[House Hearing, 113 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
HEARING TO REVIEW CURRENT RESEARCH AND APPLICATION OF MANAGEMENT
STRATEGIES TO CONTROL PESTS AND DISEASES OF POLLINATORS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HORTICULTURE, RESEARCH, BIOTECHNOLOGY, AND FOREIGN
AGRICULTURE
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
APRIL 29, 2014
__________
Serial No. 113-12
Printed for the use of the Committee on Agriculture
agriculture.house.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
87-765 PDF WASHINGTON : 2014
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma, Chairman
BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia, COLLIN C. PETERSON, Minnesota,
Vice Chairman Ranking Minority Member
STEVE KING, Iowa MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina
RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas DAVID SCOTT, Georgia
MIKE ROGERS, Alabama JIM COSTA, California
K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania KURT SCHRADER, Oregon
BOB GIBBS, Ohio MARCIA L. FUDGE, Ohio
AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia JAMES P. McGOVERN, Massachusetts
SCOTT R. TIPTON, Colorado SUZAN K. DelBENE, Washington
ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, Arkansas GLORIA NEGRETE McLEOD, California
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee FILEMON VELA, Texas
CHRISTOPHER P. GIBSON, New York MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM, New Mexico
VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire
REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin RICHARD M. NOLAN, Minnesota
KRISTI L. NOEM, South Dakota PETE P. GALLEGO, Texas
DAN BENISHEK, Michigan WILLIAM L. ENYART, Illinois
JEFF DENHAM, California JUAN VARGAS, California
STEPHEN LEE FINCHER, Tennessee CHERI BUSTOS, Illinois
DOUG LaMALFA, California SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York
RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois JOHN GARAMENDI, California
CHRIS COLLINS, New York
TED S. YOHO, Florida
VANCE M. McALLISTER, Louisiana
______
Nicole Scott, Staff Director
Kevin J. Kramp, Chief Counsel
Tamara Hinton, Communications Director
Robert L. Larew, Minority Staff Director
______
Subcommittee on Horticulture, Research, Biotechnology, and Foreign
Agriculture
AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia, Chairman
VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri KURT SCHRADER, Oregon, Ranking
JEFF DENHAM, California Minority Member
STEPHEN LEE FINCHER, Tennessee SUZAN K. DelBENE, Washington
DOUG LaMALFA, California JIM COSTA, California
RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois MARCIA L. FUDGE, Ohio
CHRIS COLLINS, New York ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire
TED S. YOHO, Florida JUAN VARGAS, California
SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Costa, Hon. Jim, a Representative in Congress from California,
submitted letter on behalf of Almond Hullers & Processors
Association.................................................... 39
Scott, Hon. Austin, a Representative in Congress from Georgia,
opening statement.............................................. 1
Prepared statement........................................... 2
Submitted statement on behalf of Gene Harrington, Vice
President, Government Affairs, National Pest Management
Association................................................ 39
Schrader, Hon. Kurt, a Representative in Congress from Oregon,
opening statement.............................................. 3
Witnesses
Pettis, Dr. Jeffrey S., Research Leader, Bee Research Laboratory,
Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Beltsville, MD................................................. 5
Prepared statement........................................... 6
Submitted questions.......................................... 43
Supplementary material....................................... 41
Cummings, Arthur Daniel ``Dan'', Chief Executive Officer, Capay
Farms; Chief Financial Officer, Olivarez Honey Bees, Chico, CA. 8
Prepared statement........................................... 10
Submitted letter............................................. 42
Stone, Jeff, Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer,
Oregon Association of Nurseries, Wilsonville, OR............... 12
Prepared statement........................................... 14
Fischer, Dr. David L., Director, Pollinator Safety & Manager,
Bayer North American Bee Care Center, Research Triangle Park,
NC............................................................. 17
Prepared statement........................................... 19
HEARING TO REVIEW CURRENT RESEARCH AND APPLICATION OF MANAGEMENT
STRATEGIES TO CONTROL PESTS AND DISEASES OF POLLINATORS
----------
TUESDAY, APRIL 29, 2014
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Horticulture, Research, Biotechnology, and
Foreign Agriculture,
Committee on Agriculture,
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:01 a.m., in
Room 1300 of the Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Austin
Scott [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Members present: Representatives Scott, Hartzler, Denham,
LaMalfa, Davis, Collins, Schrader, DelBene, Costa, Vargas, and
Peterson (ex officio).
Staff present: DaNita Murray, Debbie Smith, John Goldberg,
Nicole Scott, Tamara Hinton, C. Clark Ogilvie, Keith Jones, Liz
Friedlander, John Konya, and Riley Pagett.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. AUSTIN SCOTT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM GEORGIA
The Chairman. Good morning. This hearing of the
Subcommittee on Horticulture, Research, Biotechnology, and
Foreign Agriculture to review current research and application
of management strategies to control pests and diseases of
pollinators, will come to order.
I thank you all for being here today to discuss an issue
that is extremely important to our country's agricultural
industry. Today's hearing of the Subcommittee on Horticulture,
Research, Biotechnology, and Foreign Agriculture will review
the current health of our nation's bee pollinators. Bees play a
critical role in plant reproduction, contributing an estimated
$16 billion annually in added value to more than 30 percent of
the crops that we produce in this country. My colleagues and I
are pleased to welcome several witnesses who have direct
involvement and first-hand experience with bee pollinators.
Over the past several years, beekeepers have experienced
significant losses due to colony collapse. The precise reason
for this Colony Collapse Disorder is not yet known. However, a
leading cause appears to be the Varroa mite pests. Some believe
other factors including disease, diet, nutrition, genetics,
habitat loss, beekeeping management practices and the improper
use of pesticides may also play a role.
To address these issues, the Agriculture Committee
authorized increased funding for pollinator research as part of
the 2008 Farm Bill. Similarly, the 2014 Farm Bill reauthorized
and expanded many of these provisions addressing managing
honeybees and native pollinators as part of the research,
conservation and specialty crop program.
As we hear from our distinguished panel of witnesses today,
we hope to gain a better understanding of the role of our
nation's pollinators and the status of research both on causes
of Colony Collapse Disorder and the possible tools to combat
this problem.
Before us today is a panel of four distinguished witnesses.
We are joined by Dr. Jeff Pettis, Research Leader of the USDA-
ARS Bee Research Laboratory. Dr. Pettis oversees all USDA
research concerning threats that may play into the sharp
decline of our nation's pollinators. We are also joined by Mr.
Dan Cummings, CEO of Capay Farms. Did I say that correctly, Mr.
Cummings?
Mr. Cummings. Capay.
The Chairman. Capay Farms in Chico, California. Capay Farms
manages over 10,000 acres of almonds and walnuts in the Central
Valley of California, also is partner and CFO of Olivarez Honey
Bees.
Mr. Cummings. Olivarez.
The Chairman. Olivarez. That may be the Georgia-California
divide there. Every year he ensures California is provided with
a healthy supply of honeybees.
Also we have Mr. Jeff Stone, Executive Director and CEO of
the Oregon Association of Nurseries. The Oregon Association of
Nurseries represents more than 1,200 growers, retailers,
landscapers and suppliers in the ornamental horticultural
industry. We have Dr. David Fischer, Director of Pollinator
Safety Group and Manager of the Bayer North America Bee Center
located in the Research Triangle of North Carolina. Dr.
Fischer's expertise is in the area of terrestrial exotoxicology
and risk assessment.
We appreciate the time each of you have given to us, and we
will have a more detailed introduction of you as we go forward.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Scott follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Austin Scott, a Representative in Congress
from Georgia
Good afternoon.
Thank you all for being here today to discuss an issue that is
extremely important to our country's agriculture industry.
Today's hearing of the Subcommittee on Horticulture, Research,
Biotechnology, and Foreign Agriculture will review the current health
of our nation's bee pollinators. Bees play a critical role in plant
reproduction contributing an estimated $16 billion annually in added
value to more than 30% of the crops we produce.
My colleagues and I are pleased to welcome several witnesses who
have direct involvement and first-hand experience with bee pollinators.
Over the past several years, beekeepers have experienced
significant losses due to colony collapse. The precise reason for this
Colony Collapse Disorder is not yet known, however, a leading cause
appears to be the Varroa mite pest. Some believe other factors
including disease, diet and nutrition, genetics, habitat loss,
beekeeping management practices and the improper use of pesticides may
also play a role.
To address these issues, the Agriculture Committee authorized
increased funding for pollinator research as part of the 2008 Farm
Bill. Similarly, the 2014 Farm Bill reauthorized and expanded many of
these provisions, addressing managed honey bees and native pollinators
as part of the research, conservation, and specialty crop programs.
As we hear from our distinguished panel of witnesses today, we hope
to gain a better understanding of the role of our nation's pollinators
and the status of research both on causes of Colony Collapse Disorder
and the possible tools to combat this problem.
Before us today is a panel of four distinguished witnesses:
We are joined by Dr. Jeff Pettis, Research Leader of the USDA-ARS
Bee Research Laboratory. Dr. Pettis oversees all USDA research
concerning threats that may play into the sharp decline of our nation's
pollinators.
We're also joined by Mr. Dan Cummings, CEO of Capay Farms in Chico,
California. Capay Farms manages over 10,000 acres of almonds and
walnuts in the Central Valley of California. Also, as partner and CFO
of Olivarez Honey Bees, every year, he ensures California is provided
with a healthy supply of honeybees.
Also, we have Mr. Jeff Stone, Executive Director and CEO of the
Oregon Association of Nurseries. The Oregon Association of Nurseries
represents more than 1,200 growers, retailers, landscapers, and
suppliers in the ornamental horticulture industry.
Finally, we have Dr. David Fischer, Director of Pollinator Safety
Group and Manager of the Bayer North American Bee Care Center located
in the Research Triangle region of North Carolina. Dr. Fischer's
expertise is in the area of terrestrial exotoxicology and risk
assessment.
We appreciate the time each of you have given to prepare for this
hearing. Your testimony will be important to evaluate the current state
of pollinator health.
Thank you.
I would like to recognize my colleague from Oregon, Ranking Member
Schrader, for any opening remarks he may have.
The Chairman. I would now like to recognize my colleague
from Oregon, the Ranking Member, Mr. Kurt Schrader, for any
opening remarks that he may have.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. KURT SCHRADER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM OREGON
Mr. Schrader. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I really appreciate
the opportunity to have this hearing. As we all know, honeybees
are critical to agriculture. Without them, we don't have much
of the agricultural products that we know and love and create a
lot of economic opportunity for our country.
Honeybee populations suffered over a 30 percent decline
over the past 20 years. The Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) has
been a longstanding area of research. Honeybees pollinate over
90 different food, fiber and seed crops across the country, a
$15 billion annual benefit. It covers the gamut of crops as we
know. There are over two million colonies transferred all over
the country to pollinate our crops by commercial beekeepers.
I have some of that experience myself, personally. Our
family had a small apiary we used on our farm along with some
commercial beekeepers who would help us pollinate our crops.
The losses became acute as I understand it back in 2006-
2007 winter, and beekeepers have been struggling ever since.
The 2008 Farm Bill for the first time funded research into what
some of the causes of CCD are. We furthered that initiative in
the 2014 Farm Bill, to carry that research through 2018.
As a veterinarian, I learned that diseases, whether they
are in animals or in our crops, are multi-faceted. Rarely is
there a single cause, I believe that is what I am hearing from
folks in the industry and the folks that benefit from
pollination is that we are having to deal with several
different causes and figure out how best to manage what to do
with the problem. The press sometimes will focus on one reason,
oftentime there is more than one cause. I hope this hearing
adds some thoughtful science to the process and moves us
further down the road to good policy.
And with that, I yield back Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Schrader. And as I said
before, today we have a panel of four distinguished witnesses.
Dr. Jeff Pettis is Research Leader of the USDA, the ARS Bee
Research Laboratory. I would now like to yield to Mr. LaMalfa
for an introduction of Mr. Cummings who is from his district.
Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am glad today to
have Mr. Cummings from northern California, a constituent of
mine here. Dan is the Capay Farms which is responsible for
managing over 10,000 acres of almonds and walnuts, also the CFO
of Olivarez Honey Bees, one of the world's largest producers of
queen bees for resale. He is a frequent speaker at national
honeybee conventions, almond industry research conferences and
international trade shows. His 30+ years of experience have
prepared him as a provider of background information and
frequently quoted authority on almonds, honeybees in numerous
publications and media, including The Wall Street Journal,
Fortune magazine, Newsweek, and the BBC.
Dan is also a director on the Blue Diamond Growers who have
very graciously provided us with snacks here today. And it has
helped me to illustrate that we say almond without the ``l'' in
California a lot.
So he is on the Blue Diamond Growers as a Director and
Immediate Past Chairman of Project Apis m. and the Chairman of
the Bee Task Force of the Almond Board of California. Dan has
traveled extensively, having visited over 50 countries around
the world, often promoting almonds during his tenure as Vice
Chairman of the Almond Board and Chairman of that
organization's Marketing Committee.
He holds a BA in Economics from Stanford University, an MBA
from Harvard and has been an instructor of the Capstone Course
on Competition and Strategy in the College of Business at
California State University in Chico.
Dan, thank you for appearing today. Mr. Chairman, I yield
back.
The Chairman. I would like to now recognize Mr. Schrader,
again, for an introduction of Mr. Stone from Oregon.
Mr. Schrader. I will make it brief, Mr. Chairman. I am just
really pleased to have Mr. Stone here. Jeff is no stranger to
Capitol Hill and the goings on, so he brings a wealth of
knowledge about the process. He has been the Executive Director
of the Oregon Association of Nurseries for a number of years
now and has great reputation back home. He is one of the
leaders in our agricultural community when it comes to solving
problems that affect all agriculture, and I really want to
welcome him here. I appreciate him coming.
The Chairman. And again, we have Dr. David Fischer with
Pollinator Safety and Manager for Bayer North American Bee Care
Center from North Carolina. Gentlemen? Dr. Pettis, your opening
statements.
STATEMENT OF DR. JEFFREY S. PETTIS, RESEARCH LEADER, BEE
RESEARCH LABORATORY, AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
BELTSVILLE, MD
Dr. Pettis. Chairman Scott, Ranking Member Schrader, and
Members of the Subcommittee, I am Dr. Jeff Pettis, Research
Leader of the Bee Research Laboratory in Beltsville, Maryland,
a research laboratory dedicated to honeybee health. I am
pleased to appear before you today to discuss a serious threat
to the honeybee, the parasitic mite, Varroa, and also
pollinator decline, an issue that threatens U.S. food security.
About \1/3\ of our diet directly or indirectly benefits
from honeybee pollination, and these tend to be the foods that
add flavor and diversity to our diet, the fruits, nuts and
vegetables that we enjoy. We can survive on grains, like corn,
rice and wheat, but we thrive on the fruits, nuts and
vegetables that bees provide.
I want to focus my remarks now on one specific threat to
honeybees, the parasitic mite Varroa, a modern plague on
honeybees and responsible for the deaths of massive numbers of
colonies not only here in the United States but worldwide.
When Varroa mite was first found in this country in 1987,
we had a strong population of honeybees in the wild. Beekeepers
managed more than three million colonies for crop pollination,
and their winter losses were typically around 10 to 15 percent.
Today wild populations of bees are virtually gone. We manage
2.5 to 2.7 million colonies, and the economic losses and the
sustainability of beekeeping is at a tipping point. Ultimately,
if no solutions are found for the Varroa mite and other plagues
on honeybees, our food could become more expensive.
Varroa mites are like ticks. They suck the blood of the bee
physically and are a huge parasite in relation to the size of
the honeybee. To illustrate this, if a honeybee were the size
of a person, it would be like you having a tick the size of
this large navel orange feeding on you. So again, if you can
imagine that size parasite on an average human, you can see the
Varroa mite is in fact a very physically damaging parasite and
in addition, it acts much like a mosquito and will transmit
viruses and other diseases that affect the bee.
What bees and beekeepers need is research to build better
tools to truly reduce the size of the problem the Varroa
represents. Researchers at USDA's scientific agencies, the
Agricultural Research Service and the National Institute of
Food and Agriculture are working short term to provide better
management practices and getting that information out to the
beekeepers. For long-term solutions, we are looking at the
genetics of both the mite and the bee, and we are also looking
at better ways of nationally monitoring the bee health around
the country.
To give you an idea of how seriously the critical need for
new solutions is, this past February USDA hosted a Varroa
Summit. We brought together more than 75 individuals
representing a broad array of stakeholders, and they talked for
2 days and they came up with a number of long-term and short-
term solutions. We have a report coming out from that which
will help guide us in future research on Varroa.
However, even if the Varroa mite problem disappeared
tomorrow, and I want to emphasize that, even if the Varroa mite
problem disappeared tomorrow, honeybee health is complicated.
This would not by itself solve all the problems facing
honeybees. In the last 20 years, a whole host of new honeybee
pathogens, viruses, bacteria, fungi, mites, have entered the
United States, and Colony Collapse Disorder, a syndrome for
which scientists still do not have a cause, while it has
abated, continues to take a toll on apiaries. Exposure to
pesticides in the environment may be weakening bee colonies,
possibly making them more susceptible to other stresses. A lack
of diversity in nectar and pollen resources may also play a
major role in stressing honeybee colonies in the environment.
Last, a loss of honeybees may reflect a larger issue of
pollinator decline, with honeybee acting as an indicator
species. The relative contributions of different stressors to
colony deaths, including Colony Collapse Disorder, is not well
understood, and solving this problem will take an all-hands-on-
deck approach, including research, public education, increased
foraging lands and public-private partnerships to address the
loss of pollinators.
To meet today's increasing pollination demands, we need
well over three million managed honeybee colonies in this
country. To meet that goal, we need to make beekeeping
profitable again, and I believe that starts with limiting the
impact of Varroa, but it goes beyond that.
So I would like to thank you again for the opportunity to
speak to you today about pollinator health and food security,
and I will be glad to answer questions as time permits.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Pettis follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. Jeffrey S. Pettis, Research Leader, Bee
Research Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Beltsville, MD
Chairman Scott, Ranking Member Schrader, and Members of the
Subcommittee, I am Dr. Jeff Pettis, Research Leader of the Bee Research
Laboratory in Beltsville, Maryland, a research laboratory dedicated to
honey bee health and part of the USDA Agricultural Research Service. I
am pleased to appear before you to discuss a serious threat to the
honey bee and thus our food security in the United States.
Ultimately, if no long-term solutions are developed to slow bee
decline, consumers will pay more for the food they buy. About one bite
in three of the food we eat in the U.S. directly or indirectly benefits
from bee pollination. These tend to be the foods that add vital
nutrients, flavor and diversity to our diet: the fruits, nuts and
vegetables that maintain health. Bees pollinate more than 90 crops and
are responsible for $15 billion in added crop value. Over half the
nation's bees are needed to pollinate almonds alone, a $3 billion crop
with increasing acreage.
One of the biggest problems facing honey bees and beekeepers today
is the Varroa mite. The Varroa mite's full name is Varroa destructor,
and it is perhaps the most aptly named parasite ever to enter this
country. Varroa destructor is a modern honey bee plague. It has been
responsible for the deaths of massive numbers of colonies both within
the United States and worldwide. This mite is native to Asia where it
normally parasitizes Apis cerana, the eastern or Asian honey bee, an
entirely different species of honey bee from Apis mellifera, or the
western honey bee, that was brought to the New World by Europeans, and
on which the U.S. now depends for crop pollination. Asian honey bees
have some natural defenses against the mite and consequently are rarely
seriously affected by the Varroa. European honey bees, on the other
hand, have been devastatingly susceptible to Varroa mite damage. The
simple act of feeding by Varroa, where it pierces the skin of the bee
to suck blood, can introduce bacteria and weaken the immune system of
bees. Varroa mites also transmit an array of destructive viruses to
honey bees, such as deformed wing virus.
When Varroa destructor was first found in the Unites States in
1987, beekeepers managed more than three million colonies for crop
pollination and their winter losses were typically about 10 to 15
percent. Today, beekeepers are having trouble maintaining 2.5 million
managed colonies, winter losses are averaging over 30 percent a year,
and the economic sustainability of beekeeping is at the tipping point.
Beekeepers have identified Varroa mites as a major problem. The costs
of mite controls and replacing hives that only live 1-2 years, as
opposed to living 3-5 years before the arrival of Varroa, are all
accumulating to the point where Varroa mites are making beekeeping no
longer financially viable in this country.
For commercial beekeepers, there are currently only three fast-
acting treatments for Varroa mites: the miticides fluvalinate,
coumaphos, and amitraz. While there are also a number of folk remedies
and organic treatments, none work as well as these other treatments and
all involve more labor and costs to apply. However, Varroa mites are
adapting and becoming resistant to fluvalinate and coumaphos. Some new
treatments are in the pipeline but even a new effective miticide will
only provide a short-term solution because it is only a matter of time
before the Varroa mite will adapt to that miticide as well, continuing
the destructive cycle. What beekeepers truly need are long term
solutions to Varroa mites.
The beekeeper's best hope is research that can build better tools
to reduce the size of the Varroa mite problem. Researchers at USDA's
scientific agencies--the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) and the
National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) are on that trail
right now. In ARS, scientists are working with a total budget of
approximately $11 million in FY 2014, with approximately $3 million
targeting Varroa specifically. Additional temporary funding of $1.3
million in 2013 has been provided on bee health through the Areawide
Program of ARS. These funds have helped augment the base funds and
allow scientists to work closely with commercial beekeepers to try and
improve colony survival.
ARS scientists are developing improved best management practices to
help beekeepers deal with immediate issues of overcoming Varroa mites.
By applying microbiological, genomic, physiological, and toxicological
approaches, we are creating new tools for beekeepers to build and
maintain healthy bee populations. For long-term solutions, ARS is
looking to the genetics of both the mite and the honey bee. ARS has an
active breeding program designed to increase resistance mechanisms in
European honey bees. For example, some bees have a propensity for nest
cleaning and grooming behaviors and these have been exploited in
breeding programs as control measures. ARS is also working on improving
epidemiological nation-wide monitoring of pest and diseases,
biochemical disruption and a host of other possibilities.
NIFA is supporting extramural research, extension, and educational
programming to scientists, extension specialists and educators to
address declines in pollinators. Dozens of competitive and capacity
grants are focused on novel strategies to manage the Varroa mite, which
are expected to better protect pollinators from this devastating pest.
Since 2010, NIFA has awarded competitive grants on pollinator health
worth an estimated $13 million, including approximately $2.6 million
targeting Varroa specifically. Varroa does not act alone on bee health
and thus many of these projects take a holistic approach, looking into
the multiple factors affecting honey bees and other pollinators. In one
NIFA funded project, University of Minnesota extension specialists are
assisting honey bee queen breeders in selecting for hygienic behavior,
a trait that helps bees defend against Varroa mites and other diseases.
In another, Cornell scientists are testing the hypothesis that giving
colonies smaller hives will provide the mites fewer opportunities to
reproduce and this will lower the per capita level of mite infestation
of the bees.
The work at USDA is part of a government-wide response to the large
and ongoing declines in pollinator populations in the U.S. and world-
wide. The President's FY 2015 budget proposes over $71 million for USDA
alone to focus on this issue. This includes a $25 million initiative to
create an Innovation Institute on Pollination and Pollinator Health, a
competitive program that will be managed by NIFA.
As a measure of the seriousness with which the Varroa issue is
regarded, USDA hosted a Varroa Summit in February of this year. More
than 75 representatives and researchers from beekeeping organizations,
agricultural commodity groups, the crop protection industry,
universities and Federal agencies such as APHIS, ARS, NIFA, NRCS and
EPA attended to discuss research needed to solve the problem of Varroa
mites. The attendees identified numerous specific short-term and long-
term research priorities. Most of these concerned the need to develop
the underpinnings for new approaches to controlling Varroa mites:
finding natural biocontrol agents, developing RNA interference as a
control measure, developing areawide management practices and improving
best management practices, and identifying genetic markers and breeding
for bee traits that will provide Varroa survivability. Attendees also
recognized the need for more extensive communication between
researchers and beekeepers for collection of epidemiological and
economic Varroa mite data and for transmitting new information from
researchers on techniques for controlling Varroa. One potential outcome
of the Varroa Summit will be an increased level of collaboration
between scientists and more public-private and Federal-university
partnerships.
But even if the Varroa mite problem were solved today, this would
not by itself solve all of the problems facing honey bees and
beekeepers. In the last 20 years, a whole host of new honey bee
pathogens--viruses, bacteria, fungi, mites--have entered the United
States. We know that the effects of viruses in particular are
significantly exacerbated when coupled with the presence of Varroa.
Colony Collapse Disorder, a syndrome for which scientists still do not
have a cause, continues to take a toll on apiaries. Exposure to
pesticides in the environment may be weakening bee colonies, possibly
making them more susceptible to other stresses. A lack of diversity in
nectar and pollen sources may also play a major role in stressing honey
bee colonies. The loss of honey bees may also reflect a much larger
issue of general pollinator declines, with honey bees acting as an
indicator species. The relative contributions of different stressors
for CCD is not well understood and solving this problem will take an
all hands on deck approach, including research, public education,
increased foraging lands and public-private partnerships to address CCD
and the larger loss of pollinators.
To meet today's increasing pollination demands, we need well over
three million managed honey bee colonies in this country. To do that,
we need to make beekeeping profitable again and that starts with
controlling Varroa destructor.
Mr. Chairman, I look forward to working with you in support of
honey bees and pollinator health, a vital link in U.S. food security.
Thank you again for your time. I would be pleased to answer any
questions you have on Varroa mites and pollinator health.
The Chairman. Thank you, doctor. Mr. Cummings?
STATEMENT OF ARTHUR DANIEL ``DAN'' CUMMINGS, CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER, CAPAY FARMS; CHIEF FINANCIAL
OFFICER, OLIVAREZ HONEY BEES, CHICO, CA
Mr. Cummings. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the
Committee. Thank you for inviting me to testify this morning on
the importance of honeybee health to the United States' almond
industry. My name is Dan Cummings. I am the CEO of Capay Farms
where I produce almonds and walnuts. Additionally, I am the
Chairman of the Almond Board of California Bee Task Force and
have served as Vice Chairman of that board. My almonds are
delivered to Blue Diamond Growers on whose board I serve. Blue
Diamond is a nonprofit, farmer-owned marketing cooperative.
Almonds are grown exclusively in California and are the
largest tree crop in California with a value of $6 billion.
Over $4 billion of almonds were exported to the world last
year. Over 80 percent of the world's almond supply is produced
in California.
The honeybee is essential for the global food supply. One
third of our diet comes from honeybee-pollinated plants. The
continuing health of the honeybee population is a matter of
concern to the global agricultural community. Managed honeybees
are vital to more than 90 bee pollinated crops in the United
States, and nearly $20 billion in farm income is dependent on
honeybees. California almond growers depend on honeybees for
their livelihood. Approximately 1.6 million colonies,
approximately \2/3\ of all the commercially kept honeybees in
the United States, are needed to pollinate California's almond
orchards.
California almonds are the first and largest crop each
spring to require honeybees for pollination. Our industry
partners with beekeepers with whom we share the common goal of
healthy honeybees to support the future growth of almond
production. The two industries are inextricably linked. Almond
pollination has become a primary economic driver of the
honeybee industry. It may surprise you to learn that almond
pollination fees to beekeepers nearly equal the value of all
commercially produced and sold honey in the United States.
The Almond Board has invested $2.3 million in honeybee
health research. As a grower-owned cooperative, Blue Diamond
Growers is the largest single contributor to the Almond Board.
Project Apis m. has further invested over $2.2 million on
behalf of honeybees. The Almond Board created a Bee Task Force
whose members include almond growers and processors, beekeepers
and researchers. The purpose of this group is to make
recommendations for research and effective pollination
practices.
Fifty-one percent of almond farms are less than 50 acres,
and over 80 percent of almond farms are owned and operated by
families. Almonds are the earliest blooming natural food source
for honeybees. Honeybees found in almond orchards enjoy an
abundance of natural forage. As a result, hives typically
increase after almond pollination and bloom.
Because the almond industry recognizes the essential role
honeybees play in sustaining the global food supply, it and
Project Apis m. have together invested approximately $4.5
million in honeybee research. This is more money than any other
U.S. commodity has invested in honeybee research. The focus of
this research is on improving the health of hives, which
includes improving honeybee nutrition, managing pests and
diseases effectively, restoring honeybee genetic stock
diversity, helping honeybees cope with parasites and disease,
and other areas related to help improve their health and
longevity.
Our research has led to several breakthroughs in
maintaining honeybee health. The focus has been on ensuring
better honeybee nutrition and the overall improvement of hive
health. Research has also resulted in establishing best
practices for dealing with the Varroa mite. This is a pest that
emerged in the mid-1980s that attacks beehives by weakening and
shortening the lifespan of honeybees on which they feed.
Initial feedback from beekeepers has been that those who have
adopted newer bee management practices experience improved
honeybee hive health and performance. Our industry is also part
of an alliance that created a farming guide to promote reduced
risk and environmentally responsible pest management practices.
The health of the honeybee is a top priority in the best
management practices. These guidelines are shared with all
growers.
Several promising new bee research programs funded by the
almond industry are under way. Dedicated research to improve
honeybee genetic stock has resulted in breeding programs for
hygienic behavior to help control diseases like the Varroa
mite.
Another project extends best practices to queen honeybee
breeders to assure honeybee health and genetic diversity.
The almond industry was instrumental in the development of
MegaBee, a new nutritional supplement for honeybees. California
almond growers will continue to lead in the investment in
honeybee research, including honeybee nutrition, improved
honeybee genetics, the effective management of pests and
diseases and the impact of pesticides.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman for holding this important hearing
on this very critical subject. I will be happy answer any
questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Cummings follows:]
Prepared Statement of Arthur Daniel ``Dan'' Cummings, Chief Executive
Officer, Capay Farms; Chief Financial Officer, Olivarez Honey Bees,
Chico, CA
The Importance of Honeybee Health to the U.S. Almond Industry
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee. Thank you
for inviting me to testify this morning on this very important subject.
My name is Dan Cummings. I am the CEO of Capay Farms in Hamilton,
California, where I produce almonds and walnuts. Additionally, I am the
Chairman of the Almond Board of California Bee Task Force and have
served as Vice Chairman of that Board. The Almond Board of California
is a Federal Marketing Order administered by the Department of
Agriculture. Also, I am the Chairman Emeritus of Project Apis m.
My almonds are delivered to Blue Diamond Growers on whose Board I
serve. Blue Diamond Growers is a nonprofit farmer-owned marketing
cooperative. Blue Diamond Growers is the world's largest processor and
marketer of almonds, founded in 1910 and headquartered in Sacramento,
California. The company obtains its supply of almonds from its member/
owners and sells them to retail chains and food processing,
confectionery and food service companies in nearly 100 nations around
the world. Almonds are grown exclusively in California and are the
largest tree crop in California with a value of $6 billion. In fact,
over $4 billion of almonds were exported from California to the world
last year alone. Almonds are California's number one agricultural
export.
Nationally almonds rank in the top three consumer food items
exported from the United States. Blue Diamond Growers exports for the
majority of the almond growers in the State of California. Almond
production continues to expand in order to supply the world. Over 80%
of the world's almond supply is produced in California. Almonds are
primarily grown in central California in a 400 mile area from Red
Bluff, in the north, to Bakersfield, in the south.
The Honeybee is Essential for the Global Food Supply
The honeybee is essential for the global food supply. One-third of
our diet comes from honeybee-pollinated plants. The continuing health
of the honeybee population is a matter of concern to the global
agricultural community. Managed honeybees are vital to more than 90
bee-pollinated crops in the United States.
Nearly $20 billion in farm income is dependent on honeybees,
directly or indirectly. Honeybee-pollinated crops include almonds,
apples, cherries, melons, pumpkins, squash and sunflowers. Honeybee-
pollinated seeds are also critical to cattle and livestock that
ultimately feed on alfalfa.
California almond growers depend on honeybees for their livelihood.
We are very concerned about the health of honeybees. Approximately 1.6
million honeybee colonies--approximately \2/3\ of all the commercially
kept honeybees in the United States--are needed to pollinate
California's almond orchards. An almond crop depends on cross-
pollination. Most almond orchards have at least two compatible
varieties of almonds planted. The honeybees cross-pollinate between
these varieties in order to establish the crop. Without honeybees,
there would be no crop.
California almonds are the first and largest crop each spring to
require honeybees for pollination. Our industry partners with
beekeepers with whom we share the common goal of healthy honeybees to
support the future growth of almond production and other agricultural
products. California almond growers are significant contributors to
Project Apis m., a nonprofit organization that brings together
representatives from the pollination and crop production industries to
support research aimed at improving the beekeeping industry. I was the
Chairman of the Board of Project Apis m. during its first 6 years and
remain a Board member.
Blue Diamond Growers will contribute $100,000 to Project Apis m.
this year for research dedicated to healthier honeybees. This is in
conjunction with Blue Diamond Growers' introduction of several new
honey almond products.
The Almond Board of California has funded honeybee research
beginning in 1976. Since 1995, it has invested $2.3 million in honeybee
health research. As a grower-owned cooperative, Blue Diamond Growers is
the largest single contributor to the Almond Board of California.
Project Apis m. has invested over $2.2 million on behalf of honeybees.
The Almond Board of California created a Bee Task Force in 2005
whose members include almond growers and processors, beekeepers and
researchers. The purpose of this group is to make recommendations for
research and effective pollination practices. This is being done to
ensure a future of strong healthy hives in sufficient numbers. I was
the first grower to chair this committee and still do.
Together, the Almond Board of California is partnering with the
California State Beekeepers Association and Project Apis m. that works
with landowners and managers to grow ``bee pastures'' during the pollen
deficient winters. This project is funded through a series of grants.
Fifty-one percent of almond farms are less than 50 acres and over
80% of almond farms are owned and operated by families either
individually or in partnership. Almonds are the earliest blooming
natural food source for honeybees after wintering on supplements.
Honeybees found in California's almond orchards enjoy an abundance of
natural forage. As a result, hives typically increase after almond
pollination and bloom. These larger hives are then ``split'' into
smaller units by beekeepers. It is best to ensure honeybees have a
diverse, season-long chain of food sources.
The Almond Board of California is also participating in a USDA
grant for advancing ``Integrated Crop Pollination.'' This approach
integrates honeybees, other managed pollinators like the Blue Orchard
Bee, and ``bee pasture'' in addition to almonds.
Because the California almond industry recognizes the essential
role honeybees play in sustaining the global food supply, it and
Project Apis m. have invested approximately $4.5 million in honeybee
research. This is more money than any other U.S. commodity has invested
in honeybee research. Other industry organizations have invested
additional funds in honeybee research. The focus of this research is on
improving the health of hives, which includes improving honeybee
nutrition, managing pests and diseases effectively, restoring honeybee
genetic stock diversity, helping honeybees cope with parasites and
disease, and other areas related to helping improve their health and
longevity.
Our research has led to several breakthroughs in maintaining
honeybee health. Experts agree that beekeeping practices in the U.S.
have changed more in the last few years than in the last 20 years. The
focus has been on ensuring better honeybee nutrition and the overall
improvement of hive health. Honeybees need a variety of food sources in
their diet for optimum health. The Almond Board of California's support
was instrumental in the development of a new nutritional supplement for
honeybees that beekeepers can use in the late summer and fall when
natural sources of pollen are at low levels.
Research has also resulted in establishing best practices for
dealing with the Varroa mite. This is a pest that emerged in the mid-
1980s that attacks beehives by weakening and shortening the life span
of the honeybees on which they feed. Initial feedback from beekeepers
has been that those who have adopted these newer bee management
practices experience improved honeybee hive health and performance.
Our industry is also part of an alliance that created a farming
guide to promote reduced-risk and environmentally responsible pest
management practices based on over 5 years of field data and experience
in almond orchards. The health of the honeybee is a top priority in the
Best Management Practices. These guidelines are shared with all growers
and include recommendations to avoid applications of insecticides
during bloom; and to minimize exposure by honeybees to any spray by
avoiding applications when pollen is available and honeybees are
feeding.
Several promising new bee research programs funded by the almond
industry are underway. Over the years, dedicated research to improve
honeybee genetic stock has resulted in breeding honeybees for hygienic
behavior to help control diseases like the Varroa mite, which is the
most serious pest of honeybees. Current research by Dr. Walter Sheppard
and Sue Cobey at Washington State University is aimed at restoring
genetic diversity to commercial honeybee stock. By increasing the gene
pool within breeding stock, honeybees will be better able to cope with
parasites and pathogens. This project has also developed safe
collection and preservation techniques for honeybee stock and genetic
material.
Another project extends best practices to queen honeybee breeders
to assure honeybee health and genetic diversity. Dr. Marla Spivak at
the University of Minnesota leads this research. It has increased the
proportion of improved stock in commercial breeding lines. It has also
implemented diagnostic and integrated pest management (IPM) programs
resulting in better control of bee hive pests with fewer chemicals.
A third research project being conducted by Dr. Louisa Hooven at
Oregon State University builds on past research assessing the impact of
fungicides on honeybees. This work is evaluating the impact of four
fungicides currently used in almonds on honeybee development.
The almond industry is the largest single contributor to increasing
the health of honeybees in America. It is instrumental in the
development of MegaBee, a new nutritional supplement for honeybees,
which can be used in the late summer and fall when natural sources of
pollen are at low ebb. It has helped establish later summer-fall
feeding practices that are important for strong hives. It developed
integrated pest management (IPM) approaches for Varroa mite control
that use fewer chemicals in the hive and new breeding techniques for
improved honeybee resistance to pests and pathogens.
In fact, beekeepers who have adopted these newer honeybee
management practices experience improved honeybee hive health and
performance. For example, Dr. Frank Eischen of ARS/USDA is conducting
an ongoing study in Kern County, which indicates that hive build up
during almond bloom resulted in an average of a 27% increase in hive
strength. He notes, that at the beginning of almond bloom, the hive
strength averaged 11 frames of honeybees and at the end of bloom; the
hive strength averaged 14 frames of honeybees. Under average weather
conditions, a standard size (referred to as ``strength'') hive of eight
frames of honeybees at the start of the bloom will increase in size or
``strength'' to 10-12 frames at the end of the almond bloom.
This improves in warm weather conditions, like we just experienced
in February 2014, where a hive of eight to ten frames of honeybees will
increase to 15 to 16 frames of honeybees. This is an increase in size
or ``strength'' ranging from 50% and up. Further research is currently
being conducted on this year's bloom and its impact on the health of
honeybees.
Meanwhile, California almond growers will continue to lead in the
investment in honeybee research, including honeybee nutrition, improved
honeybee genetics, the effective management of pests and diseases, and
the impact of pesticides.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman for holding this important hearing on this
very critical subject. I will be happy answer any questions you may
have.
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Cummings. Mr. Stone?
STATEMENT OF JEFF STONE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER, OREGON ASSOCIATION OF NURSERIES, WILSONVILLE, OR
Mr. Stone. Chairman Scott, Ranking Member Schrader, Members
of the Subcommittee, I am Jeff Stone, and I serve as the
Executive Director of the Oregon Association of Nurseries. I
have placed into the record my expanded testimony, and I will
be mercifully brief in my comments before you this morning.
The Oregon nursery and greenhouse industry is the largest
sector in agriculture. It is also the second-largest nursery
state in the country with over $744 million annually in sales.
Nationally the horticulture industry's production, wholesale,
retail and landscape service components represent about $163
billion in economic activity with $1.1 million full- and part-
time jobs.
I am not going to tell you that the bee deaths that
occurred in Oregon last summer was not bad. It was. A respected
landscape company sprayed neonicotinoid pesticides on linden
trees in flower, which are highly attractive to bees. This
incident killed 50,000 bees, occurred less than a mile from my
home office in Wilsonville on National Pollinator Day. I
couldn't think of a worse set of circumstances.
While I am not a nursery grower, I work for them and I
don't even pretend to have the understanding about how to grow
clean, quality plants, but I do know how to read. And I
reviewed the label with the agricultural agency about the
pesticide application. It was done improperly and against what
the EPA label says. And that is the law.
The Oregon Department of Agriculture began an investigation
and instituted a temporary ban of the use of the pesticide
containing the active ingredient, dynotefuran. I practiced that
quite a bit, actually. I didn't know how to say it.
Investigation was completed and the restriction lifted at the
end of 2013. At the beginning of 2014, the department imposed
label language restrictions on the pesticides and dynotefuran
and imidacloprid. For those trees in the Tilia genus, which
includes linden and basswood trees.
The concerns around pesticide use and the potential effects
on bees is very important to all pesticide users, especially
those involved in agriculture. Oregon farmers depend on bees to
pollinate many of their crops. They also depend on pesticide as
tools to combat destructive pests. The furor over the death of
so many bees caused national attention, but the discussion in
Oregon was engaged by beekeepers, environmental groups and the
farm community. Legislation was filed in the state legislature
that would have moved neonicotinoids to restricted use and
functionally ban the use of the product in the state. Oregon
House Bill 4139 could have taken a negative approach in pitting
interest group against interest group, but that did not happen.
Instead, stakeholders listened to one another and determined
that a science-based approach to pollinator health would lead
to a better solution.
So over the next 2 years, stakeholders will roll up their
sleeves and work with Oregon State University, our land-grant
university, legislators and state agencies to determine the
most proper path forward. And there is science out there, quite
a bit, actually. But what we hear in the press are from the
extremes. However, Oregon chose not to cherry-pick the science
that suited a political point, instead doing the work which I
urge Congress to do.
We see a lot of white papers and press releases, but let us
talk about what is actually happening on the ground. For a
retailer who sprays pesticides indoors, that is away from bees,
at risk was the critical Christmas season plant, poinsettias,
who have a common pest called the white fly. Now, nobody is
going to buy let alone sell a plant that has a pest on it at
your garden center. But the large garden center during this
temporary ban was required to find an alternative pesticide for
the whitefly and ended up using three times the amount of
pesticide than they ordinarily would. Normally, it is a small
drench application. So they put it right in the soil for the
highly effective neonics. Instead, a less-effective pesticide
was used, taking more time and making the business really
consider the fact for human health because it has far more
toxicity. For the operator, it is just not a matter of if
alternatives are present but are they as effective and can you
get by with using less?
Without a full pest management program, whiteflies will
quickly develop resistance and threaten other crops including
cotton in other parts of this country. A pest management plan
was developed in part with the nursery industry and the cotton
industry with USDA. Pest and disease problems are real, and
they can cost agriculture and threaten our natural environment.
For pollinator health, there is no smoking gun. But as my
written testimony explains, there are several factors for
Colony Collapse Disorder. Our industry has faced many
challenges, Mr. Chairman, from invasive pests and pathogens and
regulatory obstacles, and we are still recovering from the
housing collapse that took out a third of my membership just in
the past 5 years.
But Oregon growers are innovative, and we want to work
through issues and engage those that may disagree with us on
this very emotional issue, but we need to let science be our
guide and not emotion. And it is my sincere hope that Congress
engages in the same spirit. Thank you for your time and
attention.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Stone follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jeff Stone, Executive Director and Chief
Executive Officer, Oregon Association of Nurseries, Wilsonville, OR
Chairman Scott, Ranking Member Schrader, Members of the
Subcommittee, I am Jeff Stone and I serve as the Executive Director of
the Oregon Association of Nurseries. I welcome the opportunity this
morning to provide comments for your consideration relating to
pollinator health.
This morning I will discuss the merits of a discussion on
pollinator health and its importance to the agricultural community as
well as our environment. I will address how Oregon's nursery and
greenhouse industry uses neonicotinoids. I will also talk about the
potential impacts to agriculture if this chemical class is restricted
or banned without proper science-based facts. Last, I will give a
little insight on how Oregon brought together stakeholders to chart out
a reasoned path on this important issue.
Oregon Nursery Industry Background
The nursery and greenhouse industry is the largest agricultural
sector in Oregon. Oregon represents the nation's second largest nursery
state with more than $744 million in sales annually. The industry is a
traded sector, much like you would see in high technology or other
cluster businesses. Nearly 75 percent of the nursery stock grown in our
state leaves our borders--with more than \1/2\ reaching markets east of
the Mississippi River. Our reach extends to international markets as
well. Nursery association members represent wholesale and Christmas
tree growers, retailers and greenhouse operations. Nationally the
horticultural industry's production, wholesale, retail, and landscape
service components have annual sales of $163 billion and sustain over
1,150,000 full and part-time jobs.
As a proud part of U.S. agriculture, we certainly understand the
importance of pollinators to the agricultural industry and our natural
environment. We also recognize the importance of having effective
pesticides with low environmental impact. Much of the debate today will
be over Neonicotinoids. This chemical class, when used properly, is
vital to the success of our industry. They are important tools in
defending trees, shrubs, and plants against destructive invasive
species like the Japanese Beetle, Hemlock Woolly Adelgid and Asian
Longhorned Beetle and employed as part of a management strategy to
control chemical-resistant whitefly species.
Pollinator Health Is Critical to the Nursery and Greenhouse Industry
In the summer of 2013, a misapplication of pesticides on Linden
trees in Wilsonville resulted in the death of 50,000 bees due to acute
toxicity, or their direct contact with the insecticide. Oregon's
Department of Agriculture (ODA) conducted an investigation and
instituted a temporary rule restricting the use of pesticides
containing the active ingredient dinotefuran. The investigation was
completed and the restriction lifted in December 2013. Effective at the
start of 2014 the department has imposed label language prohibiting the
use of products containing dinotefuran and imidacloprid for use on
trees in the Tilia genus, which include linden and basswood trees--
these trees are highly attractive to pollinators when in flower.
The concerns around pesticide use and potential effects on bees are
very important to all pesticide users, but especially those involved in
agriculture. Oregon farmers depend on bees to pollinate many of their
crops. They also depend on pesticides as tools to control destructive
pests. Similarly, commercial beekeepers rely on healthy crops to
optimize their pollination services. This means that Oregon growers and
beekeepers have a lot at stake in this conversation. Both of us want to
make sure that protecting bee health, and retaining pesticides as an
effective tool, are not mutually exclusive.
The association conducted extensive outreach to our members--
including retailers, greenhouse operators and wholesale growers--to
increase awareness of the pollinator issue. We also wanted to assess
the use of neonicotinoids and understand the number of licensed
pesticide applicators. Beyond the dramatic headlines, the nursery
industry expressed its support of the ODA action and the industry's
reservations regarding an outright ban of neonicotinoids. This chemical
class, first developed in the 1990s, represents advancement over other
chemical classes making them safer to both human and pollinators and
are used as part of pest mitigation strategies by our greenhouse and
nursery members. In some cases, neonicotinoids are approved regulatory
treatments for certification and interstate movement of nursery and
greenhouse crops.
While seven states have made efforts to pass anti-neonicotinoid
legislation, it is critical that the Federal Government's efforts be
science-based. Congress should listen to stakeholders from the green
industry, the environment community and academia. This is what we did
in Oregon and we believe it could serve as a national model to give
voice to disparate views while working toward a common goal--improving
pollinator health. The Environmental Protection Agency's labeling
program is intended to create a unified national regulatory program
that prevents patchwork lawmaking by states. One standard is critical
for commerce between the states.
Science and Reason Should Go Hand in Hand
Bee health is important to all of us. Nobody wants to see adverse
incidents that add to the decline of bee populations. That being said,
it is easy to let emotion drive the conversation. Instead, we should
let science be our guide.
Based on current science, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
continues to allow application of neonicotinoids with appropriate
guidelines. These chemistries are among the safest available to combat
many pests. We encourage Congress to direct the research community to
pursue its work on this issue without bias and identify the appropriate
steps to alleviate environmental and pest pressures on pollinator
health.
It is important to note that neonicotinoids represent a tremendous
advancement over older pesticide treatment options. When used properly,
neonicotinoids effectively control problem insects, while exhibiting
less impact on non-target insects (including bees). Their ability to
provide residual control means fewer applications and less applicator
exposure. The OAN and other nursery industry leaders fear that
decisions made to restrict or prohibit use of such materials, without
scientific merit, will undermine research and development into new and
reduced-risk materials going forward.
These calls to ban neonicotinoids continue despite a cadre of
reports that suggest their role in declining bee health is small. The
USDA's 2013 report on Honey Bee Health put pesticides, in general, near
the bottom of the list of factors impacting bee health. The report
highlighted other issues like colony management, viruses, bacteria,
poor nutrition, lack of genetic diversity, and habitat loss as more
impactful. The report continued to stress that, ``the single most
detrimental pest of honeybees'' is the parasitic Varroa mite, first
discovered in the U.S. in 1987. Recent reports from the Australian
Governments Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (equivalent
to our EPA) supported the conclusions of the USDA report. The
Australian report said that even though neonicotinoid pesticides are
used there, Australia has not suffered from honey bee colony declines,
like those seen in Europe and the U.S.
Since reports of significant losses to bee colonies were publicized
in 2006, researchers and regulators have been looking for possible
causes. A Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) Steering Committee was formed
at the national level to address the concerns over bee losses. Several
individuals from the Steering Committee along with Pennsylvania State
University met in October 2012 for a National Stakeholders Conference
on Honey Bee Health to discuss future actions to promote health and
mitigate risks to managed honey bees in the U.S. In May 2013 the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) and EPA released a comprehensive
scientific report on honey bee health. The report concludes that there
are multiple factors that play a role in honey bee colony declines.
Findings from the report include:
There are multiple diseases associated with CCD, many of
which are amplified by the Varroa mite.
Stakeholders should adopt Best Management Practices (BMPs)
to enhance bee health.
There is need to significantly improve genetic diversity in
U.S. bee populations.
Bees require increased nutritional options (forage) to
lessen susceptibility to stressors.
There should be continued research on pesticide impacts at
field-relevant exposures.
Stakeholders need greater collaboration and information
sharing among stakeholders to facilitate adoption of BMPs that
are critical to improving bee health.
While the current research does not point to neonicotinoids as a
primary factor in bee health decline, we know that it may be tempting
to restrict use for precautionary reasons. Unfortunately this approach
ignores the important role these products play in managing pests that
can have devastating effects on the environment. Neonicotinoids provide
unique environmental, economic and public health benefits, such as:
Effective protection against invasive species which can harm
important urban landscapes, including the Emerald Ash Borer
which can devastate urban forests.
Systemic insect control not provided by other chemical
classes.
Lower impact on many non-target organisms than older
chemistries, protecting natural enemies, which allows for
greater use of IPM strategies.
Effective control of disease carrying vectors.
Extended control, which limits the needed number of
applications, and therefore limits the exposure to workers.
Control of pests that are resistant to other chemical
classes.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has not followed Europe's
lead by suspending or banning the use of neonicotinoid pesticides.
Instead, the EPA has been active on the pollinator issue by increasing
the level of funding for research into integrated pest management,
which has resulted in a reduction in the use of pesticides. Several
studies, including a National Academy of Sciences study on the loss of
pollinators, chaired by University of Illinois entomologist May
Berenbaum, indicated that there is little evidence to indicate that
banning this class of chemicals would have any positive effect.
The Congress and Obama Administration Should Focus on Solving the
Problem
There is legislation pending before the House Agriculture Committee
(H.R. 2692, the Saving America's Pollinators Act) introduced by Oregon
Congressman Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) in response to the bee incident in
the summer of 2013. The bill would effectively put a national
moratorium on most neonicotinoid applications until an array of
studies, including multi-year ``residue build-up'' evaluations can be
completed. The bill's proposed moratorium could be lifted only if a
final determination is made that the pesticides ``will not cause
unreasonable adverse effects on pollinators.''
On February 24, 2014 the Pollinator Protection Caucus of the U.S.
House of Representatives, chaired by Congressmen Denham (R-CA) and
Hastings (D-FL), held a briefing on pollinator health and invited four
groups to participate. AmericanHort's regulatory and legislative
affairs director, Joe Bischoff, was asked to present the horticulture
industry's perspective on the issue. During the briefing, Dr. Bischoff
emphasized the importance of a holistic approach to research on the
issue. He stressed that, ``no concerned communities, including the bees
themselves, would be served if we chase a red-herring and point fingers
at an easy target like pesticides, for the purpose of political
expediency.''
When considering regulations surrounding pesticides, we feel it is
important to look at what regulations are already in place. All
pesticides used in Oregon must go through registration processes
mandated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Oregon
Department of Agriculture (ODA). At the Federal level this happens
under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).
Initial and ongoing re-registration is subject to a substantial review
process. Registered products must meet the high standard of having ``no
unreasonable adverse effect on health or the environment.'' This means
that the pesticides of concern in these cases have had extensive safety
testing including:
Honeybee acute contact toxicity (all outdoor use products)
Honey bee toxicity of residues on foliage (if high acute
toxicity and exposure likely)
Field testing for pollinators (specific conditions)
While we can understand the concerns of beekeepers, and the public
at large, the issue of declining bee populations unfortunately has no
simple answer. In fact, research on Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) has
highlighted a complex interaction of factors that play a role in bee
health. No singular cause of the problem has been found. While
pesticides are often noted as one factor, they are not considered the
primary one.
The Nursery industry wishes to work with the EPA to stress the
message of stewardship and compliance with label instruction. However,
in the meantime we have growing concerns over the EPA taking further
steps on pollinator protection through administrative action which
would substantially affect turf and ornamental applications. The use of
``advisory label language'' is understandable when faced with
unforeseen circumstances. However, we are receiving signals from a
variety of stakeholders that the Administration is considering
extending the label changes to other products that are used for foliar
sprays. It is critical that Congress and the Administration understand
that moving the industry toward specific application methods for
systemic products (such as liquid solution or the use of dry broadcast
formulations) without consideration of the efficacy and available
alternatives will not solve the problem of declines in pollinator
health.
Oregon Can Serve as a Model in Collaboration
While the furor over the death of bees received national notoriety,
the discussion in Oregon was engaged by beekeepers, environmental
groups and farm organizations. The initial bill mirrored the Federal
bill introduced by Congressman Earl Blumenauer and would have moved
neonicotinoids to a restricted use pesticide and substantially ban the
use of the product in the state. Oregon House Bill 4139 could have
taken a negative approach and pitting interest group against interest
group--but that did not happen. Instead, stakeholders listened to one
another and determined that a science-based approach to pollinator
health would lead to a better solution. Over the next 2 years,
stakeholders will roll up their sleeves and work with our land-grant
university (Oregon State University), legislators, and state agencies
to determine the most appropriate path forward. It is critical we work
with interested parties to examine how to study this issue further and
create a communication effort for the general public and industry. We
all benefit when we move in a reasoned manner to evaluate trends in
pollinator health, including the use of best management practices.
We must acknowledge our stewardship role in using these
chemistries. When we use them, we must deploy them as part of a larger
management strategy, and always remember to use them only as directed
by the EPA-approved label. It is important that consequences and
tradeoffs be discussed and that a decision on neonicotinoids not lead
to economic harm, erosion of pollinator health, or increased human
safety concerns during the application of pesticides at the nursery
operation.
The nursery and greenhouse industry is working through our national
association, AmericanHort, to engage with various chemical and
registrant associations on the neonicotinoid issue and to conduct a
survey of use at a national level. We believe an expanded look at
pollinator health should be conducted and the nursery and greenhouse
industry should be a reasoned voice in the discussion.
The public, environmental groups and agriculture have an
opportunity to set aside short-term political points and work together
on pollinator health. It is my sincere hope that Congress engages in
the same spirit. Perhaps by working alongside one another, we can do
what is right for pollinator health, environmental stewardship and
economic prosperity of our agricultural sector.
Thank you for your time and attention.
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Stone. The linden tree is one
of my favorite trees. There are a tremendous number of them on
the Capitol if you noticed.
Dr. Fischer?
STATEMENT OF DR. DAVID L. FISCHER, DIRECTOR,
POLLINATOR SAFETY & MANAGER, BAYER NORTH
AMERICAN BEE CARE CENTER, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC
Dr. Fischer. Honorable Members, my name is Dr. David
Fischer, and I am here today as the Director of Pollinator
Safety on behalf of Bayer. I have been involved in the field of
environmental toxicology and risk assessment for 27 years,
published more than 20 peer-reviewed scientific papers and have
supervised hundreds of studies evaluating crop protection
products. I have led or participated in numerous scientific
forums on bee health research, and I am responsible for the
management of Bayer's new Bee Care Center in North America. I
thank you for the opportunity to appear before this Committee
and for your interest in promoting pollinator health. Our
industry recognizes the importance of honeybees to American
agriculture, and we fully support collaborative efforts to
promote pollinator health and sustainable agricultural
practices.
Although the number of commercial honeybee colonies in the
United States has been relatively stable since the late 1990s,
bee losses following the winter season have averaged about 30
percent in recent annual surveys, more than twice what has been
the historical expected average. Fortunately, beekeepers have
been able to build up their colony numbers to meet crop
pollination demands, but these losses highlight the need for
more effective measures to promote bee health.
Most scientists and bee experts agree that multiple factors
can negatively impact honeybee health. These include parasites,
diseases, adverse weather, habitat loss, crop and hive
protection products, nutritional deficiencies and hive
management practices. Although some stressors are more
important than others, the solution to bee health requires a
comprehensive approach as no single factor is solely
responsible.
A broad stakeholder group including members of the crop
protection industry is working with the regulatory agencies to
improve our understanding of pollinator risk assessment,
particularly as it relates to a relatively new class of
agriculture insecticides, the neonicotinoids. These products
have been widely adopted by farmers and have replaced many
older insecticides because of their effectiveness against
destructive pests and they have more favorable environmental
profiles. Comprehensive reviews of studies and databases
comprising 15 years of research have shown these products do
not represent a threat to honeybee colony health.
We strongly endorse ongoing research in meaningful
stewardship practices, including the adoption of best
management practices to avoid unwanted pesticide exposure.
Although protecting honeybees from the unintended exposures to
pesticides is a commitment shared by all agricultural
stakeholders, this will have little practical consequence until
we address the much broader and more significant threats to
colony health. One threat in particular, which has been
mentioned by everybody, is the Varroa mite, an invasive
parasite identified by the United States Department of
Agriculture as the single-most detrimental pest of honeybees
and one most closely associated with colony decline.
Understanding the impact of this parasite and how to best
manage its destructive potential remains a critical gap in our
effort to improve honeybee health.
The recent Varroa Summit sponsored by the USDA provided a
forum for international experts to discuss areas of research
that one day may provide relief. Other recent Federal
initiatives such as those of the Natural Resources Conservation
Service for both increased forage options for beekeepers,
including the management of public lands to increase available
forage for pollinators, could have a positive and lasting
impact on bee health.
Although more research conducted under real-world
conditions is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of these
programs, engagement by all agricultural stakeholders is
essential.
For more than 25 years, Bayer crop science has been
committed to finding solutions to improve honeybee health. Our
Bee Care Program was established to bring this experience and
knowledge of bee health under one coordinated initiative, which
includes opening our North American Bee Care Center, a state-
of-the-art facility dedicated to improving bee health through
collaborative research, education and training; launching our
fluency agent, an innovative seed application technology to
reduce potential exposures to honeybees during corn seed
planting; implementing our Sentinel Hive Program in
collaboration with beekeepers to monitor the health of colonies
associated with agricultural production; developing our novel
Varroagate technology and new chemistry to aid beekeepers in
managing destructive Varroa mites; training more than 350 of
our employees in North America as bee care ambassadors to
promote bee health awareness in their local communities; and
collaborating with leading researchers and participating in
major scientific forums to remain current on the latest
advances as well identify areas of fruitful bee research.
Pollinators and crop protection products are critical to
agriculture. The inherent complexity and broad ramifications
associated with pollinator health means that state and Federal
Government will continue to play a vital role in helping to
support both bees and agriculture. Our industry is committed to
stewardship and the protection of beneficial insects, and we
look forward to working with our government agencies in
measures that protect bees and ensure agricultural
sustainability.
Thank you once again for the opportunity to address this
Committee.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Fischer follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. David L. Fischer, Director, Pollinator Safety
& Manager, Bayer North American Bee Care Center, Research Triangle
Park, NC
My name is Dr. David Fischer and I am providing this testimony as
the Director of Pollinator Safety, on behalf of Bayer. I have been
involved in the field of environmental toxicology and risk assessment
for 27 years, published more than 20 peer-reviewed scientific papers
and have supervised hundreds of studies evaluating the effects of crop
protection products on pollinators. I have led or participated in
numerous scientific forums on bee health research and am responsible
for the management of Bayer's Bee Care Center in North America.
Bayer welcomes the invitation to appear before the United States
House of Representatives Subcommittee on Horticulture, Research,
Biotechnology, and Foreign Agriculture, to review current research and
management strategies regarding insect pests and pollinators. For more
than 25 years, Bayer has been committed to environmental stewardship
and the protection of beneficial insects. We recognize the importance
of honey bees to agriculture and fully support collaborative efforts to
promote pollinator health and sustainable agricultural practices.
Of the many insect pollinators, none is more valuable to
agriculture than the honey bee. The value of these insects (as measured
by crop yield and quality) has been estimated at $15-$20 billion
annually. Honey bees are important not only because they are efficient
and general pollinators, but also because their colonies can be managed
and moved wherever needed, which is especially useful given the
demanding requirements for pollination services in American
agriculture. The utility of these pollinators is not without its
challenges, however. Commercial beekeepers have the difficult job of
maintaining colony health over diverse geographies, often while facing
unfavorable environmental conditions.
The number of honey bee colonies in the U.S. steadily declined from
a peak of 5.5 million in 1950, primarily due to a reduced post-war need
for honey as a sugar replacement and a decreased interest in
beekeeping. Since the late 1990s, the number of managed colonies has
stabilized at around 2.5 million--more than \1/2\ of which are needed
annually to pollinate the California almond market. Although colony
losses of 15 percent are not unusual following the winter season, bee
losses in the U.S. have averaged around 30 percent in recent annual
surveys. Fortunately, beekeepers have been able to build up their
colony numbers to meet crop pollination demands, but such losses
highlight the need for more effective measures to promote bee health.
The first step in addressing this problem is the recognition that
no single factor is solely responsible. Most scientists and bee experts
believe that numerous stressors can negatively impact honey bee
health--including parasitic mites, diseases, adverse weather, habitat
loss, crop and hive protection products, nutritional deficiencies, and
hive management practices. It is important to note that not all factors
have equal significance to colony health, nor can the effects of some
be realistically mitigated (e.g., adverse weather). It is equally
important to understand that the solution to bee health requires a
comprehensive approach.
Knowing the factors that affect bee health is crucial, but
determining the relative importance of each is even more significant,
as it provides a clear roadmap to effective management. A broad
stakeholder group, including members of the crop protection industry,
are working with our regulatory agencies to improve our understanding
of pollinator risk assessment, particularly as it relates to
agricultural insecticides. Contrary to the opinion of some anti-
pesticide groups, extensive research has shown that these products do
not represent a long-term threat to bee colonies. Comprehensive reviews
of studies and databases comprising 15 years of research were recently
published by a diverse group of researchers and directly challenge
unsubstantiated claims against pesticides as a significant cause of
colony decline.
Despite the absence of a clear connection to colony health, our
industry will continue to work with regulators to avoid unwanted
pesticide exposures, through effective product labeling and the
implement of meaningful stewardship actions that help minimize harmful
interactions. We believe these measures have been quite successful, as
the number of pesticide exposures to foraging bees is relatively rare,
especially when considering the many millions of acres that are treated
each year. Although any loss of bees associated with agricultural
production is of concern, it is important to remember that infrequent
accidental exposures are not indicative of the general health of honey
bee colonies.
If the use of agricultural pesticides is not a major factor, then
what is responsible for the decline seen in honey bee health? We may be
closer to understanding this phenomenon than some might think. Large
multi-factorial field research studies conducted in the U.S., Canada,
Belgium, France and Germany all report that poor bee health correlates
well with presence of parasitic mites and bee diseases. Correlation
does not mean causation, but it does provide a useful map in attacking
this important problem. This is especially significant when considering
the biology and impact of the Varroa mite parasite on honey bee
colonies in North America.
The Varroa mite is an exotic parasite introduced to North America
during the 1980s. It feeds on honey bees and reproduces in the
developing bee brood, while transmitting serious diseases. Immediately
following its introduction, the number of colonies in Canada and the
United States dropped precipitously, as beekeepers struggled to find a
way to manage this destructive pest. A primary method of controlling
Varroa infestations is through the use of miticides applied directly to
the hive, but proper monitoring and timing are crucial. Though the use
of miticides can be effective, resistance management and the lack of
suit able alternative methods remain a concern among beekeepers.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Agricultural
Research Services (ARS) have been at the forefront of this issue. The
2013 report from the National Stakeholders Conference on Honey Bee
Health provided a comprehensive assessment of the most important
factors affecting colony health. Of particular concern, as noted in the
report, is the recognition of the Varroa mite as the ``single most
detrimental pest of honey bees'' and one most closely associated with
over-wintering colony decline. Recent scientific research has shown
that the winter survival of honey bee colonies is largely dependent on
the level of Varroa infestation and the higher colony losses seen in
recent annual surveys appear to support this conclusion.
Understanding the impact of this parasite and how best to manage
its destructive potential remains a critical knowledge gap in our
effort to improve honey bee health. As a follow up to the stakeholder
report, the USDA recently sponsored a Varroa Summit, providing a forum
for international experts to discuss areas of research that one day may
provide relief for one of the most persistent problems facing our
nation's beekeepers. Our success in combating this pest will only come
from a continued focus and cooperative effort among all bee
stakeholders.
Although the effects of the parasitic Varroa mite and its
associated diseases are among the most significant threats to honey bee
health, other factors require serious attention. Recently,
representatives from our industry participated in a meeting with the
Administration's Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and
Domestic Policy Council (DPC) to discuss Federal initiatives on
pollinator health and areas of potential collaboration with
agricultural interests. Part of this discussion centered on initiatives
by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) to promote
increased forage options for commercial beekeepers, as well as the
management of public land to increase available forage for pollinators.
Initiatives aimed at Varroa mite management and increased forage
options for bees can have a positive impact on pollinator health and
sustainability. However, more research is needed to fully evaluate the
effectiveness of these measures, especially under real-world
conditions. To accomplish this objective, engagement by all
agricultural stakeholders is essential.
As a leader in the agricultural industry, Bayer is committed to
finding solutions to improve honey bee health. Bayer's Bee Care Program
was established to bring our experience and knowledge of bee health
under one coordinated initiative. This effort includes the following:
The North American Bee Care Center is a $2.4 million state-
of-the-art facility that opened on April 15 at our Research
Triangle Park, NC, headquarters. The center brings together
collaborative research and education resources fully dedicated
to bee health, housing a full laboratory and research apiary,
honey extraction and workshop space, along with offices,
meeting rooms, and interactive displays for pollinator
research, education and training.
Bayer has developed a new seed application technology to
help reduce potential exposure to honey bees during seed
planting. This Fluency Agent has been shown to significantly
reduce dust and insecticide exposure when compared to the
standard lubricants used by farmers to improve flowability and
planting uniformity.
As part of our commitment to research and stewardship, Bayer
developed a Sentinel Hives Program, which is designed to
monitor the health of selected colonies in North America
associated with agricultural production. Working
collaboratively with beekeepers, this ongoing initiative will
evaluate best management practices to improve colony health.
Bayer's novel ``Varroagate'' technology represents a
potential new tool to aid beekeepers in managing destructive
Varroa mite populations through an innovative means of limiting
Varroa infestations resulting from mites carried by foraging
bees to the hive.
Bayer has trained more than 350 of its employees in North
America as ``Bee Care Ambassadors'' to promote bee health
awareness in their local communities.
Our scientists collaborate with other researchers and
participate in major scientific forums to remain current on the
latest advances, as well as identify areas of fruitful bee
research.
Other companies in our industry are engaged in similar activities,
working with multiple stakeholders to promote bee health. Because of
the inherent complexity and broad ramifications associated with
pollinator health, state and Federal Government will continue to play a
critical role in helping to support both bees and agriculture. Our
industry is committed to stewardship and the protection of beneficial
insects and we look forward to working with our government agencies in
measures that protect bees and ensure agricultural sustainability.
Honey bees and crop protection products are both critical to modern
agriculture. Although many issues associated with honey bee health are
not new, the demand for pollination services has never been greater. It
is only through a collaborative effort involving government, university
research, private industry, commercial beekeepers and farmers that we
can hope to protect this vital resource and ensure that American
agriculture remains the envy of the world.
Thank you once again for the opportunity to address this Committee.
The Chairman. Thank you, Dr. Fischer, and we have been
joined by Mrs. Vicky Hartzler and by the Ranking Member, Collin
C. Peterson of the full Committee. And I am glad to have both
of you here.
Just a reminder before we get into the questions, we will
go in order by rank, and then we will go in order of attendance
with the one exception that we will let Mr. Peterson go first.
And that reminded me.
Dr. Pettis, most of my questions will be for you as to the
lead researcher for the USDA with regard to this issue. Our
witnesses' statements, both written and oral, suggest that the
Varroa mite is the single most detrimental problem affecting
honeybee health. Do you agree with that and that the research
on this pest is likely the task at hand, if you will, that we
should address for the honeybees?
Dr. Pettis. Very good question. I would say that if you had
to single out one single individual factor in bee health it was
the one thing, if we could eliminate it, it would have a big
impact. I will say there is a lot of confusion about what
Colony Collapse Disorder is. It gets mentioned by the media,
and the media loves it. We define Colony Collapse Disorder as
the absence of Varroa, the absence of damaging levels of
Varroa. So we don't think that Varroa mites have much of
anything to do with Colony Collapse Disorder, at least not
directly. So it is, again, a mixed bag. If we had to single out
one thing, Varroa mite would certainly probably be it, but it
is certainly not the only thing going on in bee health.
The Chairman. And this gets to some of your previous
indications that there are some constituencies that want to
place the blame squarely on pesticides, particularly the
neonicotinoids for honeybee colony loss. In Australia,
neonicotinoids are registered just as they are in the United
States as seed treatment. Beekeepers don't experience the
losses that we have here in North America as well as Europe.
The Varroa mite is not in Australia, is that correct?
Dr. Pettis. Correct.
The Chairman. So just by definition, if we are making
decisions based on the facts, without a mite problem, growers
in Australia don't have the same impact.
Dr. Pettis. I think other places around the globe, the
beekeepers have not suffered as they have in the United States.
U.S. beekeepers have suffered higher losses, although Europe
has also suffered some fairly high losses when you look at
winter losses. Australia is the only exception that doesn't
have Varroa. So around the globe where honeybees are managed,
Australia is the only continent that does not have Varroa.
The Chairman. So we are seeing this in South America and
other continents?
Dr. Pettis. Varroa is widespread everywhere else in the
world.
The Chairman. The U.S. EPA is involved in ongoing
litigation regarding the registration of several neonicotinoid
pesticides. Would the data from Australia--these pesticides are
being used in Australia is my understanding. Is it fair to
suggest that regulatory agencies would be ill advised to
oversimplify this problem in taking action against pesticides
without the proper science and considering the other factors
involved in this issue?
Dr. Pettis. Chairman Scott, I would like to remind you that
I am from the USDA and not from EPA----
The Chairman. Thank you.
Dr. Pettis.--but I will do my best.
The Chairman. That is why you are here.
Dr. Pettis. Thank you.
The Chairman. I mean, because you are--we don't allow the
EPA to come in. I'm kidding.
Dr. Pettis. Right.
The Chairman. I am kidding.
Dr. Pettis. I think the level of agriculture in Australia--
I am actually fairly familiar with the beekeeping in Australia,
and the level of agriculture is not what it is in the United
States. We have a much more advanced agricultural system, much
more agriculture going on here.
I think the reason the neonicotinoid group gets mentioned a
lot is the fact that it represents a new exposure to
pollinators and that it is moving systemically in the plant,
and it can be found in nature in pollen, unlike more
traditional pesticides. But we still have issues with exposure
in those realms as well.
So I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other,
other than that the neonic raises a new level because of the
exposure route.
The Chairman. Thank you for answering those questions, and
again, we need to resolve this issue. It is extremely important
to the United States as well as many other continents and
countries, and we just need to make sure we take a fact-based
approach and resolve this based on science and not emotion.
Mr. Schrader?
Mr. Schrader. I yield some of my time to--oops. Okay. I
guess I won't then.
The Chairman. Sorry.
Mr. Schrader. No, it is fine. Well, I will go back to Dr.
Pettis here. Can you talk about best management practices that
are coming out? When do you think they are going to be out and
what do you think they are going to be including?
Dr. Pettis. Well, we have, as you noticed, Mr. Cummings was
mentioning these public-private partnerships. We have been
working with groups like Project Apis m. to try to develop some
of these best management practices. We have some already, but
Varroa mite in particular changes it. It becomes resistant to
various chemicals that we use to control it. So we are always
having to adapt those best management practices. We have some
already in place. Project Apis m. and other groups have put
together some of these who are constantly adopting them.
Mr. Schrader. Can you describe some of the practices?
Dr. Pettis. Again, taking a kind of an integrated approach,
not treating for Varroa unless it reaches a certain threshold.
We know that the bees can suffer a certain amount of damage
without using chemicals to treat them because the chemicals
themselves that the beekeepers use are not benign. The other
things are we are doing work with breeding and breeding
resistant stock. We have a whole lab, ARS lab dedicated to
breeding and genetics where we have developed a trait that
confers resistance and also a line of bees that confer some
resistance to Varroa mites. And in general, there are other
aspects of bee health where we look at the timing of feeding.
Like if we have to feed bees that are on a pollination contract
and it is not so nutritious, we can feed bees supplemental food
and help get them through that crunch time on a certain
pollination contract. Cranberries come to mind, watermelons,
things like that. They are not totally nutritious, but the bees
have to be there for pollination so we can do supplemental
feeding.
So I would say these--things are ongoing.
Mr. Schrader. What about the genetic mapping? There is a
lot of controversy nowadays on genetic modification. We have
been doing it for centuries, frankly. We are just doing it
differently nowadays. What are the prospects for improving bee
genetics even beyond what you have described?
Dr. Pettis. We are looking for marker-assisted traits in
bees that would confer, say, Varroa resistance. We are not
going to have a bionic bee. We are not going to modify bees in
that way. But we can use certain better techniques to do
marker-assisted breeding, and we are doing that.
Mr. Schrader. Very good. Dr. Fischer, can you talk a little
bit about the seed application technology that you are working
on?
Dr. Fischer. Yes. We have a new additive that is added to
the seed hopper we call fluency agent. It is a seed lubricant
is what it is, and what has occurred in some instances is with
pneumatic planters that are in use, as the seeds are moved
through the planter and put into the ground, they rub against
the machinery, they rub against each other and a little bit of
dust is produced. And that is exhausted by these pneumatic
planting systems. So what we are trying to do with the fluency
agent is eliminate this dust because this dust has the
potential to move off-site to flowering plants where bees can
contact them. What we have found is with our fluency agent, we
can reduce the dust abrasion by anywhere from 50 to 90 percent,
and we are actually working with a number of universities and
other stakeholders. There is actually a corn dust research
consortium that has been convened by the Pollinator
Partnership. I saw Tom Van Arsdall here today. And so that
group has sponsored research to really look at how effective is
this and what are the best ways that we can--what are the ways
that bees can be exposed to these seed treatments.
But seed treatments in general are the best way to use an
insecticide. You get it into the ground. The worst way to use
an insecticide and expose bees or the way that has the most
potential to cause exposure is to spray a bee attractive plant
when it is blooming, the Linden tree example. When you spray a
pesticide, you result in about 1,000 times greater residues
than the pollen and nectar that the bees are collecting than if
you use the chemical systemically.
So that is really--the message I would have is systemics,
when they are used carefully and properly, are really the best
way to go. And we want to be careful with insecticides,
spraying anything, any plants that are bee-attractive.
Mr. Schrader. Mr. Stone, you talked about improper
application. Would you describe what happened as improper in
that one incident in Oregon?
Mr. Stone. Thank you, Ranking Member Schrader. Absolutely.
Linden trees, which are beautiful as the Chairman indicated,
when they flower, a landscaper came and sprayed it on the whole
tree. And it is a big attractor to bees and a whole bunch just
came in and then they got in contact with it. And when you are
in direct contact in that application, it is fatal. And so it
was an improper use of that application.
Mr. Schrader. And what is the right recommendation for
application?
Mr. Stone. For Linden trees, it is when it is not in
flower. So it is an attractor to the bees. Oregon is fairly
well north, and bees are out only at a certain part of the
year, and you have to spray it when the tree is not in flower.
Mr. Schrader. Thank you. I yield back.
The Chairman. Mr. LaMalfa?
Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Cummings, again,
thank you for traveling as far as you did to be part of this
here today. You stated, did you say it was \2/3\ of U.S. bees
are used at one time or another during the year for almond
pollination?
Mr. Cummings. That is approximately true. It depends on
when you take the baseline. So for example, last year the NAS
report said there were 2.5 million colonies of honeybees. There
were over-wintering losses. If you use 2.4 million as
available, 1.6 are required, around \2/3\. It is not an exact
number, but it is pretty close.
Mr. LaMalfa. And for California, their need starts about
that first week of February, correct?
Mr. Cummings. That is correct.
Mr. LaMalfa. Okay. So this is an important thing to the
almond industry, up and down our state----
Mr. Cummings. It is absolutely critical.
Mr. LaMalfa. Could you emphasize that a little bit? I know
we are short on time.
Mr. Cummings. Yes. Most almonds are not self-fertile nor
self-pollinating. There are some newer varieties now that are
self-fertile, but they still do benefit from pollination. And
that means moving the pollen from the anther of the flower to
the stigma of the flower. So 90-95 percent of the almonds in
California need to be cross-pollinated which requires the
honeybee as a vector to move the pollen from one variety of
almond to another variety of almond, and the percentage of nut
set is highly correlated with the number of pollen grains that
are transferred. So the better and more thorough pollination
transfer of pollen grains from one variety of almond to the
other variety of almond dramatically improves the nut set and
our crop. And this crop has continued to grow. It is 840,000
bearing acres this year, and that crop value will probably
close to maybe $7 billion--I am not used to talking in B's--$7
billion.
Mr. LaMalfa. We do it all the time around here. So the
challenge the panel has talked about a little bit here, we hear
about the mite, we hear about pesticides as a possibility, we
might have other conditions with, say, our drought in
California causing challenges. What would you rank, how would
you rank, say, the top three you face or we face in California
or for almonds across the board, what have you?
Mr. Cummings. In growing challenges or bee challenges?
Mr. LaMalfa. Bee challenges.
Mr. Cummings. Bee challenges would be forage, the Varroa
mite and pesticides.
Mr. LaMalfa. Forage?
Mr. Cummings. Forage is nutrition, is that--this is my
opinion--CCD and winter losses and honeybees are highly
correlated with cumulative stress, and the largest stressor as
we have discussed is Varroa mite. The second largest is
nutrition. So just the same as you and I, if we have a good,
balanced diet, we are able to tolerate stressors in our lives
far more better. And with the drought in California, all of the
growing regions for almonds in California are ranked as either
extreme or exceptional drought, and there are no flowers. And
this is true as well in many other places across the United
States which has reduced the amount of natural forage that are
available to honeybees. So forage, Varroa mite and then
pesticides.
Mr. LaMalfa. I know first-hand. I know other beekeepers
that they sell honey at some of the various festivals and such,
and they will have different varieties that come from star
thistle or meadow from of all things, and their varieties are
down on some of those types due to some of our recent drought.
It was mentioned on the panel earlier that you have some
other supplements, other things you were working with in
feeding the bees. What was that food, the SuperBee?
Mr. Cummings. MegaBee.
Mr. LaMalfa. MegaBee. That is right. My brother has the
Super Bee Dodge. So I got them mixed up. Okay, MegaBee. So you
are taking steps forward to really try and enhance what you
have naturally. Talk about that a little bit more, too, on how
you are making bees healthier and more nutrition, et cetera.
Mr. Cummings. Sure. Our bee operation with over 10,000
colonies of bees spends around $\1/2\ million a year on
supplemental feeds because of the dearth in available forage.
The natural forage is absolutely indispensable. It comes in
with different bacteria. It helps ferment pollen that is
deposited into the comb and to bee bread which converts into
amino acids. Jeff could elaborate on this far better than I
could. But it is absolutely critical for a good diet.
The supplemental feed helps. Certainly the proteins
especially help. Project Apis m. and the Almond Board of
California have been sponsoring programs now to encourage
almond growers and other farmers in California to plant forage.
And we do so alongside of our orchards so that before and after
almond bloom, and even during almond bloom, there are
alternatives, natural forage, pollens and nectars available to
the honeybees.
Mr. LaMalfa. So a good ground cover is helpful to you all,
too?
Mr. Cummings. Absolutely. The CRP grounds in North Dakota
are critical as that acreage--a lot of it has been converted
over from CRP into soybean propagation and corn because of the
value of those commodities make that ground now economically
viable, and that has been a tremendous loss for the bee
industry. Approximately 20 percent of all the honey made in the
United States is made in North Dakota, anywhere from 300,000 to
500,000 colonies a year go to North Dakota after almond
pollination, pollination of other crops. And so that CRP ground
is critical, and the planting mixture is not only the acreage
that is available but as well the mix of the CRP of the cover
crops. So a richer mix of legumes and flowering plants in that
CRP mix will make a tremendous difference.
Mr. LaMalfa. Okay. Thank you. I might come back to you on
bees and citrus as we talked about in California a couple years
ago. So I will yield back, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Mr. Vargas?
Mr. Vargas. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. First, I
would be remiss if I didn't thank all of you from the
agriculture arena for your support on immigration reform. You
have been stalwarts on that, and I appreciate it very much. By
the way, CCD, as a Catholic, usually stands for something very
different, Confraternity of Christian Doctrine. I hope we can
get back to that and fix the honeybee.
I want to ask about best management practices. What is the
best science? What are the best management practices that we
should have out among growers to protect the bees? I agree with
how important honeybees are to California. What are the best
management practices? Anyone want to take a stab at that? Mr.
Stone?
Mr. Stone. Thank you for the question. The best management
practice, when this issue first was raised, we brought together
our growers, our retailers, our landscapers all into one place,
and we wanted to try to get to the root of the problem. An
integrated pest management program is probably the best way to
go about it because as I stated in my oral testimony, if you
use just one type of pesticide, any pest, it doesn't matter if
it is something that impacts the bees or not, will develop a
resistance to it. So what you want from the nursery perspective
is to make the cleanest plant possible to ship to customers and
to rewholesalers that are free of any pathogen or pest because
the last thing you want to do is have it spread all over the
country, and then it is a bigger problem for USDA in trying to
manage it. So the best way that we have seen it is that you
want to be smart. People forget how much pesticides cost, and
that you just don't throw it on there. You certainly don't
throw on a pesticide that you don't know how effective it is
going to be or what is it going to do to the plant because you
don't put anything that is unknown on there.
An IPM, integrated pest management program, is the best BMP
that you can start with but then also just good, old-fashioned
common sense.
Mr. Vargas. How about you, Mr. Cummings? I know that we in
California are quite sophisticated in the farming industry.
What would you say? I heard your answer about the forage and
the severe drought and the other issues. But what in California
should we be doing or what are we doing that we shouldn't be
doing?
Mr. Cummings. I will start with turning on talk. The first
most important thing is really communication and coordination
between growers of pollinated crops and pollination services,
beekeepers, to know what each other is doing and what our plans
are. So for example, in the almond industry is that, of course,
I own a bee business, but we also use other bee businesses. We
coordinate when the bees are going to be moved into the
orchards. We discuss what other crops might be blooming in the
area, what other crops might be experiencing pesticide
applications in the area. The bees are brought in, they are
strategically placed, water is provided. This year we have been
having this horrible drought, is that we provide water for the
honeybees. We coordinate when the bees are moved out. We try to
coordinate our sprays and communicate with our beekeepers of
what we are applying. We choose the softest materials and most
bee-friendly materials that are available and try to put them
on the orchards after most of the pollen has been gathered so
that there is as little direct contact between pesticides and
the honeybee as possible.
Integrated pest management has been mentioned, and that is
critical. That is something that the bee industry is deploying
more and more with some of their tech transfer teams that are
like our certified pest advisors, our CPAs that advise us with
our crop production going out now and working with beekeepers
to know, to be able to identify what do they have in the
colonies. Do they have foul-brood? Do they have mites? Do they
have nosema? When is the appropriate treatment levels to try to
use more but use it more timely--excuse me, to try to use less.
Mr. Vargas. Less, yes.
Mr. Cummings. But more timely. So those are examples of
different best management practices, and in the end, I think it
goes back to the collaboration between pollination service and
pollinated crops.
Mr. Vargas. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield
back, sir. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you. Mr. Cummings, how long does a bee
live? What is the average lifespan of the bee?
Mr. Cummings. I will defer to Dr. Pettis. I do know from my
honeybee production is that if you are in a northern latitude
where the days are very long and there is a hell of a sweet
clover bloom, those bees are working long, hard hours and don't
live nearly as long as a well-nourished bee in the fall that
goes into semi-hibernation in preparation for producing brood
for almonds. So I believe 45 days to as much as 5, 6 months.
Dr. Pettis. Yes, we have winter bees and summer bees. In
the summer, they can be very short lived, even in a heavy honey
flow, even 15 or 20 days. But the average is probably 35 days
in the summer, 200 days in the winter.
The Chairman. Mr. Collins.
Mr. Collins. Thank you, Chairman. As a new Member of
Congress and somebody that came in with a firm belief that
Washington rarely knows best, in a critical role that I see us
playing on Committees is one of oversight in looking out for
business and Americans to avoid overreach and the like. So my
question, really, to Mr. Cummings and to Mr. Stone, whose
livelihood depends on the bee population, would just be the
simple question, should Congress be playing any role whatsoever
in this particular issue? And as we are finding out, there are
many different threats to the honeybees and there is a lot of
collaboration going on already to protect your industry. With
Dr. Pettis sitting there, as I am hearing this discussion, it
sounds like the USDA is actually working collaboratively with
the industry, that they are looking out for what is best for
the industry, whether it is best practices or the like and that
right now, as I sit here, this has been educational. I don't
know that I see any pressing need in this case for Congress to
step in, unlike other areas where we have seen overstepping by
the EPA and we need to make sure that we don't define mud
puddles as navigable waters. I don't see that issue here with
the USDA, and I just wonder what your opinion is of the
collaboration between the USDA, your industry, and do you
really think in Congress there is a role for us to play in this
very complicated issue? Mr. Cummings, you want to or--
Mr. Stone. We did rock, paper, scissors----
Mr. Collins. Okay.
Mr. Stone.--so that I would go first, Congressman. Thank
you for the question. The question about whether or not you
should act, it is how you act and what you direct. And there is
a bill before Congress that talks about putting off the ban of
the use of neonicotinoids until further review can be done by
the Environmental Protection Agency. I think that is well-
intentioned. I just don't know if it is the right thing to do.
Mr. Collins. That to me would be the overstep of Congress,
thinking we always have a solution. We rarely do. So yes, that
would be--I am fully with you on that. That would be an
overstepping. We would never support that.
Mr. Stone. One of my own Members of my delegation
introduced the bill, so I can't be too cheeky about that. But I
would submit to you, though, my written testimony is about the
role of Congress is to help direct research. There is a lot of
research out there, and it is about accumulating that research
and finding out not only what are the options for the use of
this particular type of pesticide which was misapplied in
Oregon, okay? Misapplied. And finding alternatives, helping
work with our chemical companies about finding alternatives
that will work well and have not been--and you don't want to
harm the pollinator community, but we also don't want to
increase health risk for workers who apply a pesticide. So my
urging to you is to be collaborative, involve stakeholders,
folks in the environmental community, the beekeeper community,
the farm community, have them come together and work with
researchers to try to find a suitable path forward.
Mr. Collins. And again I would think that is a continued
role between the industry and the USDA.
Mr. Cummings. I would like to echo Mr. Stone's remarks and
just point out, it perhaps might be subtle until you give it a
little thought is that as a farmer, I like to have the broadest
array of arrows in my quiver to address pests. And if you start
removing those or the EPA does, then I have to go back, I have
to fall back to some other alternative that still is available,
and oftentimes those aren't nearly as beneficial to the
honeybee.
Second point would be the continued funding of Varroa is
that I think the number, Mr. Chairman, from $16 billion to $20
billion just goes for the increase in value of the almond crop
in the last 2 years, is that we need to address and we need to
get a solution for Varroa mite. It benefits 90 different
pollinated crops in the United States, about \1/3\ of our diet
in all the states. So funding of Varroa mite research is
critical.
And then last, something could be done at little expense is
continued support of the CRP program and encouraging a richer
mix of flowering species, not just grasses but flowering plants
in the CRP mix to enhance the natural forage that is available
to honeybees. I can't imagine it would incur any additional
cost.
Mr. Collins. Yes. No, thank you for that testimony. What
you have really pointed out were, when I say what is the role
of Congress that is on a pro-active way, what you have given me
is two examples of where Congress should not be pro-active,
which I fully agree with. One is the EPA, the other is banning
the neonicotinoids. That is the case of Congress, as I started
out by saying, the overreach we shouldn't do and should back
off, and again, this is one where I think what I am sensing is
USDA is doing a very good job in working with the industry in a
collaborative effort. We should let that continue. And I also
do agree the research dollars and making sure they are well-
used with input from you is something we should be cognizant of
as we pass our appropriation bills. Thank you. I yield back,
Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you. Mrs. Hartzler.
Mrs. Hartzler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,
gentlemen. I am very interested in this. I am a farmer myself,
but a few years ago I found a bee colony in a dead tree in our
pasture and it was kind of fun. We had a beekeeper come out and
help harvest that, and they saved the colony and so they were
going to treat them for the mites and make sure they were able
to be healthy for a long time. And I got to try to strain honey
out of the old combs, and it was a lot of fun. So I certainly
appreciate the role of bees and appreciate what you do.
And I was just wondering, while much attention has been
given to the Varroa mites, it is my understanding that other
parasites and pests may affect honeybees. So I was wondering,
what is the assessment, your assessment of the impact of these
pests individually and collectively on bee colonies? And I
guess Dr. Pettis, maybe?
Dr. Pettis. Well, certainly the Varroa mite is not the only
problem affecting honeybee health, and in fact, viruses are a
good example of that. Honeybees all have viruses at low levels,
but given the interaction with the Varroa mite, those levels of
viruses can spike. Well, the same can happen with something
like nutritional stress or other stressors. So the pathogens,
things like bacteria, fungi and viruses, are there present in
the bees, and when bees are under stress, then these things can
manifest themselves, just like our own bodies if we are under
various types of stress. It is the pathogens that often kill
the bees. There are some primary stressors that are driving
that.
Mrs. Hartzler. That is very interesting. What do you think
the most pressing need in research is right now and is there
adequate funding for that in our budget, the President's
budget? Dr. Pettis, maybe?
Dr. Pettis. I am kind of echoing what they were saying
about some of the issues. I think the land use and forage
efforts, CRP and others that USDA has on a number of fronts,
are where some of the biggest impact can be made. Beekeeping in
the United States has changed. It used to be about honey
production. It is now about pollination, and the average
colony, the average commercial colony, gets rented three to
five times. So by definition, they are in an ag setting, but
they are only getting one source of nectar or pollen, and they
always do better on a mixed diet. So if they can get mixed
flowers and CRP and other programs can provide that, then they
will do better.
So diversifying the agricultural environment through these
land management programs can have a huge impact.
Mrs. Hartzler. I think that makes a lot of sense, and it
wouldn't necessarily incur that much cost, like you say,
because we already have the CRP programs and just start
promoting that more. So I really appreciate that information.
USDA estimates bee colony losses normally average 17 to 20
percent per year, but in the winters of 2006-2007 and 2007-
2008, losses averaged higher than normal rates, about 30
percent per year. So I was just curious, how is this number
calculated? Who is surveyed? How have losses trended in the
more recent years, 2011, 2012, 2013?
Dr. Pettis. So in 2006-2007 when we started identifying
Colony Collapse Disorder as a major impact on bee losses we
started doing a survey. USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service, the apiary inspectors of each state got together and
we did a survey of the beekeepers, what were your losses like
through the wintertime. And so we started out with just
manually calling things. We moved online, and now it is funded
by a NIFA grant. Bee Informed Partnership does that. NASS,
National Agricultural Statistic Service, has a honey survey
that they do, have done for 75 years. There is talk about NASS
taking over that loss survey, and that would be good because
then they reach out to all beekeepers and get total
representation. The survey that we have conducted has
represented about 20 to 40 percent of the managed colonies in
the United States. So it has been fairly representative, but it
is not as good a job as NASS could do in doing a loss survey.
Mrs. Hartzler. How have the losses compared the last few
years?
Dr. Pettis. Two or 3 years ago we had a loss of about 22
percent, but on average they have been just at 30 percent or
greater. And we will have a new number May 6th. We have a
report that will come out for last year's losses. So they are
still averaging in the 30 percent range which again is at least
ten percent higher than we expect with Varroa mite. So very
simply, before Varroa mite, we had about ten percent loss. With
Varroa mite, we moved up to almost 20 percent loss, and now
with all these other factors, we are up to 30 percent loss. And
beekeeping is kind of unsustainable at that rate.
Mrs. Hartzler. Absolutely. Well, this is a very, very
important issue, and I appreciate you being here today. I
appreciate, Mr. Chairman, you holding this hearing because it
is very vital for agriculture in many ways. So I yield back.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Mr. Denham from California.
Mr. Denham. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Pettis, as you
know California is experiencing a tremendous drought right now.
Secretary Vilsack has stated that USDA is acting to mitigate
the crop losses due to the drought. What types of challenges or
loss do you expect to see with the honeybees?
Dr. Pettis. Well, it is a challenging question. We have
that survey under way right now, and we will have that figure
May 6th. I do know for California specifically, this year,
coming out of almonds, the keepers are normally there from
January, February, into early March, and there are other things
blooming in California. This past year there has been virtually
nothing blooming in California due to the drought. So this
particular year in California was unusual and that the bees had
almonds and they had virtually nothing else.
So we talk about the Midwest as being important, the
Dakotas and the Midwest, because that is where the bees summer.
Sixty to 70 percent of the bees summer there, and then they go
to California, but foraging California is critical as well. And
I don't know where the loss figure will go this year.
[The information referred to is located on p. 41.]
Mr. Denham. And do you know if USDA is planning anything to
mitigate any loss or address any of the challenges that we are
facing with our pollinators?
Dr. Pettis. I would have to get back to you with specifics
on whether we were looking at mitigating. I will say that this
fall we are planning to hold a summit on forage that will look
at forage issues this coming fall. But I don't know about
mitigation. I have to get back to you on that.
[The information referred to is located on p. 41.]
Mr. Denham. Thank you. Mr. Cummings, have you seen your
costs increase? Have you been forced to pay higher prices due
to the Colony Collapse Disorder?
Mr. Cummings. Prices have definitely gone up from about $40
or so early in the 2000s to up to about $180 now. There was a
Gianini Foundation study that was published about 3 years ago,
and they did a correlation between two things, two driving
factors for the cost of almond pollination. One of them was the
dramatic increase in acreage and therefore the demand for
honeybees, and then second, Colony Collapse Disorder. The
conclusion of that study was that the increase in costs are
driven about 50/50, 50 percent by the increase in acreage and
50 percent by Colony Collapse Disorder and the impact on the
available supply of honeybees to the almond industry.
Mr. Denham. Thank you. Along with over quadrupling of the
cost of honeybees, how tough is it to find them these days? And
is it getting tougher?
Mr. Cummings. You can always find boxes to put in the
field, but whether that is a good viable colony and how strong
that colony is, as I know you know as you are an almond farmer.
So that is why I immediately started chuckling is there are a
lot of growers out there that think they have bees. It always
amazes me. You know, to produce a pound of almonds, 13 percent
of my variable cost of production, labor, water, equipment,
fertilizer, 13 percent of our cost to produce a pound of
almonds is for honeybee rent. And growers need to be more
active and getting out there and looking in their boxes and
seeing what they have because some years are dramatically
better than others.
Mr. Denham. Thank you. I yield back.
The Chairman. Thank you. Mr. Schrader, do you have any
closing statements?
Mr. Schrader. I just appreciate the panel. It has been very
informative. I think it has gotten us a little better
appreciation for the variety of problems that are causing
problems in our pollinators right now. I appreciate the great
work, research, and thoughtful discussion that you guys bring
to the table. Hopefully we will mirror that in what we do and
what we don't do here in the halls of Congress. And just for
the record, I am not that legislator from Oregon that
introduced that bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Mr. LaMalfa. I think he had another question.
I'd ask the gentleman if he had----
Mr. LaMalfa. Oh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. One more follow-
up on that, Dr. Fischer. There is a lot of research you are
going to have underway soon, and I am just wondering what do
you think can be developed in the future? What will your
emphasis be to improve bee health situations with ongoing
research? We talked about it isn't just Varroa but we also have
other pests and disease that can be an emphasis. What do you
have on that, please?
Dr. Fischer. Well, we are focused largely on Varroa. We are
working on some other things, but we are working on some new
ways to control Varroa, ways to apply the chemicals in a novel
way so that the bees sort of self-dose, and beekeepers are able
to rotate modes of action to combat resistance. We have some
new chemicals that we are screening to see if we can come up
with something novel. We are also working on small hive beetle
which is a pest that certainly in North Carolina and the South
causes some problems, some ways to control the small hive
beetle. And just general beekeeping practices. You know, how
can agriculture and beekeeping coexist better? A number of
people mentioned it. When you talk to beekeepers and growers, a
lot of times if they just communicate better, they can work out
a lot of the conflicts. But we are trying to be a place where
we can bring stakeholders together. We can work with multiple
stakeholders to find some of these solutions.
Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you. And Mr. Stone, Mr. Cummings as
well, coordination was mentioned. Thank you, Dr. Fischer, on
that. It makes a lot of sense where you have--for back hoe
folks they have 1-800 Miss Utility phone number. And so it
would seem like is the system, Mr. Stone, Mr. Cummings, working
well enough on coordinator or is there more that can be done,
more that perhaps we could emphasize if it is appropriate to
have that coordination? You know, we have talked about a lot of
things. Back when I was in the state, there was a lot of
controversy over citrus as a place to house bees over-
wintering, so they would have a food source until they can get
back into the spring but some controversy over when and where.
So could we do better on the coordination with the timing, with
when material might be applied, or even as was talked about,
more places to forage? I have a little idle land that we can't
grow anything on, maybe a positive program where we would have
certain types of cover crop that would be helpful to bees. What
could we do in all this coordination area, either with
government or not?
Mr. Cummings. The industry is doing a lot of that on their
own and getting better every year. And so by way of example, it
has really only been the last 3 or 4 years that we have clearly
identified what a deficit we have in the availability of
natural forage. So Project Apis m., in conjunction with the
Almond Board of California, has been sponsoring plantings of
cover crops in fallowed areas adjacent to almond plantings,
providing free seed as a matter of fact, also developing best
management practices and enhancing communication within the
grower community. And obviously, the cost of the input to
almond growers is getting almond growers' attention, and they
are paying more attention also. We are making great strides in
those areas. There is clearly more opportunity, but we are
already doing very well.
I will give you an example. Blue Diamond has a field staff,
a dozen different field staff members that service the needs of
our grower owners, and they are a wonderful vehicle for getting
the word out, communicating to growers the things that they
ought to be concerned about and promoting the communication and
cooperation with beekeepers, developing a beekeeping strategy,
a pollination strategy. And so at least the California almond
industry is evolving in that area in recognizing the value of
natural forage and doing what we can through Project Apis m.
and the Almond Board to advance that.
Mr. LaMalfa. And certainly we have some of your colleagues
set up bee yards in some of our idle areas. Mr. Stone was
talking about--and there is this emphasis again of Congress, do
something, right? And so we hear a piece of legislation might
be to have a complete ban on the neonicotinoids--sir----
Mr. Stone. I'm not keeping--Congressman.
Mr. LaMalfa.--to some extent, and you know, there is always
an overreaction it seems on things. So what I have heard is
that when you have a misapplication, somebody using the
material wrong, and if the label is not defined well enough for
certain situations, those folks making the law have stepped in
and further defined the label so people use the material will
better use that. And if they continually use it
inappropriately, there is going to be a penalty for that. Do
you believe we are on track using this better information,
better emphasis on information? Are we on track to doing that
without having to take a drastic measure on bans as is some
folks' natural course on these materials?
Mr. Stone. Congressman, I appreciate the question. I think
that the EPA's response initially was actually pretty helpful.
They are creating an insignia that looks like a bee on
something that could be potentially toxic to the pollinator
community and just reiterating the fact that you need to take
into consideration when you are applying this particular
pesticide that you can't do it when bees are present.
One of the big challenges that we have is that we face
language barriers as well as we do anything else with some of
our applicators. So you want to try to use as many visuals as
you can, and the EPA should get a little bit of credit for
putting that forward. Now, saying that we should uniformly then
ban until the science catches up, is a little bit of an
emotional response. But I would say that your role, my plea to
you is that I believe that the Congressional role is to urge
the type of research, get the type of alternatives that we
have, increase public awareness. One thing about the bee deaths
in Wilsonville is that it sure as heck got a lot of public
awareness to it. But I would submit that this type of
pesticide--the neonics are involved in a lot of different
products ranging from flea and tick items all the way to the
stuff that you would buy to apply as an agricultural operation.
Mr. LaMalfa. Real quick question.
The Chairman. Gentleman--
Mr. LaMalfa. How many bees per bee box? How many bees
reside in one bee box?
The Chairman. This is the last question until we go to Mr.
Costa.
Dr. Pettis. Twenty thousand to 40,000, depending on the
season.
Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I
appreciate it.
The Chairman. Mr. Costa.
Mr. Costa. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for holding
this hearing of the Subcommittee. It is kind of a follow-up
question by our colleague, Congressman LaMalfa. In 2008 we put
funding in the farm bill to try to deal with the concerns with
the loss of bee colonies throughout the nation, and in 2014 we
did so as well. And I just finished a bag of almonds here, and
knowing that California produces 95 percent of the world's
almonds, obviously this is important, but it is also important
to a lot of other commodities that depend upon the pollination
as well as a whole lot of other important purposes that bees
produce that are just now beginning to come to light.
My question to those of you who would like to respond is,
are we doing a good enough job coordinating the money from 2008
and 2014 with the private sector money? You mentioned the
California Almond Board's efforts on research to deal with the
decline of bee colonies. Is the money being, both the public
and the industry money being used and coordinated well to
really determine not only the contributing factors to the
losses but also a strategy to address those losses? Who would
like to respond?
Dr. Pettis. I will just say that within USDA we hold
stakeholder meetings that include beekeepers but also growers
and other stakeholders to get input and what things we should
be addressing. And there are good examples of us working with
private partnerships, with the Almond Board and things.
Mr. Costa. Well, I know there are examples. I guess I am
trying to find out is your sense is it working and what is not
working, I guess, and what could we do better? It is all
perfect, huh?
Dr. Pettis. It is not perfect, no. The health of the
honeybee is not perfect.
Mr. Costa. No, we know that.
Dr. Pettis. Honeybees----
Mr. Costa. But I am wondering as this isn't a new issue.
Dr. Pettis. And beekeepers are suffering. We have looked at
honeybees as something kind of mystical. They produce honey and
wax, but it is really the pollination. And we need to think of
it more as livestock, and we have not done that. We have not
done that in the past. They are livestock, and they have one
mission and that is pollination, at least in agriculture. They
do all these other magical things as well, and working with the
growers, the different growers that depend on bees for
pollination, I agree with doing that, but it could always be
improved.
Mr. Costa. Yes, but this Committee's job in part is
oversight. What I am trying to understand in terms of our
oversight role is this; is the Federal funding being used well,
as it should be. Are either taxpayer dollars or industry-
related dollars to coordinate with the various private entities
or associations really getting to the bottom of this. Are we on
the right track? Is there an evaluation? How do we provide the
oversight to know that taxpayer money is being spent wisely? No
one argues the cost.
Mr. Cummings. I can try to speak----
Mr. Costa. I don't argue the cost.
Mr. Cummings. I can try to speak to at least a part of
this. As the Chairman of the Bee Task Force for the Almond
Board of California and as the Past Chairman of Project Apis m.
as well, we review a lot of bee research proposals that either
the Almond Board funds or Project Apis m. funds, and we have
learned a lot as well over the last several years. We now have
a Scientific Review Committee at the Almond Board, at Project
Apis m. At the Almond Board we have the Bee Task Force to
prescreen these research proposals and evaluate them and ask
questions of where is other money coming from? What areas of
specialty exist out there with the ARS labs? And we continue to
fund that. The Almond Board of California has spent a lot of
money at the Carl Hayden Research Lab----
Mr. Costa. No, I know you have.
Mr. Cummings. To your question, we feel like we are getting
good value there because we are electing to spend our money
there. We are a client in a sense.
Mr. Costa. I got that. I am just trying to understand from
our oversight role, if there is something we should be doing. I
would like to see what the results of our efforts are and make
sure we are getting the best bang for our buck and getting to
the root causes of the CCD, how we fix this problem. Where are
we?
Dr. Pettis. I will take another stab. As Dan mentioned
earlier, we have actually probably in the last 5 years
recognized that honeybees are suffering from lack of forage.
And so all the USDA and even the private efforts by utility
companies and others to increase the forage is money well
spent. So there is some of that that is Federal and there is
some of that that is private where these private-public
partnerships are developing around forage. I think that is an
area where we can have immediate and lasting impact.
Mr. Costa. Mr. Chairman, my time has expired, I am only
trying to find out if we invest X amount of dollars, will we
arrive at a solution in 2 years or 4 years? Is the question one
of resources? Is the question one of research? Or is the
question that we just don't know enough yet? I understand more
forage is better for bees. I got that. But I don't know that we
are any closer to solving the cause. I have read that there are
a number of factors that are resulting in the decline of the
colonies. What I have not heard is how we fix this decline.
Dr. Pettis. You have heard that it is multi-factoral. There
are various factors involved. And so the answer is going to be
complex. I think in this year's President's budget there is
some $25 million pollinator--I don't know what we call it--
pollinator initiative. And I was asked specifically by a number
of individuals, would that turn bee health around, and I could
not honestly say that even that infusion of money would turn it
around tomorrow. And the reason for that is it is very complex.
It is not going to take one answer. So we are going to have to
take--research helps with the land use issues and things like
that help as well. So I couldn't honestly say that the huge
infusion of money would turn it around tomorrow.
The Chairman. Mr. Davis?
Mr. Davis. Well, actually, I am glad Mr. Costa went in
front of me. My question is actually built on what his line of
questioning was, and I first want to apologize to the panel
that I came in late. I had to go see some veterans on an honor
flight who served our country. And that was our priority today.
But this is a very important issue. As a matter of fact, I
was actually out in the Central Valley of California with my
good friend, Mr. LaMalfa, and Mr. Valadao, and saw parts of
agriculture that someone in the Midwest doesn't get to see very
often, including almond trees, pistachio trees and other
operations.
I have a distinct concern of the Colony Collapse Disorder,
and when you look at Mr. Costa's questions about how are we
utilizing our investment from the Federal Government to address
this problem, I find it very interesting, Dr. Pettis, your
comment that $25 million might not solve the problem. And it
goes to the old adage that not everything needs money to fix
the problems.
And with that in mind, I would like to go to Mr. Cummings
and ask you. You know, USDA has a publication called Using Farm
Bill Programs for Pollinator Conservation. Can you tell us how
you in California have been able to leverage some of these
programs?
Mr. Cummings. I am not familiar with that document so----
Mr. Davis. Well, better yet, have you guys in the private
sector who are dealing with this issue on a regular basis, have
you been able to leverage any of our farm bill programs, USDA
research programs, to help further your research to get to the
point where we start to solve problems?
Mr. Cummings. You know, I am not prepared to answer that on
behalf of the industry. Perhaps I could prepare some remarks
and submit it to the Committee for your review.
[The information referred to is located on p. 42.]
Mr. Davis. Okay. That would be fine. How do you think USDA
can better help these beekeepers then? You just heard from Dr.
Pettis that $25 million may not be enough in his opinion. So it
is not just about money. What can we do in this Committee to
help you address this problem on the ground to leverage Federal
funds or Federal opportunities with some of the opportunities
that you discuss in your testimony and also that you discussed
today?
Mr. Cummings. Congressman, two areas, one of them would be
a sustained and continued commitment to research on Varroa
mite. Oh, boy, if that burden was lifted from our honeybee
operation, it would make a tremendous difference. And then the
second area would be the availability of forage which would be
the CRP lands and a richer mix of flowering plants in those CRP
mixes.
Mr. Davis. Excellent. I appreciate the responses. I have a
couple minutes left, and as I see that I am winding down to the
end, I want to give each of you a chance. Is there anything
that this Committee hasn't asked you that you would like to
address now? You are welcome to use the rest of my time to do
so. Going once, going twice. I yield--oh, Dr. Fischer.
Dr. Fischer. Let me just say I haven't commented on the
forage issue. Our industry also sees that as a tremendous need
that we need more opportunities for beekeepers to place bees in
good, quality habitat. Bees need food, shelter and water just
like we do, and if we keep the bees healthy, they will resist
some of these diseases better. And if we can control the mites,
we will knock down the pathogen loads. Everything is
intertwined. It is all intertwined.
Mr. Davis. Well, thank you, Dr. Fischer. Mr. LaMalfa, I see
you took 10 minutes the first time. You need me to yield me the
last minute?
Mr. LaMalfa. No, I am doing fine, sir. Thank you.
Mr. Davis. You sure? All right. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
The Chairman. Are you sure about that?
Mr. Davis. Reset the clock. I got another 5 minutes. All
right.
The Chairman. Gentlemen, I want to thank you for being
here, and I know Mr. Schrader had to step out as well. I
appreciate the fact-based approach in making sure that we have
the science right to help resolve this problem. I think one of
the key questions with regard to the oversight is making sure
that the money that is going from the taxpayers, from the
United States taxpayers, into this research is producing the
results that is needed to help again generate the value of the
crop, which means that it will have a return for everybody.
With that said, again, thank you for being here, and under
the rules of the Committee, the record of today's hearing will
remain open for 10 calendar days to receive additional
materials and supplementary written responses from the
witnesses to any questions posed by a Member. The Subcommittee
on Horticulture, Research, Biotechnology, and Foreign
Agriculture hearing is now adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 10:25 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
Submitted Statement by Hon. Austin Scott, a Representative in Congress
from Georgia on Behalf of Gene Harrington, Vice President, Government
Affairs, National Pest Management Association
Chairman Scott, Ranking Member Schrader, and other Members of the
Subcommittee, the National Pest Management Association (NPMA)
appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony regarding the panel's
hearing to review the current research and application of management
strategies to control pests and diseases of pollinators.
Founded in 1933, NPMA is the only national trade group representing
the interests of professional pest management companies. NPMA's 6,000
members manage countless residential pests such as ants, bed bugs,
mosquitoes, rodents, stinging insects and termites in a myriad of
residential, commercial and institutional settings.
We are taught early on that bees are beneficial insects. The value
of insect pollination to U.S. agricultural production is estimated at
$16 billion annually; about \3/4\ of the value is attributable to honey
bees. In light of how significant bees are to the ecosystem and to
maintaining a diverse and healthy food supply, NPMA is a member and
financial supporter of the Pollinator Partnership, a group devoted to
the promotion of the health of pollinators through conservation,
education, and research
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) estimates of over-winter bee
colony losses have averaged more than 30 percent annually in recent
years. (Since many beekeepers have been able to replace lost hives,
overall honey bee colony numbers are stable.) Science suggests multiple
factors for the decline in bee health including; parasites, diet and
nutrition, lack of genetic diversity, habitat loss, beekeeping
management practices, weather, and viruses. A 2013 joint USDA and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) report found the Varroa mite as
the ``most detrimental pest of honeybees.''
Some have unjustifiably singled out pesticides as the primary cause
for the decline in bee health, focusing specifically on a class of
pesticides known as neonicotinoids. As part of its periodic review of
every pesticide, EPA is presently reevaluating neonicotinoids to ensure
they meet contemporary health and environmental standards. While the
process is expected to last until 2018, EPA can impose use restrictions
sooner, if the data warrants such action. In fact, last August, EPA
amended language on neonicotinoid product labels to better safeguard
bees from unintended exposure. The Agency is expected to issue a
proposal later this year extending that language to all pesticide
labels.
When used improperly, pesticides can indeed be harmful to bees.
Pest management professionals (PMPs), however, have met their states'
pesticide applicator licensing and certification requirements and are
trained to apply pesticides according to label directions. The
byproduct of EPA's evaluation of a pesticide's potential environmental
and health hazards, labels are an extension of Federal and state
pesticide law. Of course, bees can also be pests, infesting homes and
threatening human health in certain situations. Consequently, PMPs are
frequently contacted to manage such problems. It is standard practice
for many PMPs to reach out to bee keepers to collect and recolonize
honey bees they are called upon to control. In addition, an increasing
number of PMPs are being bee keepers themselves, and they try to
preserve the bees they encounter for their personal hives. Sometimes,
however, treating bees with a pesticide is unavoidable.
When used according to the label, there has been no demonstrated
negative effect on bee health associated with use of neonicotinoid
insecticides. Moreover, the chairwoman of a major National Academy of
Sciences study on the loss of pollinators recently said she was
``extremely dubious'' that banning neonicotinoids would have any
positive effect.
In closing, NPMA urges Members of Congress to withhold support from
measures that unfairly blame pesticides for the decline in bee health,
overlooking the widespread science that shows this is an extremely
complex issue with multiple factors involved. NPMA also urges Committee
Members to join the Congressional Pollinator Protection Caucus (CP2C),
a bipartisan group dedicated to protecting pollinators and their
habitat.
______
Submitted Statement Hon. Jim Costa, a Representative in Congress from
California on Behalf of Almond Hullers & Processors Association
May 5, 2014
Hon. Jim Costa,
U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
Dear Rep. Costa:
Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony to the recent
hearing on research efforts to combat pests and diseases of pollinators
on behalf of the Almond Hullers & Processors Association, the
California almond industry's trade association. Our members represent
90 percent of the almond industry based on tonnage. The almond industry
is California's third ranking agricultural crop with a farm gate value
of $4.3 billion in 2012. We are proud to say we are the number one
California agricultural export and the number one specialty crop export
for the United States. 2012 almond exports of $3.4 billion created
47,000 jobs. California produces 80 percent of the world's almonds and
100 percent of the U.S. domestic supply.
Almonds are the largest crop that needs to be pollinated by bees
and we are the first crop to bloom each year. For those reasons, the
almond industry partners with beekeepers and bee researchers to protect
this vital resource. This partnership is funded through the Almond
Board of California (ABC). I would like to share with you that ABC has
invested over $2.2 million of almond grower dollars in bee health
research since 1995. ABC key objectives today are to assure a
sufficient supply of strong hives for almond pollination and to assure
almonds continue to be a good and safe place for bees. To reach these
objectives, ABC's primary research focus over the last several years
has been honey bee health including nutrition, stock improvement, pest/
disease management, and the impact of pesticides. Since 2000, ABC has
funded 70 projects with key researchers throughout the United States.
Current projects include:
1. Improving honey bee nutrition and forage throughout the year
a. Nutritional effects of protein supplements vs.
natural forage in colonies used for almond pollination
b. Integrated crop pollination--supplemental forage in
conjunction with almonds
2. Varroa mite (and other bee pests) control--breeding, new
materials and management techniques
a. Varroa treatments: Efficacy and economic impact
b. Treatment thresholds: Enhancing tech transfer teams
for the beekeeping industry.
Note: Tech Transfer Teams are experts who work with beekeepers
and other pollinator stakeholders to provide disease and
parasite management monitoring along with analysis so that
beekeepers can make science-based decisions on what helps
or hinders bee health. Over wintering bee losses for
beekeepers working with a Tech Transfer Team average 17
percent, while the standard bee loss is 31 percent.
3. Stock improvement
a. Germplasm importation, preservation and stock
improvement
4. Balancing the need for pest control materials, both in crops and
in the hive vs. possible effects on live health
a. Fungicide effects on honey bee development
b. Impact of fungicide application on pollen
germination and tube growth
In addition to ABC-funded research, the almond industry has
successfully utilized the UC Cooperative Research and Extension
programs that support staff and facilities for basic laboratory and
field research as well as supporting applied research and Extension
that moves basic research into commercial settings and helps
communicate findings and recommendations developed through that
research to the grower community. Continuing cuts in public funding for
agricultural research are having a significant impact on the pool of
skilled researchers available to carry out research projects. At UC
Agricultural and Natural Resources (ANR) division, there has been a 40
percent decline in the number of ``boots on the ground'' Extension
specialists and farm advisors from a peak of 300 farm advisors and 200
specialist in 1990 to 200 advisors and 100 specialists today.
As these permanent budget cuts continue, private industry must be
involved in securing research capacity at the basic and applied level
to ensure California growers maintain their competitive edge.
The ABC is currently engaged in prioritizing future research needs
for the industry and exploring ways to support research capacity
through public and private partnerships.
To support research capacity, ABC is designating funds on an
ongoing basis to cover start-up costs for Extension opportunities. For
example, ABC is partnering with the California Pistachio Research Board
to provide funding for the research and community outreach provided by
a Farm Advisor/Specialist with the ANR for up to 6 years. Upon the
completion of the 6 year probationary period, ANR would take over the
funding. This collaborative approach is being overseen by the ABC
Production Research Committee and allows ABC to advance commitments to
this important program.
If you would like information about these projects or others ABC
funds to benefit the almond industry, please let me know. Again, thank
you for letting us participate in this discussion.
Sincerely,
Gabriele Ludwig,
Consultant to AHPA.
______
Supplementary Material Submitted by Dr. Jeffrey S.Pettis, Research
Leader, Bee Research Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, U.S.
Department of Agriculture
Insert 1
Mr. Denham. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Pettis, as you know
California is experiencing a tremendous drought right now.
Secretary Vilsack has stated that USDA is acting to mitigate
the crop losses due to the drought. What types of challenges or
loss do you expect to see with the honeybees?
Dr. Pettis. Well, it is a challenging question. We have that
survey under way right now, and we will have that figure May
6th. I do know for California specifically, this year, coming
out of almonds, the keepers are normally there from January,
February, into early March, and there are other things blooming
in California. This past year there has been virtually nothing
blooming in California due to the drought. So this particular
year in California was unusual and that the bees had almonds
and they had virtually nothing else.
So we talk about the Midwest as being important, the Dakotas
and the Midwest, because that is where the bees summer. Sixty
to 70 percent of the bees summer there, and then they go to
California, but foraging California is critical as well. And I
don't know where the loss figure will go this year.
The main effect of drought on bees is that it will reduce bee
forage. This year, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
gave farmers incentives to plant bee forage on their farms. This
program was just initiated this year. Since 2008, ARS research has
identified ways to better provide bee forage for honey bees and other
pollinators that will be useful to the farmers in this program.
In addition, the 2014 USDA Crop Insurance program insures honey
production losses related to low rainfall and its effects on bee
forage. This should help mitigate financial losses felt by honey
producers.
Insert 2
Mr. Denham. And do you know if USDA is planning anything to
mitigate any loss or address any of the challenges that we are
facing with our pollinators?
Dr. Pettis. I would have to get back to you with specifics on
whether we were looking at mitigating. I will say that this
fall we are planning to hold a summit on forage that will look
at forage issues this coming fall. But I don't know about
mitigation. I have to get back to you on that.
Based on scientific evidence to date, the leading factors that are
most likely interacting to cause pollinator decline are poor bee
nutrition and habitat loss, parasitic mites and pathogens,
transportation stress, and exposure to pesticides. Lack of diverse bee
stock may also contribute to bee susceptibility. ARS has identified
ways to better provide bee forage for honey bees and other pollinators.
NRCS has initiated efforts to provide farmers incentives to plant bee
forage on their farms.
One of the issues that has recently emerged concerns questions over
the importance of sublethal effects of insecticides and fungicides on
honey bee health. The extent to which bees are exposed to these
pesticides throughout their lifecycle is being assessed. In the last
year, ARS has started research projects to evaluate better use of
pesticides, such as to reduce bee exposures while still maintaining
adequate crop protection.
USDA and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are coordinating
efforts to revise the CCD and Bee Health Action Plan and develop a
National Recovery Plan for Honey Bees in response to the 2014
Presidential Memo on Pollinator Health. This will be accompanied by
several listening and informational sessions nationwide. These efforts
build on a National Stakeholder Workshop on Honey Bee Health held in
2012. The report for that workshop can be found at www.usda.gov/
documents/ReportHoneyBeeHealth.pdf. A Bee Health Action Plan was
developed to address needs identified by stakeholders at this workshop,
and several Federal agencies are now working together to accomplish
this work; the Federal agencies include eight USDA agencies
(Agricultural Research Service (ARS), National Institute of Food and
Agriculture (NIFA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), Farm
Service Agency (FSA), Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
(APHIS), National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), Forest
Service (FS), and Economic Research Service (ERS)) and EPA.
The goals of this work are to:
Accurately determine the pesticide exposure that bees
receive in the field and the sub-lethal effects of pesticides
on honey bees and colony productivity;
Systematically implement Best Management Practices for
pesticide use and develop strategies to enhance adoption of
these practices;
Greatly improve knowledge of bee nutrition and its impact on
bee longevity since malnourished bees are more susceptible to
stressors;
Improve bee breeding stock; and
Improve means of managing parasitic mites and diseases.
______
Submitted Letter by Arthur Daniel ``Dan'' Cummings, Chief Executive
Officer, Capay Farms; Chief Financial Officer, Olivarez Honey Bees,
Chico, CA
June 16, 2014
House Committee on Agriculture,
U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
Dear Committee Members:
Thank you for the opportunity to provide additional answers to
questions raised at the hearing to review current research and
application of management strategies to control pest and diseases of
pollinators. Rep. Davis had requested ways in which the almond industry
had leveraged programs funded through the farm bill to improve bee
conditions.
Conservation Programs
Almond growers have availed themselves of funding from the
Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) managed by the Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) to help plant pollinator friendly
plantings and hedgerows around their properties to help provide diverse
forage for honey bees. Plantings have also been used to restore non-
agriculture lands to provide bee habitat. The NRCS Plant Material
Centers around the country have been extremely useful in helping to
identify plant species that are regionally appropriate to plant for
pollinator habitat. Thus, they play a critical role in improving forage
for honey bees and pollinators.
Another program funded by the farm bill that is extremely important
to beekeepers and the almond industry is the Conservation Reserve
Program managed by USDA-FSA. While it is not directly utilized by the
almond industry, the use of CRP lands in the Midwest is critical to
ensuring good summer forage areas for commercial honey bees. The
significant loss of acres due to increased corn and soybean prices,
coupled with Congress' cut in support for CRP acres, is seriously
hurting honey bees due to loss of good forage opportunities during the
summer months.
Research Programs
The Specialty Crop Block Grant program has been invaluable for
funding. Project Apis M. has received funding for habitat creation
around almonds. Also, funding from Specialty Crop Research Initiative
(SCRI) grants via USDA-NIFA have gone to honey bee health or to
pollinator health/habitat.
Also, I would be negligent if I did not mention the Bee Informed
Partnership sponsored by USDA-NIFA. Funding for Tech Transfer Teams
through this project has been critically vital in Varroa mite treatment
and control. In 2012-2013, commercial beekeepers working with these
teams experience 17% overwintering loss of hives where the average
commercial beekeepers hive loss was 31%. Funding for this project ends
in 2 years and alternate funding will need to be identified as this
program is too important to lose. The Almond Board of California
contributes funds for Tech Transfer Teams and is committed to the
program and future funding. Partnerships with other industries should
be pursued.
Finally, Rep. Costa had also asked a question regarding the
effectiveness of research dollars that Congress provided in 2007 and
2012 for honey bee health and whether that research is sufficiently
coordinated. I would like to address that question as well. The
additional funding has been very helpful in learning more about honey
bee health especially when it comes to diseases and pesticides.
However, better coordination to improve honey bee/pollinator health
research within USDA and universities would be beneficial. The large
coordinated efforts such as the Bee Informed Partnership (mentioned
above) or the Integrated Crop Pollination Project are examples of very
successful coordinated efforts. Areas where improved coordination would
help include Varroa mite and disease management as well as pollinator
breeding (e.g., queen breeders are not adopting USDA-ARS bred strains
of bees). Also, currently there is too little coordination with EPA on
any of the pesticide impact research. Most of the current work within
USDA and universities is not usable in the regulatory context because
it doesn't really help EPA assess what actions to take.
Again, thank you for letting me participate in the hearing. Should
you have any further questions, I am happy to respond.
Sincerely,
Dan Cummings.
______
Submitted Questions
Response from Dr. Jeffrey S. Pettis, Research Leader, Bee Research
Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of
Agriculture
Questions Submitted by Hon. Jim Costa, a Representative in Congress
from California
Question 1. With the investments made on pollinator issues in both
the 2008 and 2014 Farm Bills as well as other USDA programs, what has
and hasn't worked?
Answer. The U.S. bee industry started to suffer high bee mortality
rates in the mid-2000's due to a malady commonly called Colony Collapse
Disorder (CCD). Like Alzheimer's, diabetes, and cancer in humans, CCD
has turned out to be a very complex problem in honey bees, and despite
significant findings and continued scientific research, we have not yet
found the underlying cause. While CCD seems to be somewhat in decline,
bee losses in total have stayed about the same, suggesting that the
problem of bee loss is large and the solutions are difficult.
At the start, a major research barrier was the lack of any baseline
data on honey bee colony health in the United States. Scientists still
do not have any means for determining how current honey bee mortality
rates compare with mortality levels before CCD, so U.S. Bee Loss Survey
was established in 2008 to provide some data on the causes of bee
losses, and from which to evaluate progress and measure success. This
was run by the Apiary Inspectors of America for the first few years,
and for the last 3 years, via a NIFA funded CAP grant to the University
of Maryland. A Pest and Disease Survey is a separate, significant
achievement that resulted from new funding provided for CCD research to
APHIS, with scientific labor provided by ARS. Also, NASS is developing
a strategy to survey colonies losses on a quarterly basis. A quarterly
survey will provide better tracking of when and where mortality occurs,
especially for migratory colonies. This project is not currently
funded, but if funding is obtained, it could begin as early as April
2015.
Although over-winter losses in honey bee colonies have not declined
significantly since the U.S. Bee Loss survey was initiated, scientists
have made progress in addressing the problem. Four main areas have
yielded results.
First, research on CCD has taught us that the availability of
forage for pollinators is declining in this country, and that a
diverse, high-quality forage is needed for honey bees to help them
withstand multiple stressors (e.g., disease, pests, pesticides). The
U.S. Bee Loss Survey and research conducted by University and ARS
researchers suggests that poor nutrition is affecting the ability of
bees to survive the winter and deal with bee health issues. One recent
finding is that pollen substitute protein does not provide, in itself,
adequate nutrition for bees; pollen is needed as a supplement to any
diet.
Second, scientists have found that bees are exposed to a far
greater number of insecticides and fungicides than previously
recognized, and many of these pesticides can persist in the hive.
Before this research was conducted, we did not know the large extent to
which these pesticides were permeating the bee lifecycle. New research
also suggests that some of these pesticides may cause sublethal or
long-term health effects, even at low concentrations. As a result, EPA
is now including honey bees in its quantitative risk assessment for
pesticide registrations, and will begin requiring a broader suite of
tests, all of which collect information on sublethal effects on bees.
EPA is also considering a quantitative tiered method of testing (both
lab and field evaluations) that will capture both lethal and sublethal
endpoints. This evolution in the regulatory process is new since 2008
and a direct result of research indicating that pesticides are one of
the factors associated with declines. Also as a result of this
research, ARS is now evaluating the use of pesticides in certain crops,
such as vegetables, tree fruits and nuts, corn, cotton, and soybeans,
to determine how pest control could be more efficiently achieved with
regard to minimizing pollinator exposure to pesticides while still
maintaining adequate crop protection.
The third main finding is that Varroa mite control is critical to
improving honey bee survival rates and CCD. In particular, this common,
but devastating parasite spreads viral pathogens, inhibits the honey
bee immune system, and decreases the life span of honey bee adults.
These pathogens can be fatal on their own, but the combination of
viruses, the Varroa mite, and possibly other pathogens such as nosema,
seem to exacerbate CCD and declines in honey bee health. The search for
a virus that may cause CCD has also resulted in the development of an
entirely new method for controlling pests and diseases in insects, a
method based on RNAi technology. RNAi technologies are still in
development, but this strategy may open up an entirely new way to
develop pest control, a new approach that could create highly specific
pest control compounds that should not harm the bees.
Fourth, U.S. honey bee colonies need increased genetic diversity.
Genetic variation improves bee thermoregulation (the ability to honey
bees to keep the hive warm), disease resistance, and worker
productivity. Honey bee breeding should emphasize traits such as
hygienic behavior that confer improved resistance to Varroa mites and
resistance to diseases (such as American foulbrood).
Question 2. What can we do to better help solve CCD?
Answer. Pollinator health, of which CCD is an aspect, is a
nationally important issue. In June 2014, President Obama issued a
Memorandum in response to these serious issues. The Memorandum led to
the establishment of a Pollinator Health Task Force, co-chaired by USDA
and EPA, to coordinate government actions needed to improve pollinator
health. As part of this coordinated effort to understand and mitigate
pollinator decline, throughout USDA and other Federal partners, ARS has
proposed a $4 million increase for pollinator health research in fiscal
year 2015. A portion of these funds will be used for bee research at an
existing ARS laboratory in California, a state that requires the use of
over \1/2\ of the nation's bees to provide pollination services to
almonds and other tree fruit crops. Other research will be directed to
protect bees from mites and diseases using novel gene silencing (RNAi)
strategies, mitigating losses from pesticides and other environmental
stressors such as overwintering, and to develop forage seed mixes for
bee nutrition. Other USDA programs, such as the National Agricultural
Statistics Service (NASS), the National Institute of Food and
Agriculture (NIFA) and the Farm Service Agency's (FSA) Conservation
Reserve Program (CRP) have proposed significant increases. In December
2014 a Report is due to the President to describe the actions being
taken by Federal agencies in response to the Memorandum.
Question 3. Is the Federal funding used like it should be?
Answer. Yes. USDA and other Federal agencies are exploiting the
best science available to address this issue, based on customer
workshops and scientists input, and detailed in the CCD Action Plan.
This Action Plan is under revision to include recent input from a
Varroa Summit in 2014 and a Honey Bee Forage and Nutrition Summit in
October 2014. We rigorously review and assess our research priorities
for pollinator health continuously in close collaboration with
stakeholders, members of the scientific community, and other Federal
agencies.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and USDA have compiled a
Pollinator Road Map, which outlines past and planned activities to
address CCD and other pollinator health issues.
At the request of beekeepers, commodity growers, and pesticide
manufacturers, ARS hosted a Varroa Summit in February 2014 to assess
Varroa destructor (mite) control and effects on bee health.
Presentation of several innovative research results included the
development of genomic technologies, such as RNAi, and more
conventional control measures, to control this serious parasitic mite.
The Federal CCD Steering Committee hosted a customer/stakeholder
meeting in October 2012, which provided input to the CCD Action Plan
that is being updated for the 2014-2018 period. The focus of the Action
Plan will change from CCD alone to CCD and bee health. The USDA Deputy
Secretary organized a USDA Pollinator Working Group that met in March
2014.
Beekeepers and growers also requested that USDA host a Honey Bee
Forage and Nutrition Summit, and that summit was just recently held on
Oct. 20-21, 2014, in Alexandria, Virginia.