The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco overturned the Environmental Protection Agency’s unconditional approval of controversial insecticide, sulfoxaflor on Sept. 7, saying the EPA relied on “flawed and limited data” in its registration of the chemical.
Sulfoxaflor is a subclass of neonicotinoid—the family of insecticides that some believe are responsible for colony collapse disorder in honeybees.
Neonicotinoids are relatively new to the market. They’re used in the cultivation of lettuce, broccoli, and strawberries in the Santa Maria Valley, but not all regulating agencies agree about its level of safety. Charlotte Fadipe with California’s Department of Pesticide Regulation said that her agency, unlike the EPA, never embraced the use of sulfoxaflor.
“We never allowed unrestricted use because we were very concerned about toxicity to bees,” Fadipe explained. “In general, it was not allowed to be used here [in California].” Earlier this year, limited approval was given to lettuce growers for application of sulfoxaflor.
While sulfoxaflor was limited to lettuce, there are various other neonicotinoids that can legally be used in Santa Barbara County. A 2014 report from the Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) lists 274 neonicotinoid products that have been registered for use.
Although some of those products are being re-evaluated by the DPR, applications of neonicotinoids in Santa Maria rose 350 percent between 2009 and 2015. In 2013, there were 23,545 pounds of the neonicotinoid imidacloprid applied in Santa Barbara County. A map created by the Pesticide Research Institute in 2010 shows the Santa Maria Valley to be in the 95th percentile for overall neonicotinoid applications in the state.
Colony collapse disorder was first described in 2006, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Between April 2014 and April 2015, the USDA said, losses of managed honeybee colonies reached 42 percent. The mechanism behind colony collapse is still disputed—while some studies have indicated a link with neonicotinoids, causes such as mite infestation have also been suggested, and the science is not yet settled.
Ronald Gromack, a Santa Maria beekeeper who’s been keeping honeybees for 60 years, supports the court’s decision and believes that the EPA seriously erred in its initial unconditional approval
of sulfoxaflor.
“Nobody’s been able to tie it down to a specific, but the courts are finally waking up to the fact that these studies aren’t done properly and we need to look at usage of [neonicotinoids],” he told the Sun.
He said he lost seven hives to colony collapse disorder last year, and he believes that this type of pesticide may be responsible. “Neonicotinoids affect the nervous system of the bee,” he explained. “They go out, and it affects their memory—they don’t know where their home is. You end up with the queen and nurse bees, and all the field bees disappear.”
In an email to the Sun, Dow spokesman Gary Hamlin wrote that the company “respectfully disagrees” with the 9th Circuit’s decision.
“Dow AgroSciences will work with EPA to implement the order and to promptly complete additional regulatory work to support the registration of these products. Dow AgroSciences is also considering its available options to challenge the court’s decision,” he said.
This article appears in Oct 1-8, 2015.
