Herbicides

Organic farming is often promoted as a solution for counteracting the adverse impacts of agricultural intensification on biodiversity. However, it is unclear whether the biodiversity benefits derived from organic farming require an adoption of organic farming in its entirety (i.e. a systems-level approach) or whether the benefits derived are because of just a small subset of the associated management practices. Using bird survey data collected from kiwifruit orchards in New Zealand, we assessed whether orchards managed under an organic system support higher bird densities than those under integrated management systems. To determine whether biodiversity gains might also be achieved on non-organic orchards, we tested whether variation among kiwifruit orchards in the amount of (non-crop) woody vegetation cover, density of shelterbelts and toxicity of pesticide applications are better predictors of bird densities than management systems. Pesticide use and habitat composition variables were better predictors of native bird densities than management system, with native bird densities negatively associated with pesticide toxicity ranking and/or positively associated with woody vegetation cover.

Around the world, large-scale biomonitoring programs have provided extensive information about human exposure to a large number of environmental chemicals. As these programs extend to look at vulnerable populations, including pregnant women, fetuses, and the elderly, our knowledge of the widespread distribution of many of these chemicals continues to climb. However, the mere presence of a chemical in humans is not necessarily cause for concern. What is concerning is the increasing number of epidemiological studies showing associations between the concentration of these chemicals in the general population and adverse health end points. Although high exposures following accidental or occupational exposures to endocrine disruptors, industrial chemicals, pesticides, and pharmaceuticals have shown striking effects, epidemiological studies suggest that low doses may also be unsafe, even for populations that are not typically considered “vulnerable.”

Dat zegt een evaluerend rapport van het Europees Agentschap voor Voedselveiligheid (EFSA) dat op 23 mei 2012 verscheen. De bestaande tests die invloed hadden op de autorisatie van het product zijn onvoldoende voor de wijd toegepaste systemische pesticiden. Door deze tekortkoming zijn heel wat neonicotinoiden op de markt gekomen. Het EFSA geeft toe dat de procedure voor autorisatie grondig herzien moet worden. Vrijdag 1 juni publiceerde EFSA een statement over de bevindingen van twee recente studies naar subletale effecten op bijen van imidacloprid en thiamethoxam (Henry et al. en Whitehorn et al.; Science 30 maart 2012). EFSA concludeert dat in sommige gevallen de geteste concentraties relevant zijn voor veldsituaties in Europa. Volgens het Ctgb is dit voor Nederland niet het geval (bijlage).

Die EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) hat eine Auswertung der neuesten wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnisse zu den von Pestiziden ausgehenden Risiken für Honigbienen, Hummeln und Solitärbienen veröffentlicht (Beilage). Auf Grundlage dieser wichtigen Arbeit können spezifische Leitlinien für die Bewertung möglicher Risiken entwickelt werden, die sich aus dem Einsatz von Pflanzenschutzmitteln für Bienen ergeben. Die Leitlinien werden aktuelle Empfehlungen für alle enthalten, die sich mit der Bewertung von Pflanzenschutzmitteln und ihrer Wirkstoffe befassen, einschließlich der Industrie und Behörden. Das heute veröffentlichte Gutachten zu den wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnissen, die der Untermauerung dieser Leitlinien dienen sollen, wurde auf Ersuchen der Europäischen Kommission erstellt und trägt den wachsenden Bedenken von Mitgliedern des Europäischen Parlaments und Imker-Verbänden hinsichtlich der Eignung des derzeit verwendeten Risikobewertungsmodells Rechnung.

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has published a review of the risks posed by pesticides to honey bees, bumble bees and solitary bees (attached). EFSA has acknowledged enormous shortcomings and lacks of the actual risk assessment scheme: disorientation, larvae toxicity and long-term effects of pesticides are not evaluated before authorization is granted. All pesticides that are in use in the European Union have thus been authorized without any correct assessment and may thus be highly toxic for honeybees and other pollinators. Considering EFSA’s acknowledgment on the weakness of the assessment scheme of pesticides risks to bees and the increasing number of articles pointing at neonicotinoids and phenylpyrazoles as main culprits in honeybees disappearing, Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Europe and the European Beekeeping Coordination (EBC) demand an immediate ban on these molecules by the European Commission.