Your post indicates why government study might in fact be warranted. So many studies out there, so many competing interests sponsoring them…sometimes we need truly unbiased research.
What is the Bee Informed Partnership?
Article said what it was.
And it’s likely not the only entity tracking bee populations.
Study of the impact of an insecticide? Probably.
Tracking of bee populations. Already being done.
And the sudden concern about the EPA ignoring a particular study is TDS.
We can do this all day.
What’s “sudden” about it?
This administration is hell-bent on destroying everything in it’s path. Hey cons, where is your “drain the swamp?”
2020 can’t come fast enough
1 Like
Umm, psst, the chemical in question was approved for use under the Obama administration. Lol
from https://www.ecowatch.com/neonicotinoid-replacement-sulfoxaflor-bees-2596515132.html
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved sulfoxaflor during the Obama administration with new restrictions to protect bees after a court decision had vacated an earlier, more lenient approval.
While you are correct, the Obama Administration required safeguards against harming bees as a condition of its approval.
Does the new one do that?
Doesn’t appear so…appears to be a “broader use approval”…only a guess but I would guess the safeguard provision was an “onerous regulation”.
1 Like
Umm, no, it is said to also include protective conditions for bees.
The EPA’s registration of sulfoxaflor will also include updated requirements for product labels, including some crop-specific restrictions, as well as pollinator-protection language.
From everything I have read so far, this chemical has a much smaller impact on bees than other alternatives.
It’s like you didn’t even read the article in the OP or your own link Lol
How so? Was it originally approved for use under the Obama administration, yes or no?
Here the restrictions they are lifting, doesn’t look like anything earth shattering to me.
from Sulfoxaflor | US EPA
> EPA removed the prohibition of use on crops grown for seed because pollinator protection restrictions, including low use rates, will be in place regardless of whether the crop is grown for seed or for commodity harvest.
EPA removed the restriction to post-bloom application for bee-attractive crops only when there is low risk or limited potential for exposure to bees. The 12-foot buffer requirement was lifted because EPA believes the spray drift mitigation requirements on labels are adequate to limit drift. EPA removed the 2016 restriction against tank mixing because data show that there is no additional risk when sulfoxaflor is tank mixed with other compounds.
In addition they expanded its use to some other crops but keep this in mind…
same link
Widely-used alternatives do not have these restrictions and may pose higher risk to non-target wildlife than sulfoxaflor.
These restrictions remain in place…\
same link
To minimize potential exposure to bees near treated areas, the following statements/requirements are required on end-use product labels:
Environmental Hazards Statement:
“This product is highly toxic to bees and other pollinating insects exposed to direct treatment or to residues in/on blooming crops or weeds. Protect pollinating insects by following label directions intended to minimize drift and reduce pesticide risk to these organisms.”
The RT25 (how long foliar residues of sulfoxaflor exhibit toxicity to honey bees):
“The RT25 for this product is less than or equal to 3 hours.”
Directions for Use:
“Notifying known beekeepers within 1 mile of the treatment area 48 hours before the product is applied will allow them to take additional steps to protect their bees. Also, limiting application to times when managed bees and native pollinators are least active, e.g. 2 hours prior to sunset or when the temperature is below 50°F at the site of application will minimize risk to bees.”To further protect pollinators from potential exposure, EPA requires the following crop specific restrictions:
Citrus: Only one application is allowed between 3 days before bloom and until after petal fall per year Ornamentals: Do not make more than one application during bloom. The single application during bloom must not exceed a rate of 0.071 lb ai/acre. Pome Fruit, Stone Fruit, Tree Nuts and Pistachio: Do not apply this product any time between 3 days prior to bloom and until after petal fall. Small Fruit Vine Climbing & Low Growing Berry, Tree Plantations: Do not apply this product any time between 3 days prior to bloom and until after petal fall.
When you read the whole story, you find the protections have been reduced from what the Obama Administration had in place, “emergency exceptions” are sabotaging any regulations on the first place, and this rule change came into being without any independent review…all the “data you have read” is coming from Dow…the beneficiary of the rules change.
It may be true this product isn’t harmful to bees after all…but I don’t trust Dow, Monsanto or ConAgra as far as I could collectively kick them.
1 Like
Umm no, you have no idea what data I read, I read one study funded by DOW but I also read a couple of others as well as what the EPA and various groups like Greenepeace, the British Journal and EcoWatch had to say.
“The Obama administration in 2015 moved to ban the use of the pesticide after a lawsuit brought by beekeepers. Another court decision later prompted the Obama EPA to allow the use of the pesticide although it restricted it to only crops that are not attractive to pollinators.”
Dow AgroSciences, the manufacturer of the pesticide, in 2018 filed an application to the EPA for wider use of sulfoxaflor, according to a filing in the Federal Register.
“EPA’s decision on Friday not only adds new uses for the pesticides but also removes previous restrictions.”
“Dow Chemical Co., the former parent of Dow AgroSciences, gave President Donald Trump $1 million for his 2017 inauguration, according to data compiled by OpenSecrets.org, a project of the Center for Responsive Politics.”
If you know of another safer chemical that will prevent up to fifty percent of some of these crops from being lost, let us know. It’s a lot safer for bees than the neonictinoids it is replacing.
Doesn’t change the fact that is was originally approved by the EPA on his watch in 2013.
How can it harm bees when it’s not being sprayed on plants that don’t attract bees or aren’t flowering? 
Hey we have less than 12 years left anyway huh? 
12!?! Those are rookie numbers!
Can we get it going down faster?! How about 7? Maybe even 4?
Do you remember the guys that came into the bees thread back on the old board that said they didn’t care about bees any more than they cared about spiders?
