On Thursday 15 March, scientists, activists for defending bees and environmental NGOs in Brussels said the decline in bee populations has becomes such that this is no longer the time for procrastination. They urged member states to take a stance as a matter of urgency on the proposal for an almost total ban on the three most dangerous neonicotinoids responsible for killing bees.
Experts addressed the press before taking part in a workshop on pollinators, organised by the Commission’s environment services with all stakeholders, as an EU strategy on pollinators is being prepared.
All said they were impatient for such a strategy, which is the only way to address the problem more broadly, given that not only bees face decline. “This is a great opportunity for changing farming practice and for improving surveillance and data”, said Matt Shadow of the NGO Buglife. He expressed considerable concern about the impact that pesticides have on biodiversity – especially bees – but on butterflies, too, which are also in decline.
During the meeting of the committee on plants, animals, foodstuffs and animal feed (PAFF), on 22 and 23 March, there will be discussion on the latest EFSA conclusions, which confirmed the risk of acute toxicity of neonicotinoids for all bees (see EUROPE 11971). This comes after a vote by EU28 experts had been deferred in December (see EUROPE 11925), deplored Walter Haefeker of the European Professional Beekeepers Association (EPBA).
“This is another stalling manoeuvre. It is time for a vote and for member states to state their colours”, he said. He went on to point out that ten years have already gone by since the first alarm raised by farmers and the partial ban on using three neonicotinoids, decided by the EU in 2013 (see EUROPE 10852). Haefeker said the proposal is not a cure-all as it focuses only on bees and “provides for artificial exception for greenhouses” but it is nonetheless a first step in the right direction.
When asked on Thursday what the reasons were for postponing the vote, the Commission simply told Europe that there would be no vote.
To date, it appears certain that France, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Croatia, Slovenia, Luxembourg and Malta will support the proposal on the table. Hungary and Romania are apparently against it. Germany could abstain or vote against.
“All techniques for massive use of highly toxic neonicotinoids have an impact on biodiversity and birds and even on fish found in aquatic vertebrates”, stressed Jean Marc Bonmatin of France, who is a researcher at the CNRS. In his view, neonicotinoids are the symptom of agriculture that uses huge amounts of pesticides as a “preventive treatment when alternative solutions exist”. These alternatives are economically profitable. “One should not treat seeds if there are no harmful insects. In the event of problems, one must treat with the most effective pesticides and, as a last resort only use neonicotinoids”, he added.
The use of a mutual insurance fund to compensate farmers who do not use pesticides in a prophylactic way can also prove effective if the insurance pays the difference in the event of poor yields. Bonmatin said: “€40 for insecticides compared with €3.5 for the insurance per hectare is a good deal for farmers”. (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)