neonicotinoid pesticides.  This is why Europe has recently placed a two year ban on the use of neonicotinoid pesticides.  Further evidence of the effects of neonicotinoids on bees and the environment can be found in the Insecticides and Bees section of our Beekeepers' Library.  The first 17 minutes of this video relates to issue of neonics and bees.

Very good video on neonics and bees: Honeybees in Crisis

Monsanto the Evil Empire

     Recently Monsanto was voted the most evil corporation of the year in a survey taken by NaturalNews. They won by a huge margin over the second place Federal Reserve which serves the massively corrupt global banking cartel. Monsanto is the pioneer of agricultural biotechnology and produces genetically engineered seeds that tolerate their herbicide "Roudup".  In the past Monsanto has been responsible for producing Saccharin (causes cancer), Polystyrene (generates the most total hazardous waste), Atom bomb and nuclear weapons (plutonium purification and production), Petroleum-Based Fertilizer (kill beneficial soil micro-organisms, sterilizing the soil and creating a dependence, like an addiction, to the synthetic replacements), Roundup (Studies in rats have shown consistently negative health impacts ranging from tumors, altered organ function, and infertility, to cancer and premature death), Aspartame (NutraSweet / Equal) (94 health issues caused by aspartame), Bovine Growth Hormone (causes cancer in humans), "Agent Orange" (a herbicide defoliant used in Vietnam from 1961-1971 responsible for an estimated 400,000 people killed or maimed, and 500,000 children born with birth defects), PCBs (a now banned organic pollutant found to cause cancer and other side effects in all animals including humans), Dioxins (produced in the creation of artificial plant growth hormones and known to cause cancer and birth defects) and DDT (a pesticide banned worldwide in 1972 for health effects like cancer and birth defects on wildlife and humans), Genetically Modified Crops / GMOs and Terminator Seeds (forces farmers to buy new seeds from Monsanto year after year).  Monsanto is the producer of the Roundup (glyphosate) brand of herbicides and is the leading producer of genetically engineered seed (Alfalfa, Canola, Corn, Cotton, Sorghum, Soybeans, Sugarbeets and Wheat). Among their seeds is the genetically modified corn seed created to kill all insects that eat it.  The seed contains Bacill Thuringiensis which has been proven to weaken the immune system of bees (Beekeepers' Library).  Monsanto has acquired patents to coat their seeds with neonicotinoid pesticides (Planting Pesticides) known to be fatal to bees and banned in many countries (Insecticides and Bees).  Due to cross pollination it may now be impossible to eliminate Monsanto's genetically engineered, toxic franken-crops. Genetically modified foods have been banned in many European countries.  The health repercussions of genetically modified foods to humans, bees and all wildlife is potentially scary.  The largest producer of genetically engineered seed is Monsanto.  75% to 80% of the processed food you consume every day has GMOs inside, and residues of Monsanto’s RoundUp herbicide outside. In addition fresh fruit and vegetables like genetically engineered sweet corn is already being sold in your grocery store. 

     The worldwide production of seeds is now monopolized by a few agrochemical corporations.  Monsanto, Bayer and Syngenta now control over half the worldwide distribution of seeds.  Monsanto has established cross-licensing agreements for its transgenic patents with every single other company in the mix, while Dow has agreements with all except for Bayer. And Syngenta has agreements with Dow, Monsanto, and DuPont, while BASF has agreements with Dow and Monsanto.  Monsanto has purchased over 50 seed companies since l996 (Monsanto Seed Companies).  Some misconceptions of genetic modification and agrochemical use are that they are necessary to feed the world's growing population.  In a recent U.S.D.A report (U.S.D.A. Report) researchers stated "Over the first 15 years of commercial use, GMO seeds have not been shown to definitively increase yield potentials, and "in fact, the yields of herbicide-tolerant or insect-resistant seeds may be occasionally lower than the yields of conventional varieties."  GM seeds do however increase the profits of Monsanto as the higher priced seeds are patented and can not be saved and are resistant to the herbicide Roundup (produced by Monsanto) which has led to a substantial increase in the use of Roundup.

This video describes the process of genetic modification

       

      "There's nothing they are leaving untouched: the mustard, the okra, the bringe oil, the rice, the cauliflower. Once they have established the norm: that seed can be owned as their property, royalties can be collected. We will depend on them for every seed we grow of every crop we grow. If they control seed, they control food, they know it -- it's strategic. It's more powerful than bombs. It's more powerful than guns. This is the best way to control the populations of the world. The story starts in the White House, where Monsanto often got its way by exerting disproportionate influence over policymakers via the "revolving door". One example is Michael Taylor, who worked for Monsanto as an attorney before being appointed as deputy commissioner of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1991. While at the FDA, the authority that deals with all US food approvals, Taylor made crucial decisions that led to the approval of GE foods and crops. Then he returned to Monsanto, becoming the company's vice president for public policy.  Thanks to these intimate links between Monsanto and government agencies, the US adopted GE foods and crops without proper testing, without consumer labeling and in spite of serious questions hanging over their safety. Not coincidentally, Monsanto supplies 90 percent of the GE seeds used by the US market. Monsanto's long arm stretched so far that, in the early nineties, the US Food and Drugs Agency even ignored warnings of their own scientists, who were cautioning that GE crops could cause negative health effects. Other tactics the company uses to stifle concerns about their products include misleading advertising, bribery and concealing scientific evidence."

Former Monsanto employees currently hold positions in US government agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Supreme Court. These include:

Michael A. Friedman, MD, was Senior Vice President of Research and Development, Medical and Public Policy for Pharmacia, and later served as an FDA deputy commissioner.[222][223]

Linda J. Fisher was an assistant administrator at the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) before she was a vice president at Monsanto from 1995 to 2000. In 2001, Fisher became the deputy administrator of the EPA.[114]

Michael R. Taylor was an assistant to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) commissioner before he left to work for a law firm, one client of which was Monsanto. Taylor then became deputy commissioner of the FDA from 1991 to 1994, during which time the FDA approved rBST.[114] Anti-GM activists accused him of conflict of interest but a Federal investigation cleared him. Taylor was later re-appointed to the FDA in August 2009 by President Barack Obama.[224][225]

United States Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas worked as an attorney for Monsanto in the 1970s. Thomas wrote the majority opinion in the 2001 Supreme Court decision J. E. M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc.[226] which found that "newly developed plant breeds are patentable under the general utility patent laws of the United States."[114][226][227]

Public officials with indirect connections or who worked for Monsanto after leaving public office include:

Mickey Kantor served on Monsanto's board after serving in government as a trade representative.[114]

William D. Ruckelshaus served as the first head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1970, was subsequently acting Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and then Deputy Attorney General of the United States. From 1983 to 1985, he returned as EPA administrator. After leaving government he joined the Board of Directors of Monsanto; he is currently retired from that board.[228]

Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was chairman and chief executive officer of G. D. Searle & Company, which Monsanto purchased in 1985. Rumsfeld's stock and options in Searle were $12 million USD at the time of the transaction.

     Here is a video that describes how Monsanto silences scientific dissent through the positioning of former employees in influential occupations.  "In this case that a former Monsanto scientist finds himself in charge of a specially-created post at the very journal that published two landmark studies questioning the safety of that company's products should surprise no one who is aware of the Monsanto revolving door. This door is responsible for literally dozens of Monsanto officials, lobbyists and consultants finding themselves in positions of authority in the government bodies that are supposedly there to regulate the company and its actions."


    
       The people of Hawaii are fighting Monsanto in a case "Genetic Engineering Chemical Warfare".

     Monsanto has long been trying to establish control over the seeds of the plants that produce food for the world. They have patented a number of genetically altered food crops, which can only be grown with proper license, and the seeds for which must be purchased anew each year.  Alas, genetically engineered (GE) crops cannot be contained. And rather than being found guilty of contaminating farmers' property, Monsanto has successfully sued hundreds of unsuspecting farmers for patent infringement when unlicensed GE crops were found growing in their fields. Many farmers have subsequently, quite literally, lost their farms.  Percy Schmeiser of Saskatchewan, Canada, is but one of Monsanto's victims, but contrary to so many others, he refused to quietly tolerate the injustice. In a classic case of David versus Goliath, Schmeiser fought back against one of the most powerful corporations in the world.

     This 2011 article from Counterpunch a political newsletter describes how Monsanto (along with the other agro-chemical giants) through economic and political influence  have persuaded the "organic elite" along with the major food distributors to accept genetically engineered crops despite the potential contamination to organic farms and ranches.  Monsanto and others involved in the production of genetically modified food have spent $35 million towards defeating California Proposition 37 which would mandate the disclosure or labelling of all genetically modified foods. “The No on 37 Campaign knows that basic facts do not support their argument for denying consumers the right to know what’s in our food , so they are resorting to a $35 million campaign of misrepresentations, misleading statements, and outright lies,” said Stacy Malkan, California Right to Know spokesperson.  “Prop. 37 comes down to a question of who is more credible, the leading health and consumer advocates, faith based groups, working families and millions of everyday Californians -- or the same small group of financially motivated special interests and political operatives who told us Agent Orange, DDT and cigarettes were safe?”

The truth about Prop 37

• Just a simple label—like in 61 other countries, indicating if our food has been genetically engineered
• Put on the ballot by a million Californians just like you
• Enables us to make an informed choice about what foods are right for our families
• Supported by consumers, farmers, nurses, doctors and a broad Coalition 

     It is very simple.  We have the right to know what is in our food and how it was created.  Monsanto and others involved in the production of our food say we do not have that right.  In Europe labelling of GMO (genetically modified organisms) products has been mandatory since 1997 and any GMO food products exported to Europe must be labelled disclosing that they are genetically modified.

     Vote Yes on Proposition 37.  Go to The Right to Know to find out more about proposition 37 and how important it is to you and your children.



     

   

  
     In an attempt to combat it's negative environmental image Monsanto recently bought the company Beeologics which produces biological pest and disease controls for bees.  I wonder, is it possible? Genetically Modified Bees?

Monsanto Franken-Bee

Postscript: The $35 million dollars Monsanto spent on advertisement to defeat Proposition 37 was well spent as they achieved a narrow victory enabling them to continue hiding the true nature of the food they produce. Ultimately the joke is on them.  By monopolizing the food market worldwide and selling dangerous genetically modified foods they will eventually kill all of their customers.  The Devil has just finished building a new wing in Hell called Monsantoland for former employees.

Insecticides and Bees

     Imidacloprid (some of the trade names are Winner, Advantage and Gaucho) is a neonicotinoid insecticide (type of pesticide) widely used on a number of major agricultural crops since 1986.  France, Italy, Slovenia and Germany have banned it's use on certain crops because of health risks to bees (Neonicotinoid effect on European Bees): 

In France, beekeepers reported a significant loss of honeybees in the 1990s, which they attributed to the use of imidacloprid (Gaucho). See Imidacloprid effects on bee population. In response to this loss of bees called "mad bee disease," the French Minister of Agriculture convened a panel of expert scientists (Comite Scientifique et Technique) to examine the impact of imidacloprid on bees. After reviewing dozens of laboratory and field studies conducted by Bayer CropScience and by independent scientists, the panel concluded that there was a significant risk to bees from exposure to imidacloprid on sunflowers and maize (corn), the only crops for which they had exposure data. Following the release of this report, the French Agricultural Ministry suspended the use of imidacloprid on maize and sunflowers. Italy, Germany, and Slovenia have also suspended certain uses of the neonicotinoids based on concerns for bees.  To see studies done on the impact of neonicotinoid insecticides go to "The Impact of neonicotinoid insecticides on bumble bees, honey bees and other non-target invertebrates".

     One of major problems occurs during seeding of neonicotinoid coated seeds and the dusting that occurs during the machine planting process which in windy conditions can spread the insecticide a mile or more.  To see a study done on this problem go to "Effects of neonicotinoid insecticide coated maize seed on honey bees" and "Neonicotinoid effect on Bees".  This spring a number of commercial beekeepers in Canada and the United States have experienced devastating losses during the planting of neonicotinoid coated seeds.  To listen to the heart wrenching meeting between Canadian government officials and beekeepers who experienced these devastating losses go to the Parliament of Canada.

     This week Bayer, the major producer of Imidacloprid voluntarily removed Almond trees from their suggested use label.  The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency in the U.S.) is reviewing this.  There are over 800,000 acres of almonds in California alone which are pollinated 100% by bees (the major seasonal crop for professional pollination companies).  This is great news for the billions of honey bees employed each year in the almond pollination industry.  This article by Kim Flottum : 

Imidacloprid On Almonds May Be History

Early this morning Bee Culture received a call from Steve Ellis, a member of the Honey Bee Advisory Board…the group of dedicated beekeepers working to make beekeeping a safer place by making pesticide businesses…farmers, applicators, sellers, manufacturers, researchers…more aware of the incredible damage their products can do to honey bees and pollinators.

The Honey Bee Advisory Board is in Washington D. C. this week, meeting with, among others, representatives of the EPA and Bayer CropScience. During the discussions it became apparent that Bayer was voluntarily removing almond trees from the label of their imidacloprid products.

Our call this morning was to inform us, and now you, that EPA is reviewing this request. Yes, reviewing. It seems that crops are so seldom removed from a label, especially by voluntary request, that the internal engine at EPA isn’t quite sure how to make that happen. So they are reviewing it.

Mr. Ellis was quite sure the review process would be swift and action taken very soon. Hopefully before it is to be used on almonds during the coming season, thus saving billions of honey bees from the opportunity of exposure to this chemical.  Members of the Honey Bee Advisory Board are all volunteers, not supported by any National or Regional beekeeping organization. They are to be commended for their ongoing pursuit of a better, safer life for honey bees, beekeepers, and all pollinators.

Pesticides are carried away by wind, evaporation, leaching and runoff

     Imidacloprid is not banned or even restricted for use in Canada and is also used for pet flea treatments.  It is obviously toxic to beneficial insects like bees, earthworms and ladybugs and causes reduced egg production in birds (http://www.sierraclub.ca/national/programs/health-environment/pesticides/imidacloprid-fact-sheet.shtml).  To view studies on the effects of pesticides on honey bees go to Pesticides and Honey Bees.

The effects of today's systemic pesticides on bees.

     Another neonicotinoid pesticide produced by Bayer is Clothianidin which like Imidacloprid is toxic to bees and it's use has been suspended by Germany.  The film below outlines the inability of the current system (EPA and corporate testing) to properly identify the safety of insecticides.



Beekkeeper Leaks EPA Document from Bee The Change on Vimeo.

     The video below is further evidence of the agricultural industry using agrochemicals irresponsibly with total disregard for safety or suffering. Productivity and profit are the singular motivation.  Endosulfan is an insecticide that was brought to the market in 1954 by Bayer CropScience and approved by the USDA.  Although the toxic effects on the environment and humans has been known for years it wasn't until the year 2000 that home and garden use was terminated in the United States.  In 2002 the EPA determined that endosulfan residues on food and in water pose unacceptable risks and so restricted but did not ban agricultural use.  In 2007 the Canadian government announced that endosulfan was under consideration for phase-out.  From 2007-2010 international steps were taken to restrict the use and trade of endosulfan but it wasn't until 2011 that the EPA announced that the registration of endosulfan in the U.S. will be cancelled.  Although in most parts of the world endosulfan is banned it is still being produced and utilized in reduced quantities.



     A few good sites to check regarding information on insecticides are: http://www.beyondpesticides.org/ ;
The pesticide action network: http://www.panna.org/ ;The Permanent People's Tribunal http://www.agricorporateaccountability.net/ ; Coalition Against Bayer Dangers http://www.cbgnetwork.org/328.html

*To view further studies on the effects of insecticides on bees go to Insecticides and Bees in our Beekeepers' Library.