While the EPA’s pollinator protection program sounds promising, it does little to actually ensure the welfare of the nation’s honeybees, according to an EPA Inspector General report published this week.
The report criticized the EPA for inadequately assessing the success or failure of 45 state-managed pollinator protection plans. The program, which is voluntary, is supposed to ensure bees are safe from the harmful effects of pesticide exposure.
However, the program includes only managed colonies — those that farmers hire to pollinate their crops. Wild colonies and other pollinators that are also susceptible to pesticide poisoning are not accounted for.
And, the report went on, the program is focused solely on acute poisoning, not the chronic exposure that can weaken and kill the bees, especially during overwintering, when food sources are scarce.
The EPA has been working on a survey of participating states, including North Carolina, about their individual programs. However, there is no plan on how, or if, the data will be used to improve state protections.
The survey is scheduled to launch this fall, and it is a separate data collection program from the one run by the US Department of Agriculture. Last month the USDA announced it would no longer collect honeybee colony data, which is critical to understand the health and threats to these pollinators.
The Honey Bee Colonies report allows agencies, beekeepers, and other interested parties to compare quarterly losses, additions, and movements and to analyze the data state-by-state. The agency said a lack of funding prompted the program’s closure.
Since 1940, the US has lost more than half of its managed colonies, from 5.7 million to 2.7 million in 2015. Acute and chronic exposures to pesticides are among the causes.
Coincidentally, also last month, the EPA reintroduced the pesticide, allowing sulfoxaflor not only to be sold commercially but also be applied for new uses. The decision was prompted by a 2015 Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that required the EPA to remove sulfoxaflor from the market and ordered the agency to further study its effects on bees.
The EPA said data shows that when used according to the label, “sulfoxaflor poses no significant risk to human health and lower risk to non-target wildlife, including pollinators, than registered alternatives.”
Sulfoxaflor disappears from the environment faster than widely-used alternatives like neonicotinoids, the agency said.
However, pesticides are not always applied according to the label. Even some licensed pesticide applicators take shortcuts, allowing the chemicals to drift onto nearby crops or ignoring the warning labels altogether.
For example, according to NC Department of Agriculture data from June, Ricardo M. Aldape, a pesticide applicator for Wendell Garret Johnson’s peach farm in Candor, in Montgomery County, applied a pesticide to blooming parts of peach trees, resulting in a bee kill in nearby hives. The label stated the pesticide should not be applied to blooming, pollen shedding or nectar producing parts of plant if bees may forage during this period.
Aldape agreed to pay $500 for using a pesticide in a manner inconsistent with its labeling.