11 ms·
Neonicotinoids disrupt aquatic food webs and decrease fishery yields
- ptah 7y agothis is the silent killer. climate change gets all the attention but pesticides can kill everything
- jackfoxy 7y agoIt's more like switching from fossil fuels gets all the attention. That's because there is big money to be made. Not so much money to be made by reversing deforestation, not sending garbage (dubious recycling) to 3rd world countries, not releasing toxic substances into the environment, etc.
- ltbarcly3 7y agoSo if we stopped using pesticides tomorrow things would recover very quickly. Pesticides are destroyed by exposure to UV radiation and weathering very quickly, that is why farmers have to keep applying them over and over. They don't generally persist in the environment or in living things for more than a few days or weeks, with the exception of biological reservoirs where the few types that can accumulate in living things might last for months (and these types are not common, this is why DDT was banned in the first place). If we stop dumping massive amounts of CO2 into the air tomorrow the Earth will continue to warm for hundreds of years. It's clearly much, much more important to deal with CO2.
- hydraxis 7y agoEvery day, hundreds of living species are disappearing forever, mostly due to human direct actions on the environment and particularly industrial farming. I personally find this much more important (and sad) than climate change.
- ltbarcly3 7y ago"Every day {bad thing} happens due to {list of things that aren't pesticide use} therefore pesticides should be banned." This is embarrassing. It's like arguing against wind power because wind turbines are held down by cement, and making cement releases CO2. If people didn't use pesticides, yields would go way, way, way down, and more land would have to be used for intensive farming to produce the same amount of food. So you are basically arguing for pesticide use in your argument against pesticides.
- JanSolo 7y agoWhy is there no rush to phase out the use of these chemicals? My understanding is that they are a relatively recent invention and that we used different, less toxic, pesticides before. It should be a simple task to outlaw the neonicotinoids and return to the old pesticides. Sure, yields might drop a little, but that's better than an existential threat to our whole food chain, no?
- hollerith 7y agoWhere did you get the idea that the pesticides commonly used before the common use of neonicotinoids were less toxic? (They might be less toxic to bees and the zooplankton mentioned in the OP, but they were more toxic to, e.g., human agricultural workers.)
- epanchin 7y agoBecause the fish were alive.
- tptacek 7y agoNo, organophosphates were killing the fish, even at very low exposures.
- epanchin 7y agosource? I can’t see that in the article. The article states that when neonicotiniods were used, fish stocks collapsed. From this, there are only two valid conclusions; Pesticides was not previously being used, or the previous pesticide was less dangerous.
- jeffdavis 7y agoThere's a big enviromental problem with the notion that things are either approved/acceptable or not; binary. Neonicotinoids are probably good compared to a lot of alternatives. But by being one of few approved choices, they are used to such a huge extent that minor problems become major. Another example is gasoline. It's very clean, especially with a catalytic converter. It's so clean that one of the worst things you can say about it is: if billions of people use gasoline, it upsets the balance of CO2. If we use a little more variety, even if average "badness" seems worse, we will be better off. But our policies push us toward homogeneity.
- yawz 7y agoAs a beekeeper I can tell you that Neonics are a very bad and serious problem. I’m surprised that people are not much more outraged by poisoning themselves and their children.
- tptacek 7y agoAgain, the whole point of neonicotinoids is that they're less toxic to mammals than their predecessors (primarily organophosphates) and can be used in smaller amounts. The pollination industry does not appear to be collapsing despite the widespread, longstanding use of neonicotinoids. Who exactly is being poisoned?
- fhars 7y agoWild insects and birds: https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2019-09-20/birds-collapse-us-bees-ecology-environment/11520008 https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2019-09-20/birds-collaps...
- hanniabu 7y ago> The pollination industry does not appear to be collapsing despite the widespread, longstanding use of neonicotinoids Uhhhh, what? It won't happen overnight, just like smoking won't cause you to die after a few pulls. But regardless, there are reported declines from neonicotinoids. https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms12459 https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms12459 https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/neonicotinoid-pesticides-slowly-killing-bees https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/neonicotinoid-pesticide... https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/09/widely-used-pesticide-makes-birds-lose-weight/ https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/09/widel...
- gcheong 7y ago"It is now well known that neonicotinoids negatively affect pollinators" Do they?: https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2019/11/01/global-consensus-finds-neonicotinoids-not-driving-honeybee-health-problems-why-is-europe-so-determined-to-ban-them/?fbclid=IwAR0AmQuzlKAtTNwAJ40BW-LTpW-m4A5lUUVAv2Y2HHe1mFKF9ajdsPm1JYI https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2019/11/01/global-consens... "Using data on zooplankton, water quality, and annual fishery yields of eel and smelt, we show that neonicotinoid application to watersheds since 1993 coincided with an 83% decrease in average zooplankton biomass in spring, causing the smelt harvest to collapse from 240 to 22 tons in Lake Shinji, Shimane Prefecture, Japan" Isn't this mistaking correlation with causation? I find this assertion dubious mainly because the mode by which neonicotinoids are applied is by seed coating rather than spraying so how are they getting into water? I don't have access to the full study - did they actually measure water levels of the pesticides and how did they rule out other factors?
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- carapace 7y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Entine#Genetics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Entine#Genetics > Entine is the founding director of the Genetic Literacy Project (GLP), operating as the Science Literacy Project, which is the umbrella organization for the GLP, Genetic Expert News Service (GENeS) and the Epigenetics Literacy Project. GLP focuses on the intersection of media, policy and genetics, both human and agricultural. > Entine has written three books on genetics and two on chemicals. Let Them Eat Precaution: How Politics is Undermining the Genetic Revolution examines the controversy over genetic modification in agriculture.[20] > In 2007, Entine published Abraham's Children: Race, Identity and the DNA of the Chosen People which examined the shared ancestry of Jews, Christians and Muslims, and addressed the question "Who is a Jew?" as seen through the prism of DNA.[21] > Entine's first book, Taboo: Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports and Why We’re Afraid to Talk About It was inspired by the documentary on black athletes written with Brokaw in 1989.[22] It was favorably reviewed by The New York Times[23] but criticized by others[who?] who said that the subject could encourage a racist view of human relations.[24] > Entine supports the production of GMO foods, and has criticized writer Caitlin Shetterly after she wrote an article in Elle magazine saying that GMO corn had made her ill.[25][26][27]
- red-indian 7y agoNeonicotinoids are one of the best and safest pesticide treatments for termites. You dig a narrow ditch around the building's foundation, you mix in the neonicotinoid with the dirt, and you refill the ditch. Used this way there is absolutely no risk to bees or aquaculture. Neonicotinoids are one of the best and safest pesticide treatments for flea and ticks on cats and dogs. You apply it to the back of their neck and it lasts 30 days. Used this way there is absolutely no risk to bees or aquaculture. Neonicotinoids, although effective, are not suitable for use in fruit orchards or golf courses, or where they can enter water systems, yet are used in these contexts. When you buy a neonicotinoid for termite control the instructions explain that it is illegal to use it for those other things. Yet you can instead buy the exact same neonicotinoid for fruit trees where the instructions explain that it is legal for that use. This makes little sense. Losing neonicotinoids for termite, tick and flea control would be a grave mistake and loss and give no advantage. Modifying neonicotinoid instructions to ban usages that are obviously causing problems is reasonable.
- stinos 7y agoyou mix in the neonicotinoid with the dirt, and you refill the ditch. Used this way there is absolutely no risk to bees or aquaculture Does this mean it's not possible that e.g. it starts raining, the neonicotinoid mixes with the water which then eventually makes it into a nearby stream? I.e. just like your thrid paragraph describes?
- red-indian 7y agoThe trench is about 4 inches wide. It's under the eaves. You can also do it on the inside of the building if you have a crawl space. Dig 10 ft of trench. Pour 5 gallons water in trench mixed with something like 1 oz neonicotinoid. Then backfill the trench. The neonicotinoid bonds with the soil and remains active for about a decade, stopping termites from entering the building. Any house meeting building codes is going to have a roof and eaves that prevent large amounts of rain from entering this area. The area has non-neonicotonoid soil on top of it so there's no casual run off. You'd have to have leeching through the soil to whatever watershed you have. This is impossible because the neonicotonoids bond with the soil and do not move once set. With fruit trees it also has long lasting action, bonding with the very bark of the tree and remaining for many years. This is a problem since honey bees come to the tree and get microdoses which appear to mess with their navigation. But the interesting part is other pollinators don't show these effects. Which is perhaps because honey bees have the food they store (honey) harvested by their "keepers" and are then given commercial corn syrup mix (grown with pesticides and including residue) as their only food. The simplistic nutrition of this substance compared to real honey weakens these fellows, compounding the disorienting effects of the neonicotonoids. In OP's Japanese study they are mass applying neonicotonoids directly to the surface of a watershed, which resulted in huge problems to the down stream aquaculture. This use of neonicotonoids is a terrible idea and the adverse effects were not surprising. I'm quite surprised that mass application of neonicotonoids to a watershed isn't considered a criminal act.
- r00fus 7y agoAre neonics known/suspected as a cause as to why mosquito and insect populations are down so much in the US?
- crb002 7y agoSigh. Why doesn’t EPA hold auctions like FCC on dangerous pesticide use? Market will apply them where they are most needed, govt gets revenue, environment is saved.
- dalex00 7y agoSaw a documentary banned in France for certain use as bee population decreases massively e.g. used for corn. Problem goes into the ground kill every life in the ground and get into every plant around the crop and also bird population decreases. Documentary showed that Bayer tried to sabotage the investigation. I think the risks massively exceeds the benefits.
- pirocks 7y agoI'm not sure I understand this comment. Perhaps someone could rephrase it?
- AtlasBarfed 7y agoWe need to move to vertical industrial farming.