English

Staniel is the old English word for the kestrel (Falco tinnunculus), the hovering falcon. Staniel is long forgotten now; our modern English name for the bird comes from the French crécerelle, and I was put in mind of all this recently on a weekend trip to Normandy, where I was delighted to find kestrels hovering all over the place, not least above motorway verges: on a 50-mile stretch of the A28 which runs between Alençon and Rouen, I counted 18 of them. Twenty years ago, this was also a typical sight on the M1, M4 and M6, so much so that the kestrel became nicknamed the motorway falcon; the long, undisturbed grass verges, even with heavy traffic thundering past, had turned out to be perfect hunting grounds for the voles and mice on which kestrels feed. But today it would be a rare occurrence indeed to spot 18 kestrels in 50 miles of the M1, for the bird is increasingly in trouble in Britain, with its numbers dropping by 32 per cent in the years between 1995 and 2010, and a staggering 36 per cent decline just between 2008 and 2009. In the 1960s, 70s and 80s, when birds of prey such as peregrine falcons and buzzards were struggling because of pesticide poisoning and persecution, kestrels were flourishing; but now the situation is reversed, and they are the most threatened of our common raptors.

Federal conservation efforts have been unsuccessful in reversing or even halting the decline of the Marbled Murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus), a release from the American Bird Conservancy said Friday. The birds nest in tall trees in old-growth forests in Washington, Oregon and California. The study, published in the journal The Condor, said Marbled Murrelet numbers in five different study areas fell sharply from 2001-10, from a total count of roughly 22,200 to about 16,700. "This study confirms the fears that many conservationists have held for years," Steve Holmer, a policy analyst for the American Bird Conservancy, said. "By showing that the Marbled Murrelet is still in sharp decline, the study emphasizes the need for stronger, more aggressive conservation measures." The Marbled Murrelet was listed in 1992 as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.

Leaf-cutting ants have evolved a range of defensive strategies which complicate the use of entomopathogens for their control. One of these behavioral strategies is self-grooming, which increases when ants detect the presence of fungal conidia on their integuments. We have previously shown that insecticides, when used at ultra-low concentrations, can be synergists of entomopathogenic fungi. It is possible that certain insecticides could modify ant behavior in a way that increases the chances of a fungal infection taking hold. The current study investigated the effects of the neonicotinoid insecticide Imidacloprid (IMI) and the entomopathogenic fungus Beauveria bassiana on self-grooming and locomotion behavior of Acromrymex subterraneus subterraneus workers when ants were exposed to the agents separately or together.

A total of 250 samples—including fruits, fruit juices, and baby foods (50 samples each); vegetables (70 samples); and cereals (30 samples)—were collected from Lucknow, India, and analyzed for the presence of imidacloprid residues. Imidacloprid was not detected in samples of fruit juices and baby foods. It was, however, detected in 38 samples of fruits, vegetables, and cereals, which is about 15.2% of the total samples. Of samples of fruits, 22% showed the presence of imidacloprid. Imidacloprid was detected in 24% of vegetable samples, and 33% of cereal samples showed the presence of imidacloprid. The calculated estimated daily intake ranged between 0.004 and 0.131 μg/kg body weight.

The Environment Minister, Richard Lochhead MSP, has refused to outlaw the use of nicotine-based toxic chemicals used by farmers to kill insects that damage crops. This is despite mounting evidence that the toxins harm bees, which pollinate strawberries, raspberries and other soft fruits. The 30,000-member Scottish Wildlife Trust is now launching a campaign to ban the pesticides, known as neonicotinoids. Trust officials met with Lochhead earlier this month, but came away frustrated by his failure to act."We are extremely disappointed with the Scottish Government's response to our call for a moratorium on neonicotinoids," said the trust's head of policy, Dr Maggie Keegan. "We urge the Government to adopt the precautionary principle and ban these chemicals until there is convincing scientific evidence that pollinator populations are not significantly harmed."

More than 300 diseases have been linked to pesticide use. These are not as a result of lab rat tests and studies either. They are based on real-life, epidemiological studies of humans around the country. Of the top 25 pesticides used to manage "facilities" and the 13 used in "landscape management," 11 are linked to cancer, five cause birth defects, 10 cause liver or kidney damage, 12 are linked to neurological problems and the list goes on. Of course, children are the most susceptible to injury from pesticide exposure because their systems are still developing. Many pesticides are endocrine disrupters, so the development that is supposed to happen happens "wrong." There is even now link to lower I.Q. in children when exposed. This is not a happy state of affairs.

MEPs have advised that certain uses of neonicotinoid pesticides should be banned or subject to strict controls in Europe as a growing scientific consensus that the chemicals are threatening insect pollinators. In a policy document released this week, MEPs and authors from the European Environment Agency said that, although declines witnessed in insect pollinator species, most notably bees, are undoubtedly the result of a range of stressors, "The use of neonicotinoids is increasingly held responsible for recent honeybee losses." The MEPs noted, "A widespread conclusion of different authors is that neonicotinoids can contribute to lethality even at low doses by making bee colonies more vulnerable to other disruptive factors. Recent scientific findings are urging for an update of the risk assessment of all neonicotinoid insecticides approved at European level and their effects on bees." They said that a review, which is currently being carried out by the European Food Safety Authority on bee health and pesticides will give new insights into the issue and provide support in attempts to reassess EU regulatory guidelines.

For decades, the plummeting populations of bees and other pollinators have provoked serious concern: the busy insects' work is essential to about a third of all the food we eat, including tomatoes, beans, apples and strawberries. The loss of flowery meadows, starving the bees, and the rise in parasites have long been blamed. But 2012 saw a third factor rise to prominence – neonicotinoid pesticides.

It is well known in psychotherapy that giving a name to an unnamed malady can make all the difference in dealing with it: for example, the difficult admission that a beloved relative is an alcoholic can suddenly make sense of years of irrational behaviour. Many people have ills, or troubles of their own mind, which they cannot name, but which they nonetheless know beyond doubt are there; and to arrive at a naming of them may not do away with them, but it may certainly help. I have long had a growing sense that something analogous to this applies to the natural world in Britain: that there is a malady which certain people sense, which distresses them, but which they cannot name, and so is never really discussed. The people who feel this are, by and large, older. They are over 50 – the baby boomers, the post-war generation that came of age in the 1960s and has always been characterised by the explosion of new freedoms and the sound of rock ’n’ roll.

I’m not quite ready to declare any victories, but the EU Report, Existing Scientific Evidence of the Effects of Neonicotinoids on Bees (attached) sent to me by Dr. Henk Tennekes certainly represents a significant change in the perception of the problem. It will be interesting to see how, or if, the EPA factors this into their handling of the neonicotinoids. Their response to criticisms raised in the Earth Focus documentary was “If, at any time during the reevaluation, the science indicates that neonicotinoid pesticides used according to the label instructions are not meeting the protection standards of FIFRA the EPA will take the necessary regulatory action.” This is a long string of weasel words providing for multiple opportunities for rationalization and evasion, but even with that it will be difficult for the EPA to dismiss the questions raised here without being seen as even more of an embarassment than they already are.