Melissa Waage's Blog: Health and the Environment

Predator poison kills dogs in Idaho

2010-05-15T19:28:10Z

As reported in the Idaho Falls Post Register (subscription required):

Compound 1080, a pesticide that is highly toxic to humans and animals and has no known antidote, is the poisoning agent in a rash of dog deaths in a two-block area in [Salmon, Idaho's] main residential section, authorities said Friday. The discovery of the type of poison, coming months after the first of 13 dogs died since January, is the first major breakthrough in a case that has alarmed residents and spread an air of suspicion through the community. Investigators say the chemical, which has been banned by the federal government for most uses, is difficult to detect because such small amounts can prove fatal.

Once used to kill everything from rodents to predators, the poison Compound 1080 (sodium fluroacetate) is now only legally used by USDA’s Wildlife Services program to kill native carnivores. Wildlife Services says it's blameless in this case: its inventories are intact and the program hasn't used 1080 in Idaho for five years. And it’s quite possible that the Compound 1080 used to kill those dogs was purchased and stockpiled decades ago, before its use was restricted. Nonetheless, the dog deaths in Idaho this year are a stark reminder of why Compound 1080 shouldn't be used anywhere. Wildlife Services needs to end the use of Compound 1080 for good--making this kind of tragic, sadistic attack increasingly difficult to pull off.

There’s a reason that two states and many countries have banned Compound 1080 and why its use in the U.S. has been progressively restricted. Odorless and tasteless, the substance has no antidote and can take as long as 2 to 15 agonizing hours to kill its victims through cardiac failure, progressive failure of the central nervous system, or respiratory arrest following severe, prolonged convulsions. U.S. Air Force analysts, citing numerous other national security experts, have identified Compound 1080 as a potential threat to drinking water supplies if used as a chemical weapon because it “can cause incapacitation or death in humans at very small doses.”

How likely is this scenario? For what it’s worth, U.S.-made containers of Compound 1080 were found among Saddam Hussein’s chemical weapons stockpiles in 2003.

How simple it was for some sick person to kill a significant number of pets and terrify a community in Idaho, with the poison identified only months later. Do we really want or need Compound 1080 in circulation in the U.S.? As mentioned earlier, the poison used in Idaho probably did not come from Wildlife Services. But I leave it to the reader to decide how difficult it would be for a determined individual to obtain legally applied Compound 1080 that is strapped to the necks of free-ranging goats and sheep.

Wildlife Services has relentlessly defended its use of what is essentially a chemical weapon to kill a few dozen coyotes and other wild carnivores per year (that we know of). Even if you actually believe that the U.S. government should be horrifically killing wild carnivores at the behest of private ranching interests, and at taxpayer expense, there’s a word for this: overkill.

Wildlife Services dismissed the concerns of 57,000 NRDC members who petitioned USDA to end the use of Compound 1080 and another nasty predator poison, sodium cyanide. But we’re not letting up. Go here to add your voice to our continued call on Wildlife Services to end predator poisoning now.

Cancer in coal country: study links health of streams with health of people

2010-04-21T21:14:17Z

A new study from Virginia Tech and WVU researchers finds a connection between the ecological health of Appalachian streams and cancer deaths in the region. (Hat tip to Ken Ward, Jr. at the Charleston Gazette.)

Published in the journal EcoHealth this month, the first-of-its kind study analyzed relationships between a measure of stream health based on the presence and distribution of small freshwater creatures, cancer mortality rates, and factors such as poverty and smoking. They found:

A relationship between stream health and cancer rates (one that was not explainable by other factors related to cancer in the region like smoking, poverty, and urbanization)
A significant association between coal mining, poor stream health, and higher cancer mortality
Cancer clusters corresponding to areas of high coal mining intensity.

These findings are especially interesting since they come on the heels of the new EPA guidance that explicitly sets stream health, in terms of streams' ability to support aquatic life, as the standard to uphold when considering mountaintop removal permit applications.

The coal industry and its friends have made much of the notion that the presence of mayfly larvae can indicate whether water quality has been affected by mining. But the science shows that they and other benthic macroinvertebrates (or "teeny creek critters" as I prefer to call them) have a lot to say not only about stream health, but about protecting public health in coal country.

Rubber Ducky, you’re the one…fighting to keep people safe from toxic chemicals

2010-03-31T19:27:45Z

A giant, inflated rubber ducky graced Baltimore’s Inner Harbor yesterday, where it was clearly visible to chemical industry leaders attending the annual GlobalChem conference at the hotel next door.

Flanked by parents, kids, nurses, and public health advocates, the brave ducky was the backdrop for a rally and press conference calling for real reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act.

NRDC was there as well, as part of the Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families coalition that organized the event. You can read a great Baltimore Sun story about the rally here.

Why confront the chemical industry with a giant rubber ducky? Chronic diseases linked to toxic chemicals are on the rise. The ducky represents the countless products that, under the current law, continue to legally contain chemicals that either have known health risks or have never been adequately tested and approved for safety. It’s time for reform of TSCA. But what kind of reform? That’s an important question.

After years of defending the weak, risky current law, the industry has now joined in the call for reform. The problem is, the actual “reform” proposals they’ve offered protect their interests while falling far short of what’s needed to protect the public. The industry, as you might imagine, would prefer to test only a few chemicals for safety, drag out needed action by continuing to study chemicals already shown to be dangerous, and operate on the assumption that people are only exposed to chemicals one at a time.

Here’s a good summary of chemical industry positions contrasted with public health advocacy community positions from Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families.

So when you hear chemical industry spokespeople agreeing that we need to “reform” TSCA , don’t ignore the 800 pound rubber ducky in the room. Ask what “reform” means to them.

Join in: mountaintop removal day of action THIS TUESDAY

2010-03-08T22:09:28Z

As promised, this week more than two hundred activists flood Washington to lobby Congress for legislation to curb mountaintop removal mining. I met a number of the people in town for the Alliance for Appalachia's Week in Washington to End Mountaintop Removal last night, and I can tell you that they are pumped.

You can help amplify the efforts of these very pumped-up people right from your computer. Just click here to join NRDC and our allies in a March 9 day of action in support of the Clean Water Protection Act. With your help we'll get boatloads of emails and calls in to Congress even as Appalachian activists meet with congressional offices in person.

For more information about NRDC's work to end mountaintop removal mining and all the latest updates, you can always check out www.nomoremountaintopremoval.org.

Protecting bees from mountaintop removal: close, but no cigar, Kentucky

2010-02-18T20:55:34Z

Add mountaintop removal to the threats facing bees and other pollinators. The AP reports that Kentucky’s state legislature is considering a bill encouraging coal companies to mitigate the effects of mountaintop removal mining on bees by planting bee-friendly vegetation on “reclaimed” mountaintop removal sites.

As I marvel at this rare opportunity to blog about both MTR and bees in a single post, let’s unpack this concept.

Enhancing bee habitat: GOOD for bees, people, and the environment. Habitat loss is a key factor in the worldwide decline of pollinators, which threatens the health of ecosystems and our food supply.
Mountaintop removal mining: BAD for bees, people, and the environment. It doesn't get much more disruptive than liquidating a landform and dumping the toxic results into nearby waterways.
Enhancing bee habitat only after allowing it to be blown to be smithereens: STILL PRETTY BAD for bees, people, and the environment. We wouldn't have to try, futilely, to reclaim the biological diversity of Appalachian lands if we weren’t blowing the tops off mountains in the first place.

As a dozen scientists concluded in a comprehensive assessment of MTR impacts in Science, when it comes to Appalachian ecosystems, an ounce of mountaintop removal prevention turns out to be worth a pound of supposed “cure.” The authors of that study pointed to "the preponderance of scientific evidence that impacts [of MTR] are pervasive and irreversible and that mitigation cannot compensate for losses."

In other words, there's no such thing as true "reclamation" or "restoration" of MTR sites. For bees, and everyone else, it would be far preferable not to allow mountaintop removal in the first place.

Add your voice: Week in Washington to End Mountaintop Removal

2010-02-04T19:28:55Z

Coalfield residents and friends from around the country are coming together again this March for the 5th annual Week in Washington to End Mountaintop Removal. Organized by the good people at the Alliance for Appalachia, this week of action couldn’t come at a more important time for the future of the region.

Participants will team up to meet with Congressional offices about ending mountaintop removal. Want to be a part of it? Go to ILoveMountains.org to learn more, register, or, just as important, donate to support this effort. We’ll see you there, in spirit or in person!

Watch tonight: Don Blankenship vs. Bobby Kennedy

2010-01-21T18:47:13Z

Hello from beautiful Charleston, West Virginia! Massey Energy CEO Don Blankenship and Bobby Kennedy face off again tonight at the University of Charleston's Forum on the Future of Energy and I'll be there livetweeting the event right here. You can also watch live video of the debate beginning at 6:15 pm, Eastern time. This debate is sure to be spirited and couldn't come at a more important time to discuss mountaintop removal mining in Appalachia, in which Massey, of course, is a key player.

Last fall, the Obama administration took initial steps towards limiting mountaintop removal when the Department of Interior announced it would begin to review state-issued surface mining permits and at least begin to explore tightened restrictions on dumping mine waste into streams. Then, last month, a dozen leading scientists published a bombshell study on the effects of mountaintop removal, actually calling for an end to the practice. Yet the EPA's just approved yet another mountaintop removal permit in West Virginia, and the timeline for the Interior Department actually proposing stronger dumping regulations is unclear.

I, for one, am expecting quite a show as Blankenship and Kennedy duke it out (verbally) tonight. So tune in via Twitter and video tonight for the play-by-play, and watch Switchboard tomorrow for Rob Perks' take on the debate.

3 Years Since CCD First Reported: Bee Experts Track Progress

2009-09-03T19:40:18Z

There's an interesting conversation about saving bees over at the New York Times opinion page today. Entomologists and beekeeping experts weigh in on what we now know about the recent honey bee decline.

Their general message on the status of the issue is not news: experts still don't know exactly what causes Colony Collapse Disorder or how to "cure" it, but believe a range of factors are involved. But I think it's interesting and encouraging that many of the commenters do point to incremental progress in fighting. For example, genetic research on afflicted bees has yielded what may be the first way to objectively diagnose CCD. And advice to beekeepers about preventing the spread of pathogens and avoiding bees' exposure to pesticides seems to be having a positive effect on the ground.

What we need now is the persistence to follow through on promising research. Congress and the U.S. Department of Agriculture have taken many important first steps to support such research; urge them to continue the fight.

Do the Honey Bee

2009-08-28T14:57:21Z

Huffington Post blogger Joseph Freeman highlights this video celebrating honey bees from five brothers in California. Ice cream maker Haagen-Dazs commissioned the work as part of its ongoing efforts to raise awareness and funds to fight the honey bee crisis.

(We're told that "The dancing in the video is a nod to a ritual of the honeybees, who after returning from a particularly good round of pollinating 'dance' directions to the rest of their hive.")

USDA Reports on Colony Collapse Disorder Research

2009-07-28T17:44:00Z

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has produced its long awaited Colony Collapse Disorder Progress Report as mandated in the 2008 Farm Bill. This is a positive sign after previous confusion and a lack of clarity about what USDA was doing to address the CCD threat to honey bees.

The report reaffirms that 1) a combination of stressors is likely responsible for the syndrome, and 2) certain pesticides, and certain pesticides in combination, are likely one of those factors. It is encouraging to see progress on numerous research projects and some discussion of potential mitigation strategies to help beekeepers address CCD factors like pests and pathogens.

But what seems to be missing is a discussion about reducing honey bees’ exposure to bee-toxic pesticides. After all, this is an area in which federal agencies can play a powerful role, and one in which better beekeeper practices may not be enough. If the federal CCD action team has identified pesticides--alongside pests and disease--as a potential factor in CCD, it makes sense to examine the tools available to address this problem. Hopefully a serious look at improved pesticide regulation is forthcoming from the team.

Study: Pollinator loss costs big bucks, could threaten java supplies

2008-10-01T16:42:37Z

Pollination by insects, mainly bees, is worth $217 billion worldwide each year, according to a study recently published in Ecological Economics and highlighted in Business Week. That's equivalent to 9.5% of the world's crop production. (And two-and-a-half times as much as the U.S. government's recent loan to bail out insurance giant AIG, to put it into perspective.)

Interestingly, the study noted that crops that depend on insect pollinators, like fruits, vegetables, and oilseed crops, are higher in average value than crops that don't, like cereals and sugar cane. And the consequences of pollinator loss on consumer well-being (defined economically) could be even greater than the direct value of crops pollinated by insects.

But the finding that chilled me to the bone was the possible consequences for the crop category known as "stimulants." Because that includes coffee.

...the results indicate that for three crop categories - namely fruits, vegetables and stimulants [coffee, cocoa] - the situation would be considerably altered following the complete loss of insect pollinators because world production would no longer be enough to fulfil the needs at their current levels.

It's true...coffee needs bees too. And, like millions of others around the globe, I need coffee to survive.

(Incidentally, the shade-grown coffee that many of us favor because it's friendlier to birds is friendlier to bees as well, attracting close to 10 species of native sweet bees and far more bees than coffee grown in the sun.)

Bottom line: insect pollinators feed us and enhance the quality of our lives. But, in addition to colony collapse disorder, which is affecting U.S. honey bees, insect pollinators are in decline all over the world. It's worth paying attention to their plight.

What does the Environmental Protection Agency know about pesticides and colony collapse disorder?

2008-08-18T23:14:18Z

Listen, I like a good mystery. But not when it comes to my food. Mystery meat? Bad. The continuing colony collapse disorder mystery, threatening the bees that pollinate our crops? Even worse. If government agencies have information that could help unravel the mystery of CCD and point to some solutions, they need to cough it up.

Sadly, the Environmental Protection Agency has been less than forthcoming on this front. NRDC was forced to file suit against the agency today when it failed to respond to a Freedom of Information Act request for information regarding the effects of certain pesticides on bees.

Something is up. In 2003, EPA approved a new pesticide called clothianidin for use in the U.S…on the condition that the manufacturer, Bayer CropScience, submit studies on the chemical’s potentially toxic effects on bees. Five years later, EPA isn’t telling whether the bee studies were ever conducted, let alone what the results were. And clothianidin is still in use.

Coincidentally, Germany suspended the use of clothianidin and its chemical relatives earlier this year after it was implicated in a mass bee die-off. France, meanwhile, banned similar pesticides years ago out of concern for honey bee health.

So what does EPA know? Stay tuned.

Show bees the money

2008-07-30T19:29:46Z

Honey bees are critical to U.S. agriculture. And with no solid solutions to Colony Collapse Disorder, U.S. hives continue to dwindle. This spring, beekeepers lost an estimated 29% of their bees to Colony Collapse Disorder, or CCD. You’d think that the U.S. Department of Agriculture, of all institutions, would be right on top of such a threat. Unfortunately, you’d be wrong.

Last year Congress recognized CCD as a threat and granted the Department of Agriculture emergency funds to study the problem. And the 2008 Farm Bill provides $20 million a year, for the next five years, to USDA for CCD related research. That includes building the agency’s internal capacity by hiring staff and so forth; making grants to other research institutions; and tracking honey bee pests and pathogens.

But Bee Culture editor Kim Flottum has been tracking federal funding for colony collapse disorder research over at The Daily Green, and the results are, in his words, “an embarrassment to the USDA.”

He’s right. The federal money flowing into CCD research sounds pretty good until you consider:

The funding authorized for CCD research compared to the economic value of healthy bee colonies. To put it into perspective, the total price tag for the 2008 Farm Bill is 307 billion dollars over five years. $20 million a year is equivalent to a little over 1% of the $15 billion worth of crops that honey bees pollinate in the U.S. each year.

Who’s steering the ship? USDA has been unable to give a clear accounting of how it spent the emergency CCD funds Congress granted it last year. At a House Agriculture subcommittee hearing on June 26, the head of USDA’s Agricultural Research Service was unable even to provide an estimate of how much additional funding might be needed to solve the problem.

Coincidentally, USDA announced it is awarding a long-awaited, $4.1 million grant for CCD research to the University of Georgia a few weeks later. Progress is being made—but we can and need to do better. As entomologist Maryann Frazier put it at that same hearing, “How would our government respond if one out of every three cows was dying?”

That’s why NRDC is also calling on USDA to get serious about tackling the CCD problem. USDA must follow through on its responsibilities under the 2008 Farm Bill. Moreover, the department should determine what funds are needed to fully address the problem, and inform Congress of its needs. You can help by asking the department to prioritize the issue and work with Congress to ensure adequate funding. Visit NRDC’s Bee Safe page to take action.

Survey shows rising honey bee losses

2008-05-08T19:32:48Z

A national survey released this week shows honey bee losses on the rise this year, prompting the state of Pennsylvania to pump money into colony collapse disorder (CCD) research.

The Apiary Inspectors of America's annual survey indicated 36.1 percent of commercial bees were lost this year, compared to 32 percent last year. According to the group, 29 percent of the losses were from CCD. In response, the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture is contributing an additional $20,000 to Pennsylvania State University's CCD research efforts.

Apiary Inspectors president Dennis vanEngelsdorp says these bee losses are unsustainable.

"For two years in a row, we've sustained a substantial loss," he said. "That's an astonishing number. Imagine if one out of every three cows, or one out of every three chickens, were dying. That would raise a lot of alarm."

And if one of every three cows were simply disappearing off the face of the earth, as is often the case with bees affected by CCD, you can bet the federal government would be looking into it. The small but ever-so-important commercial honey bee could use some sustained, federal support for research into CCD.

Black market bees

2008-03-12T20:01:27Z

If someone offers to sell you a beehive out of the back of a truck this spring, do not buy it, even if it’s a really good deal. Because those bees may be hot.

That’s right—the law of supply and demand has created conditions favoring rampant bee theft.

Beekeepers hire out their hives each year to growers who need to get their crops pollinated. A shortage of bees means the price of pollination goes up. For example, after heavy over-winter bee losses in the spring of 2005, fees for pollinating California’s almond crop nearly tripled. In California, Colony Collapse Disorder is contributing to a bee shortage that has driven the cost of renting a hive to $200 in some places—four times the cost four years ago. And that’s provided a strong incentive for stealing bees. The Associated Press reports,

As the price of pollination soars, each hive becomes a sitting gold mine, sheriff's deputies say. Skilled criminals simply dump the colony into a new container, and rent the bees to farmers as their own, pocketing the fee they're paid for pollination.

California beekeepers have lost $330,000 in the recent rash of thefts. Apparently some of them are even installing traceable microchips into their hives to foil bee thieves.

But bee-related crime will be the least of our worries if the honey bee decline continues, with managed bees contributing $14 billion to American agriculture each year, and some crops--like almonds and blueberries--almost completely dependent on honey bee pollination. It’s clearly imperative to get to the root of Colony Collapse Disorder and make the world safer for bees.