Live, virtual panel discussion on the link between agricultural sprays and cancer cases in the Midwest, May 7

Are chemical crop treatments causing cancer in the communities where they are used?

A live virtual panel event on May 7 from 11 a.m. to noon. will explore what current data and reporting reveal about potential links between agricultural sprays and cancer diagnoses. The conversation will cover what research indicates, clinical insights and lived experience. The event is free. You can register here.

The discussion panel includes journalists, researchers, a physician and a cancer survivor who will discuss the growing body of data examining the potential link between pesticide use and cancer outcomes.

The panel will flesh out what's known about the possible connection, present what remains unclear, and examine how chemical crop treatments and severe health conditions often play out in rural communities.

The conversation will connect data, policy and personal impact to better understand what’s driving cancer risks in farm belts across the U.S. Time for a Q&A with the audience also will be included.

Current panel lineup:

• Dr. Richard Deming, MercyOne Cancer Center
• Kerri Johannsen, Iowa Environmental Council
• Amanda Starbuck, Food & Water Watch
• Carey Gillam, The New Lede
• Lisa Lawler, Iowa cancer survivor
• Ben Felder, Investigate Midwest (moderator)

“We selected these panelists to help better understand what the latest data and reporting are showing and where we go next,” said Lauren Cross, assistant editor for the event's sponsor, Investigate Midwest.

Unhappy with the expense of spraying crops with a rig, an N.C. farmer turned to drones. Now he builds them.

Drones can spray hundreds of acres without damaging
crops. (Revolution Drones photo via Farm Journal)

As farmers search for every penny in savings, using drones to spray crops is a viable way for them to increase yields, reduce machinery wear and tear, and save on fuel costs, reports Chris Bennett of Farm Journal.

North Carolina farmer Russell Hedrick has been using drone-spraying since 2021. He started experimenting with drones to lessen the damage a rig does to his crops, and the cost of running the rig does to his budget. He now operates his own drone company, Revolution Drones, that produces drones especially built for American farmers.

"If a farmer with 6,000 acres of soybeans runs a ground rig just twice, and loses 1.5 bushels per acre in damage, the cost is $90,000," Hedrick told Bennett. If that same farmer invests in drone spraying 750 acres a day at a cost of roughly $51,000, it'll take eight days to spray the crop and prevent $90,000 in crop damage.

Hedrick explained, "That farmer paid for his drone in eight days and still had $39,000 left in savings. . . .This is a game-changer like nothing else out there, and its impact is only just starting to be realized."

Russell Hedrick is a North Carolina farmer and innovator.
(Courtesy photo via Farm Journal)

Hedrick didn't set out to build his own drones, but he kept running into the same issue -- all the drones he used were built in China and built for the way Chinese farmers work their land. He told Bennett, "They don’t know how we farm in America, and don’t understand the vastness of our fields and the necessity to cover hundreds or thousands of acres in (a) day in a timely manner."

After considering his options, Hedrick decided to build his own drones. Bennett writes, "Farm innovator to the core, Hedrick already had access to software production through co-ownership of Soil Regen. He partnered with Gteex Drones in Brazil, another farmer-led business."

"Drone utilization in agriculture is about to go nuclear, far beyond present use, Hedrick insists. Why? Simple economics," Bennett reports. "Agriculture, Hedrick believes, is at the get-go of historic technology change, echoing the breakthroughs of yesteryear, whether steel plow or mechanization."

Surrounded by crops sprayed with pesticides, Missouri's Bootheel residents report high rates of cancer

Small farming communities dot the Bootheel counties of Missouri, where agriculture is king, and residents live alongside crops regularly treated with pesticides. "The counties with the highest use of pesticides per square mile are all located in Missouri’s Bootheel," report Alex Cox, Adeleine Halsey, Kyla Pehr and Savvy Sleevar of Investigate Midwest. "Many of these counties have some of the state’s highest cancer rates, and their health care options are dwindling."

Dunklin County, Missouri, sits along the western border of the Bootheel and boasts the state's biggest cotton harvest. It also ranks among the state's "top 10 counties with the highest rates of colon cancer," Investigate Midwest reports.

Dunklin County resident Bobby Bibbs is a living example. "She discovered she had cancer in her colon in December 2023, which then metastasized to her liver, making it a stage four diagnosis," Cox writes. Bibbs told reporters, "There are so many (cases) where we are from. It’s got to be coming from somewhere.”

Like her neighbors, Bibbs lives surrounded by crops sprayed with pesticides. Cox writes, "Multiple scientific studies have explored a connection between pesticide use and cancer, pointing to a silent public health crisis hitting rural communities particularly hard."

For tightly-knit rural communities, a cancer diagnosis is shared along the grapevine, as are concerns that the area's only hospital closed in 2018. Investigate Midwest reports, "For cancer care, folks from Dunklin County often travel an hour to Jonesboro, Arkansas, or an hour-and-a-half to Cape Girardeau in Missouri."

Bootheel residents are often hemmed into farming to make a living. "As manufacturing jobs moved out of many places in the Bootheel, [towns] felt the economic sting," the article explains. "One industry that remains is agriculture."

While many area farmers see using agricultural chemicals as a way to protect their livelihoods, most are aware of the potential dangers. Jan McElwrath who has lived in Dunklin County most of her life, told Investigate Midwest, "We’re surrounded by agriculture. We recognize (chemicals) as a risk, but our economy here is very dependent on agriculture.”

Helping to save the world might start with inviting bugs back; they've got a lot to offer

Praying mantes are farmers' little helper.
(Photo by Rosie Kerr, Unsplash)

Entomologists appreciate all sorts of insects, and in his opinion for The Washington Post, Dana Milbank encourages all humans to give bugs some love because they are vital to the food chain and human survival. He notes that when insects are allowed to be in their natural habitats, bugs that bite, bite less:

"Here, in the mountains, I walk the fields and putter about in the woods without wearing my usual Eau de DEET, and yet the mosquitoes do not feast. I sit on the porch at dusk, baring my arms to all comers — and not so much as a nibble. . . . It isn’t my imagination. Entomologists tell me this is part of a worldwide phenomenon. We’ve worked so hard to banish bugs from our lives—destroying their habitats with pavement and lawns, killing them with insecticides and stressing them with climate change—that our cities and suburbs are now insect wastelands but for a few hardy pest species, such as the disease-carrying mosquitoes that feed on the blood of people and pets.

"In the country, by contrast, the ecosystem is in better balance. There are actually more mosquitoes here, but a smaller proportion of them dine on human blood and carry disease. Competition with other insects keeps their numbers in check, and the other abundant species in the ecosystem — spiders, frogs, fish and bird—gobble up the mosquitoes. In other words, the problem isn’t that we have too many bugs in cities and suburbs; the problem is that we don’t have nearly enough."

The world, not just humans, needs insects to survive.
(Photo by Europeana, Unsplash)

Millbank writes, "Multiple studies show that the overall insect population is declining by one percent to two percent per year, which means losing perhaps a third of all insects on the planet within 20 years—moving us toward what’s often called an ‘insect apocalypse.’ . . . If this mass extinction of insects isn’t reversed, it will decimate the entire food chain, threaten crop pollination and generally cause havoc.

"Agricultural pesticides are a big problem, but there’s some evidence that we use even more insecticide per acre in cities and suburbs. In the sterile environment we’ve created, a few nasty species flourish, such as the tree-devouring spongy (formerly gypsy) moth, the crop-destroying spotted lanternfly, the domestic cockroach, the bloodsucking mosquito. . . . Luckily, the insect apocalypse is relatively easy to reverse compared with other anthropomorphic disasters. And unlike climate change, you can quickly make a noticeable improvement in your backyard, or even on your apartment balcony. You simply need to invite bugs back into your life. They’ll quickly accept. As a bonus, you’ll also wind up with more songbirds — and you just might save the planet."

EPA is putting new restrictions on prestcides malathion, diazinon and chlorpryifos to protect endangered species

The Environmental Protection Agency is putting new restrictions on three widely used pesticides, citing the need to protect threatened and endangered species in critical habitats. The new label changes to malathion, chlorpyrifos and diazinon follow a final opinion issued last week from the National Marine Fisheries Service as part of an Endangered Species Act review, Todd Neeley reports for DTN/The Progressive Farmer. Few of the restrictions will apply to users in the Corn Belt; the new rules are mostly for those on the coasts and in the Northeast.

"Though the agency already has banned ag uses of chlorpyrifos, the EPA announcement could be emblematic of the future of ag chemicals as ESA reviews continue," Neeley reports. "EPA now has 60 days to request from registrants of the insecticides to submit amended labels to the EPA. According to a news release from EPA, the registrants will then have 60 days to submit new labels."

Marc Heller reports for the Energy & Environment Network: "Among the new limits, diazinon can no longer be applied from the air, and chlorpyrifos can’t be applied over wide areas for the control of ants, for instance. Other conservation measures are aimed at keeping pesticides out of water, and reducing the overall load of the chemicals at any time." Neeley has a more detailed run-down of restrictions on each of the three pesticides.

Hazardous 'forever chemicals' found in common pesticides

"Forever chemicals" are present in many common pesticides, according to new testing by an environmental watchdog group. The findings raise concerns about public health and food safety, and could motivate the Environmental Protection Agency to address the issue. 

"The testing done by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility found per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAs) — a class of chemicals tied to a wide range of health concerns, including cancer — in a handful of publicly available herbicides and insecticides," E.A. Crunden and Ariel Wittenberg report for Energy & Environment News. "The tests found PFAS in Talstar P, an insecticide manufactured by FMC Corp. that kills over 75 types of pests. The company website says the product 'is approved in multiple use-sites, so you can use it almost anywhere: indoors and out, in industrial, commercial and food-handling areas.' The tests also found PFAs in mosquito and tick control agent Mavrik Perimeter, made by Zoecon. Initial testing revealed PFAs in at least two other pesticides, although further analysis is required to confirm those results."

 

Many questions remain. "It is unclear how the PFAs are getting into the pesticides, and whether manufacturers are intentionally adding the chemicals, as opposed to accidental contamination from equipment used to manufacture or transport the pesticides," Crunden and Wittenberg report.

Other testing has found PFAs in hundreds of drinking-water sources in 43 states, especially near military bases and places that use fire-fighting foam. The chemicals, which are used in everything from nonstick cookware to raincoats, have been linked to serious health problems including birth defects, cancers, infertility and weakened immune systems in children, and they've been dubbed "forever chemicals" because they like to stick around in the environment and in the human body.

EPA allows massive use of antibiotics on citrus trees despite federal warnings antibiotic-resistant diseases will spread

The Asian citrus psyllid, which spreads
the disease (USDA photo)

Florida citrus production has dropped 70 percent in the past 15 years because of citrus greening, a disease spread by a tiny insect that carries a harmful bacteria. "The rapid onset of the disease has left growers with few effective management strategies. Since 2016, the Environmental Protection Agency has allowed citrus farmers to spray medically important antibiotics on their groves in hopes of reversing the devastating trajectory," H. Claire Brown reports for The Counter, formerly The New Food Economy. "But this last-ditch solution has its consequences: It’s expensive, and scientists aren’t sure it works very well, while public health advocates worry it’s hastening the spread of antibiotic resistance."

Today, about 90 percent of Florida's citrus trees are infected; the state produces more than two-thirds of the nation's citrus and more than 90% of its orange juice. By 2016, Florida citrus farmers were reporting an average loss of 40% of their crops from the disease. That year, EPA began allowing farmers to spray the streptomycin and oxytetracycline on citrus crops, as "emergency applications," Brown reports. Since both antibiotics are used to treat medical problems in humans, including urinary tract infections, syphilis, and tuberculosis, many public-health advocates were concerned.

"The agency was proposing to allow as much as 650,000 pounds of streptomycin to be sprayed on crops each year. That’s more than 10 times the amount used to treat human diseases. The concern was that the widespread use of antibiotics on crops would select for antibiotic-resistant bacteria, which would then spread throughout the ecosystem," Brown reports. "Antibiotic-resistant infections are expected to claim 10 million human lives by the year 2050, and critics worry the spread of so-called 'superbugs' will be aided by the extensive use of antibiotics in agriculture."

In late 2018 the EPA approved routine use of oxytetracycline on citrus groves, ignoring objections from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration, Brown reports. Emergency use of streptomycin has also been approved in California.

Despite the possible public health risk, it's unclear that the antibiotics are helping. Paul Meador, a fourth-generation citrus farmer, said the antibiotics make farming much more expensive. "He remembers spending $1,000 per acre on production costs less than two decades ago. Now he spends $3,000. And the rising bills have been accompanied by a slump in yield. Production on his land has diminished by half, if not more," Brown reports.

Meador said the antibiotics have substantially diminished his crop loss though, especially compared to citrus farmers who weren't using the antibiotics. A 2019 University of Florida study seemed to contradict Meador, finding that oxytetracycline didn't help much over six months, but that study didn't test streptomycin, which Meador uses. The study also found that injecting the antibiotics directly into tree trunks instead of spraying them on leaves might help fight the bacteria better, but injection isn't an EPA-approved application method.

Leading manufacturer of chlorpyrifos, insecticide linked to neurological problems in children, says it will stop making it

The largest maker of an insecticide linked to neurological problems in children and threats to wildlife said Thursday it would stop making it by the end of the year. Chlorpyrifos "has long been sprayed on strawberries, corn and citrus to kill pests," Catherine Boudreau notes for Politico's Morning Agriculture. "The EPA under President Donald Trump has resisted banning it, arguing additional safety assessments are needed."

Some states have taken action; California has banned farm us of the insecticide after this year. Gregg Schmidt, a spokesman for leading manufacturer Corteva, said "significantly" declining demand, not safety concerns, drove the decision. "The company told Reuters that it will continue to back chlorpyrifos during the EPA's review," Boudreau notes.

"Environmental groups praised the move, but cautioned that other companies are still manufacturing the pesticide, which is allowed on imported food," Boudreau writes. Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety, said "A federal ban on chlorpyrifos is the only next logical step toward protecting children and farmworkers from this toxic pesticide."

EPA wants pesticide spray buffer-zone rule to exclude adjoining properties, members of farm families

Photo from Successful Farming

The Environmental Protection Agency wants to drop a rule that established no-spray buffer zones for pesticides around crop fields and orchards.

"The current rules stipulate that the so-called Application Exclusion Zone can range from anywhere between 25 and 100 feet from the site of application and can reach beyond a farm’s property line. EPA wants to shrink those exclusion zones by ordering that enforcement of the AEZ can’t extend outside of property boundaries, Liz Crampton reports for Politico's Morning Agriculture. "The proposal would also exempt farm family members from exclusion-zone requirements. During spraying, members would choose whether to leave or stay on the farm."

In the post on the Federal Register, the agency said the changes to the Agricultural Worker Protection Standards will simplify rules for outdoor application of pesticides, but critics say the rule could harm farmworkers and family members by making it more likely that they'll be around harmful pesticides, Crampton reports. The EPA is taking public comments on the proposal for 90 days.

The buffer zone is meant to minimize damage from pesticides like dicamba, which is notorious for vaporizing and drifting to nearby fields after application. EPA said in its notice, “As currently written, the off-farm aspect of this provision has proven very difficult for state regulators to enforce. Off-farm bystanders would still be protected from pesticide applications due to the existing ‘do not contact’ requirement that prohibits use in a manner that would contact unprotected individuals.”

"At present, a buffer zone of 25 feet is required around sprayer rigs that release large droplets more than 12 inches above the ground, and a 100-foot zone is required for aerial, air blast, and ground applications that release fine or very fine droplets as well as fumigations, mists, and foggers," Chuck Abbott reports for Successful Farming. "The EPA rule would revise the buffer zone to 25 feet for all ground applications and to 100 feet for aerial, air blast, air-propelled, fumigant, smoke, mist, and fog pesticide applications."

EPA allows more use of pesticide toxic to bees after USDA announces it will stop tracking bee-colony numbers

Portland Press Herald photo illustration

"The Environmental Protection Agency approved broad new applications Friday for a controversial insecticide, despite objections from environmental groups and beekeepers who say it is among the compounds responsible for eviscerating the nation’s bee populations," Brady Dennis reports for The Washington Post.

It could be difficult to assess whether sulfoxaflor impacts the honeybee population, since the U.S. Department of Agriculture recently announced that its National Agricultural Statistics Service will stop collecting quarterly data for its annual Honey Bee Colonies report, and has not said when or if it will resume.

The EPA first approved sulfoxaflor in 2013, but its use was restricted in 2015 after the agency was successfully sued in federal court. In 2016 the EPA approved its use for crops that don't attract bees, as well as for some plants after blooming was complete. "The agency also has repeatedly granted emergency waivers to states to allow the use of sulfoxaflor on certain crops because of a lack of effective alternatives for farmers — including more than a dozen such exemptions this year alone for sorghum and cotton," Dennis reports.

Farmers will now be allowed to spray the chemical, which the EPA says is "very highly toxic" to bees, to a wider range of crops, including corn, soybeans, citrus, strawberries, pineapples and pumpkins, Dennis reports.

"The news comes during a time that commercial honeybee colonies have been declining at a startling rate. The annual loss rate for honeybees during the year ending in April rose to 40.7 percent, up slightly over the annual average of 38.7 percent, according to the Bee Informed Partnership, a nonprofit group associated with the University of Maryland," Dannis reports. "Some of the losses have been associated with events such as massive wildfires in the west, the wet winter in the Midwest and hurricanes in the Southeast. But the bee losses documented over the past decade are often blamed in no small part on the increased use of fungicides, herbicides and certain pesticides."

In considering whether to approve expanded use of the chemical, the EPA relied on new industry-backed studies that showed that sulfoxaflor requires fewer applications and dissipates more quickly than other pesticides, which makes it less dangerous to bees and other wildlife, Dennis reports.

Study shows link between frequent exposure to insecticides and a higher risk of depression and anxiety in teenagers

Teenagers with frequent exposure to the most widely form of insecticide may have an increased risk of depression, according to a study published in the International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health.

The study was conducted in Ecuador by Dr. Jose Suarez-Lopez, an assistant professor at the University of California-San Diego. He and colleagues "have been tracking the development of children living near agriculture in the Ecuadorian Andes since 2008," a university press release said. "Ecuador is the world’s third-largest exporter of roses, with much of the flower production located near the homes of participants. Like many other agricultural crops, flowers are routinely sprayed with organophosphate insecticides, which are known to affect the human cholinergic system, a key system in the function of the brain and nervous system."

Researchers measured blood levels in 11- to 17-year-olds of an enzyme that is inhibited by organophosphates. Studies in mice had shown that reduced levels of the enzyme were linked to "behaviors of anxiety and depression in mice, and a few existing studies in humans have also suggested such a link," the release says. "However, pesticide exposure assessment in past studies had been only established by self-report of exposure and not using biological measures."

The study found that teens who had reduced enzyme levels, suggesting greater exposure to , showed higher-than-normal symptoms of depression. "The association was stronger for girls, who comprised half of all participants, and for teens younger than 14," the release says. It quotes Suarez-Lopez:  “Agricultural workers and people in these communities have long offered anecdotal reports of a rise in adolescent depression and suicidal tendencies. This is the first study to provide empirical data establishing that link using a biological marker of exposure, and it points to a need for further study.”

Glyphosate (Roundup) use soars in recent decades, especially in Midwest, as weeds grow more resistant

Glyphosate use in the U.S. Click the image to enlarge it, or click here for the interactive version.
(Map by the Midwest Center for Investigative Reporting)

Nationwide use of the controversial pesticide glyphosate has skyrocketed over the past 30 years, even as it becomes less effective against weeds and is increasingly the target of health-related lawsuits. According to U.S. Geological Survey estimates, use of glyphosate on crops rose from 13.9 million pounds in 1992 to 287 million pounds in 2016. Glyphosate is the main ingredient in Roundup.

"A review of the agency’s data by the Midwest Center for Investigative Reporting shows that farmers across the Midwest used an estimated 188.7 million pounds of glyphosate in 2016 – nearly 40 times more than in 1992 when they used a total of 4.6 million pounds. The data for the year 2016 is the latest available," Christopher Walljasper and Ramiro Ferrando report for the center. "Farmers in those 12 states – including Illinois, Indiana, Iowa and Nebraska – grow most of the country’s soybean and corn crops. Glyphosate is now the primary way farmers manage weeds that would otherwise reduce the amount of grain they can produce. The Midwest accounts for 65 percent of the nation’s use of glyphosate for crops, according to the center’s analysis."

Monsanto, now owned by Bayer, introduced glyphosate in 1974, but the pesticide became much more popular after Monsanto began selling genetically modified Roundup-resistant seeds. Usage increased even more in 2000 after the patent expired and other companies could sell it. There were at least 40 generic glyphosate-based herbicides on the market by 2007, Walljasper and Ferrando report.

However, as weeds evolved to resist glyphosate, farmers have had to use more of it. James Benham, a longtime farmer in southeastern Indiana, told the center that farmers are in a tough place financially because they have to spend more money on seed and chemicals without seeing more profit. "Sometimes if you timed it just right, you could get away with just one spraying. Now we’re spraying as often as three or four times a year," Benham said. "That puts the farmer in that much more of a crisis mode. Can’t do without it, can’t hardly live with it."

EPA bans 12 pesticides linked to deaths of honeybees

As part of a legal settlement, the Environmental Protection Agency is banning 12 insecticides containing neonicotinoids, chemicals known to be toxic to honeybees. Ten are sold in the U.S.

"For years, beekeepers and wildlife conversationalists alike have voiced concern that the widespread use of neo-nics, as the chemicals are commonly called, is imperiling wild and domesticated bees crucial to pollinating commercial fruit, nut and vegetable crops," Dino Grandoni reports for The Washington Post.

EPA has pulled other neonics from the market before, but this is a rare action. "The decision follows five years of litigation in which the beekeepers and environmentalists pressed the agency to mount a response to the use of neonics as regulators in Europe and Canada have taken steps toward banning the chemicals," Grandoni reports. "Finally, at the end of 2018, three agribusinesses — Bayer, Syngenta and Valent — agreed to let the EPA pull from shelves the 12 pesticide products used by growers ranging from large-scale agricultural businesses to home gardeners. The legal settlement also compels the EPA to analyze the impacts of the entire neo-nic class on endangered species."

EPA ordered to decide whether to ban chlorpyrifos for good

A federal appeals court has ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to make a final decision within 90 days on whether it will ban a popular pesticide linked to developmental disorders in children. Last year the Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit "ordered the EPA to remove chlorpyrifos from use within 60 days of an August ruling, ending what would have been a decade-long fight by health advocates to ban the substance," Miranda Green reports for The Hill. "However, the Trump administration promptly appealed that ruling, and the court agreed to rehear the case." It ruled Friday.

Chlorpyrifos was first developed in World War II for use in chemical warfare, but has been used for years on crops such as strawberries, oranges, corn and wheat. The EPA banned it for residential use in 2001 and proposed a total ban during President Obama's tenure, but Scott Pruitt, President Trump's first EPA administrator, reversed that order. Pruitt wrote that the science linking chlorpyrifos to neurological effects in children was "unresolved" and that further study was necessary, Green reports.

In the weeks leading up to Pruitt's decision, he secretly promised farm lobbies that he was listening to their concerns, according to internal documents obtained by The New York Times. Pesticide makers also lobbied Interior Secretary David Bernhardt, then the deputy secretary, to block a 2017 study that could have led to tighter restrictions on two pesticides. The Fish and Wildlife Service study found that chlorpyrifos and malathion were so toxic that they threatened the existence of more than 1,200 endangered species.

EPA issues 'emergency exemption' for fourth year to allow limited use of a pesticide that is harmful to bees

The Environmental Protection Agency will allow farmers in 18 states this year to use an insecticide that may kill bees on two crops, sorghum and cotton, that attract bees.

This is the fourth straight year that EPA has issued an emergency exemption for sulfoxaflor, which is not approved for general use. Dow AgroSciences marketed the pesticide, sold under the brand names "Closer" and "Transform" as an alternative to neonicotinoids that harm bees, Zoe Schlanger reports for Quartz. But the pesticide apparently failed to live up to expectations, and was banned in 2015 after beekeepers, environmental groups and honey industry advocates filed suit.

Sulfoxaflor behaves very like neonicotinoids, researchers found. "A paper published in Nature in August 2018 found that exposure to sulfoxaflor significantly lowered bees’ ability to reproduce. Exposed colonies had fewer than half the number of offspring as unexposed colonies," Schlanger reports.

In 2016 EPA reapproved sulfoxaflor but said it could only be sprayed on bee-attracting crops after their bloom period. It allowed exceptions for cotton and sorghum, and could extend further exceptions in the future: "In October 2018, Dow submitted an application to expand the use of sulfoxaflor to rice fields, avocado trees, household plants, tree farms, and greenhouses," Schlanger reports.

Scientists say dicamba partly to blame for honeybee die-off

Scientists say a popular weedkiller is a major reason honeybee populations are falling in the U.S. and worldwide.

Dicamba has been used as a herbicide since the 1960s, but in recent years stakeholders have increasingly complained that it tends to drift from where it's sprayed and damage or kill neighboring crops and other plants. That includes the flowering weeds that honeybees love to pollinate, Liza Gross reports for Reveal, a publication of The Center for Investigative Reporting, in conjunction with the Food & Environment Reporting Network.

Several states have banned or restricted use of the herbicide, but the Environmental Protection Agency ruled in October that farmers can use it for the next two years with tighter restrictions. Scientists have warned EPA for years that dicamba would continue to kill bees' food. In 2011, EPA scientists agreed, concluding that increased dicamba use could hurt pollinators. But in 2018 EPA said it expected the decision would not cause any adverse effects for bees or other pollinators.

Dicamba use "appears to be a major factor in large financial losses for beekeepers," Gross reports. "Hive losses don’t affect just the nation’s honey supply: Honeybees pollinate more than $15 billion worth of fruits, nuts and vegetables a year, largely in California. From 2016 to 2017, U.S. honey production dropped 9 percent. Official statistics for 2018 have not been released."

Besides destroying bees' food, dicamba may also be killing them by damaging their gut microbes and hindering their ability to make fat and stay warm during cold weather. Parasites, viruses, climate change and insecticides are other factors that have contributed to colony collapse disorder, which has destroyed between 30 and 90 percent of beekeepers' hives in the past decade, Gross reports.

Air Force spraying insecticide over 6 million acres in Texas to combat post-Harvey mosquitoes

Texas is using huge U.S. Air Force planes to spray 6 million acres for mosquitoes breeding in the standing water left by Hurricane Harvey.

Devika Krishna Kumar reports for Reuters, "C-130 cargo planes began spraying insecticides over three eastern Texas counties over the weekend and will expand to other areas over the next two weeks, officials from the Texas Department of State Health Services said. . . . Most mosquitoes that appear after floods are not the disease-carrying varieties but can hurt recovery operations by swarming residents and disaster workers during cleanup efforts."

The spraying is using naled, an insecticide banned in the European Union but commonly used in the U.S. and supported by American health officials. "Both the Centers for Disease Control and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency stand behind naled, saying the small amount of the insecticide sprayed from planes doesn’t expose people enough to pose a health concern," Zoe Schlanger of Quartz writes for Route Fifty. "The chemical has caused controversy in recent years. In 2016, naled spraying inadvertently caused millions of honeybee deaths in South Carolina."

Critics say big companies' monopoly of seeds and chemicals would hurt small farmers

Consumer, environment and anti-trust groups say a trio of mega-mergers could hurt small farmers, John Vidal reports for The Guardian. The deals—Bayer is looking to acquire Monsanto, Chem China is acquiring Sygenta and DuPont and Dow are merging—would mean that the three companies would control nearly 60 percent of the world's seeds and 70 percent of chemicals and pesticides used in agriculture to grow food.

Critics say "the three mega-deals have the potential to concentrate political and financial power dangerously and could force more countries to adopt a single model of farming that excludes or impoverishes small farmers," Vidal writes. "With seeds, chemicals, research and lobbying power in the hands of a tiny group of immensely powerful companies, they say, the small farmer will inevitably be blown away, competition could be stifled, and food and farm input prices will rise."

A soon to be published report by the International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems "is expected to say that “an unprecedented wave of corporate consolidation is under way," Vidal writes. An early draft given to The Guardian says: “New technology and data-driven synergies could lead to three companies controlling 60 percent of seeds and 70 percent of agrochemicals worldwide with still greater oligopoly possible — a historic power shift throughout global agricultural inputs and even greater crop and livestock vulnerability through uniformity."

Pat Mooney, director of the ETC Group, a global agribusiness and agricultural technology watchdog, said "the mergers are linked to companies wanting control of big data and access to patents, gene traits and intellectual property," Vidal writes. Mooney told him, “These deals are not just about seeds and pesticides, but also about who will control big data in agriculture. The company that can dominate seed, soil and weather data and crunch new genomics information will inevitably gain control of global agricultural inputs – seeds, pesticides, fertilisers and farm machinery." (Read more)

Missouri Farmers Union President Richard Oswald wrote in June about the dangers of the mergers to farmers.

Bayer ups takeover bid of Monsanto to $66 billion

Bayer AG's $66 billion approved takeover bid of Monsanto Co. would "create a company commanding more than a quarter of the combined world market for seeds and pesticides in the fast-consolidating farm supplies industry," Greg Roumeliotis and Ludwig Burger report for Reuters. "The $128 a share deal, up from Bayer's previous offer of $127.50 a share, is the biggest of the year so far and the largest cash bid on record."

"Competition authorities are likely to scrutinize the tie-up closely, and some of Bayer's own shareholders have been highly critical of a takeover plan which they say risks overpaying and neglecting the company's pharmaceutical business," Roumeliotis and Burger write. "The transaction includes a break-fee of $2 billion that Bayer will pay to Monsanto should it fail to get regulatory clearance. Bayer expects the deal to close by the end of 2017."

Bernstein Research gave the deal a 50 percent chance of winning regulatory clearance, "although they cited a survey among investors that put the likelihood at 70 percent on average," Roumeliotis and Burger write. They wrote: "We believe political pushback to this deal, ranging from farmer dissatisfaction with all their suppliers consolidating in the face of low farm net incomes to dissatisfaction with Monsanto leaving the U.S., could provide significant delays and complications." (Read more)

Insecticide sprayed from air to fight Zika, without direct warning to beekeepers, kills many S.C. bees

Photo posted by Flowertown Bee and Farm Supplies

Millions of bees have been killed in Dorchester County, South Carolina, with an insecticide used to kill mosquitoes potentially carrying the Zika virus, Ben Guarino reports for The Washington Post. Beekeeper Juanita Stanley, co-owner of a bee farm that lost 46 hives—or 2.5 million bees—told reporters her farm “looks like it’s been nuked.”

Guarino writes, "In parts of South Carolina, trucks trailing pesticide clouds are not an unusual sight, thanks to a mosquito-control program that also includes destroying larvae. Given the current concerns of West Nile virus and Zika—there are several dozen cases of travel-related Zika in South Carolina, though the state health department reports no one has yet acquired the disease from a local mosquito bite—Dorchester decided to try something different Sunday."

"It marked a departure from Dorchester County’s usual ground-based efforts," Guarino writes. "For the first time, an airplane dispensed Naled in a fine mist, raining insect death from above between 6:30 a.m. and 8:30 a.m. Sunday. The county says it provided plenty of warning, spreading word about the pesticide plane via a newspaper announcement Friday and a Facebook post Saturday."

But after the bees perished, county officials apologized for that and failing to notify local beekeepers, The Associated Press reports. Bee City USA, a bee-protection group, said in a news release that it "encourages mosquito abatement districts across the country to provide beekeepers with ample notice of planned spraying so they can protect their hives as much as possible by covering them or moving them to a non-spray zone. By the same token, we encourage beekeeping chapters to meet with county officials in charge of vector control as soon as possible and each year to discuss mosquito control plans that protect pollinator health, and in the event of bee kills, how beekeepers will be compensated."