Bees and Neonics

In the news for the last however many years, Bees have been cropping up more and more. The mysterious disappearance of Bees and other pollinator insects is of great concern to us all (even if some people don’t realise it). A lot of theories have been thrown around about what could be causing the dramatic loss of Bee colonies known as Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), but for some reason we seem reluctant to investigate or believe that it could be directly linked to the pesticides and chemicals that we use. We have considered that it could be disease, invasive Mites and even mobile phone radiation, but the one thing that gets the least attention is this high use of agro-chemicals.

Right now, Bayer (an agro-chemical giant) is suing the European Commission in a bid to overturn its 2 year ban on 3 Neonicotinoid chemicals (Neonics), but none of this is in the news. In 2012 the European Commission asked the EU Food Safety Authority to conduct a study on 3 Neonics (Imidacloprid, Thiamethoxham and Clothianidin) and in January 2013 they stated that Neonics posed an unacceptably high risk to Bees and pollinators. They also claimed that the industry sponsored science which Bayer and Syngenta (another chemical giant) funded had flaws and gaps in their findings. On the 29th April 2013, 15 of 27 EU countries voted to ban the 3 Neonics for seed treatment, soil and foliar application for 2 years starting on December 1st 2013. The UK, for the record, voted against the ban.

Neonics were first introduced in the 90’s with Imidacloprid (IMD) being the first to be commercially used. Since then, there have been numerous links between these chemicals and the collapse of Bee colonies worldwide. Bee keepers in France were the first to notice this not long after the introduction of Imidacloprid. Business’ for bee keepers was severely damaged and huge numbers of colonies suddenly disappeared. This led to a number of lawsuits against Bayer to try and ban or restrict the use of the pesticide, but the Bee keepers, even when combined, could not take on such a powerful company. Eventually a study was carried out and in 2003 a 108 page report was released by Comite Scientifique et Technique which showed extensive research that linked Imidacloprid to Colony Collapse Disorder.

Even with these kind of findings Neonics continued to be used everywhere. In the US the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has a 15 year registration review cycle for all pesticides. However, agro-chemical companies used an emergency clause (section 18) to gain commercial selling status and therefore bypassing all safety tests. This clause is used in emergencies and use is granted for 2 years as a last resort, but agro-chemical companies have abused this loop hole in the system and Imidacloprid was approved countless times. In 2013 the EPA was sued for inadequate toxicity tests by the Pesticide action Network (PAN), the Sierra club, the Centre of Environmental health and Beyond Pesticides group.

The fact that a chemical company can sue the European Commission is worrying in itself. These companies have an enormous amount of power and the agro-chemical industry has investments and influence over education, scientific studies and environmental government groups. They even seem to swing the media in their favour.

However, these companies claim that their products, when applied properly and in the right dosage, will not be lethal to Bees or pollinators. This may be true in as much as it may not kill them instantly, but the French study mentioned earlier found that even in sub-lethal doses of under 5 PPB (Parts Per Billion) Imidacloprid can cause CCD by distorting the Bees navigation system or their central nervous system. Bees have a naturally low immune system and do not cope well with rapid developing chemicals as they have no opportunity to adapt. They rely on “Nurse” Bees that clean them as they enter and exit the hive and when a Bee returns with a low dose of pesticide it can eventually affect the entire colony.

Neonics work by targeting the nervous system in pest species (like Mites). Below is an extract from Bayercropscience on how IMD effects Termites;

“Imidacloprid binds to the nicotinergic acetylcholine receptors at the nervous systems which leads to paralysis and eventual death”

(http://www.elitepest.com.sg/brochure/Premise_200SC.pdf)

It is not hard to believe then, that these chemicals could be affecting the Bees, even at supposedly low doses. The odd thing is that CCD doesn’t cause all of the colony to die, like when a hive is struck by disease, but the majority of the hive vanish, leaving only a few dying Bees. This could be the effect of the chemical on their nervous system which disables their ability to navigate and feed properly.

It is worrying enough that without our Bees and pollinators we face a devastating loss to agricultural production for all the foods that rely on them, but, knowing how these chemicals work and the effect they have on insects and pests, what effect are they having on us? Imidacloprid has been proven to remain present in the soil after application for several years, so what about all the food we eat that has been covered in it? None of this is mentioned on the packaging in the supermarkets. Who has the right to decide what a safe dose is of Imidacloprid for us to eat? And what about all the Neonics that are used in homecare products, lawn pesticides and garden fertilisers that make a higher percentage than used on cereal crops?

The current ban on Neonics in the EU is a definite victory for safety and reason and for the Precautionary principle, which is supposed to underlie Environmental policy and regulation. But the ban is only for 2 years, which is not enough time to measure the effect the pesticides have had and is not enough time for Bees or pollinators to recover, especially as it stays in the soil for so long. These chemicals have been used in ignorance where the immediate interests of profit over-ride the long term consequences to us and the environment. People need to be made more aware of the facts and food packaging should clearly label what has been used on the product.
There should be an immediate independent review of the latest science and recent conclusions of the flawed EU risk assessments of Neonics on the current market, and a Moratorium on UK approvals and use of Neonics in agriculture, ornamental and amateur garden sectors until proven not to be harmful to pollinators and people.

We should also offer more options and incentives for farmers to adopt more integrated pest management methods, reducing the dependency on chemicals and pushing for more Organic farming standards.

The Havana Model

Following on from my last blog; If we then look at countries like Cuba, we can see a dramatic difference in the way that allotments, or huertos, are used. Cuban farming and gardening used to be dominated by a high input, mono-culture growing system of tobacco, sugar and coffee. They were cash crops grown for export and traded for cheap oil. Towards the end of the 1980’s though, when Russia pulled out any economical help with the collapse of the Soviet union, Cuba faced a major food crisis. They were already crippled by a trade embargo with the US and so Cuba had to revert to basics and a more self sufficient lifestyle in order to survive.

Cubans had to develop a method of growing food and medicine with no oil, no fertilisers and no pesticides. Today, the result is a green revolution of vibrant, organic community gardens, known as organiponicos. In between the decaying buildings, in nooks and crannies and patches of wasteland, fruits and vegetables are grown in abundance. In Havana, there are around 200 allotments ranging from small plots made from old parking spaces, to community gardens the size of a football pitch. No space is unused, and even without ownership of the land, locals get together and transform derelict spaces into productive gardens, creating a highly sustainable, organic method of producing food and medicine.

Raised beds ensure the soil is well drained, and natural forms of pesticides are used such as fungal sprays. Plants such as Marigolds and Basil are planted around the borders of these plots to deter insect pests. Coffee bean shells and rice husks are used to make compost.

The social impact of this green revolution has been tremendous, creating a closer community who work for the benefit of each other. In some of the larger co-operatives, it creates employment for relatively low investment. It offers the young generation the chance to work and be involved with the community.

All the produce grown, whether from a small huerto or a organiponico is sold locally to the people, schools and hospitals for cheap prices. This coupled with the fact that no fuel gusling machinery is being used means that there is little, if no, carbon trail from this production.

Cuba is 90% self sufficient when it comes to fruit and vegetables, and the effect this has on their health is extremely positive. They eat a lot less meat and dairy fat than in the West and over all have a healthier diet. So compared to allotments in the UK, the difference is massive. The necessity of these gardens makes them different, as there is no plan. Gardens are made out of anything in any space available, because the people depend on them. Car parks and rubbish tips have been transformed into gardens, backyards and alleys are covered in pots and plants. There is no typical layout, and they are generally completely open. People can wander in and out of the allotments to help or buy or ask advice and this is what really brings the community together. UK allotments, as mentioned before are almost the opposite. Our allotments are generally places to escape to and relax. We don’t need to grow our own produce, (but it is something which is preferable to a growing number of people) but it is either a hobby or a luxury we indulge in if we have the time. They are organised, planned and are run by councils or associations. In Cuba anyone who wants to join in and help is more than welcome. A network of advice centres also operates in Havana to help people grow their own produce, which helps keep the momentum going. Although it was impending starvation that sparked this green revolution in Cuba, a lot can be learned from what they have achieved. They have created a sustainable, healthy and community based system of organically producing food and medicine, without any help from fuels or pesticides. This is something that could easily be done here in the UK and could have a number of benefits. In a time of mass unemployment and borderline poverty in many areas, it could be a chance for communities to pull together, instead of feeling more and more isolated, and produce their own food. It could offer a number of environmental benefits (especially for pollinator insects) and gives an opportunity for young unemployed people to learn a trade and reap the rewards. It could offer a more flexible, self sufficient lifestyle that may well be the new social paradigm we have been looking for. Community allotments certainly can’t be a bad thing, and there have been many success stories in Urban and Rural areas already. Right now we may not think it necessary or possible, or perhaps don’t see a point in it. But sooner or later we are going to have to start using alternatives to pesticides, and we are going to have to think about the damage that is being done to the environment and our pollinating insects, because if they go, then we are in trouble. So could these small movements of organic community allotments be the first stepping stones towards a mass green revolution?

Urban Farming

Growing up in rural Shropshire, I was surrounded by a culture of growing your own produce. Whether it was a large scale farm, a smallholding or a vegetable patch in the garden, it was ever-present. When I was young I worked on a farm, and would go to help out with chores before and after school as well as at the weekend. So to me and all my friends, the connection between the food that you grow and the end product was clear and obvious. As I got older and lived in various cities however, I noticed that the path between the source of your food and the product that you buy became a great deal harder to track. I could go into many reasons why this is a bad thing and should change, but for now I will focus on the positive. After doing a study of urban allotments last year I realised there is a dramatic increase in young people renting plots to grow their own fruit and veg, as well as a general trend in the younger generation growing in tiny back yards, balconies and generally every nook and cranny they can possibly utilise. And not only this, they were doing it organically. After chatting to a few different people, it really came across that they wanted to be more in control of what they ate. They were tired of not being able to trust large supermarkets and deceptive advertising which covered up a myriad of ethical sins and got a great deal of satisfaction seeing their food from seed to plate. Even if you only manage to grow a few beans here and there it is definitely worth it. One of the biggest pros to growing your own food is that it gives back a sense of choice which has gradually been taken away by supermarkets. The choice to have something fresh which hasn’t been flown half way around the world, and hasn’t been sprayed with a cocktail of chemicals makes it worth the work. Not only that, it’s a lot of fun, especially when it comes to harvest time and you cook up your home grown melt in your mouth potatoes and crunchy runner beans and share it with your mates. So is this the beginning of a larger scale shift in the way we look at food production? Are we beginning to ask more questions about where our food comes from, how it was grown, the welfare of the animals involved etc? And is it possible to take back some of the control which the mass producers have? The good news is that there has been a large increase in Organic farming and food production in recent years, and incidentally people have become more aware of what Organic means. But even now in supermarkets, organic products are relatively few and far between and marked all over with ORGANIC in bold, which gives people the impression it is something faddish, a bit gimmicky and possibly a passing trend. It should be the Organic produce which is the norm and the majority of items in your trolley, whilst half an aisle is reserved for the items printed with CHEMICAL produce all over the packaging. This is where we need to alter our attitude towards how our crops are grown and demand higher standards from our supermarkets, clearly (and truthfully) showing the source of the product. Studies have proven beyond doubt that the insecticides, herbicides and pesticides used on our crops can have a devastating effect on wildlife which comes into contact with them, killing off our pollinating insects which could lead to dire ramifications for the rest of our environment. So if it does this much damage to our wildlife, what effect is it having on our health?