Andrea Sonda/Unsplash

Dow wants to bolster use of a pesticide shown to hurt bees’ reproduction

The request seeks to expand use of sulfoxaflor to millions more acres and on some plants that pollinators frequent

Dow AgroSciences has applied for a large expansion of sulfoxaflor, a pesticide shown to harm bees, according to a federal notice last week.


The agricultural chemical company submitted an application to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to allow for use of the pesticide on rice, avocados, residential ornamentals and at tree farms and greenhouses. Sulfoxaflor, which attacks the central nervous system of insects, is designed in part to replace "neonicotinoid" pesticides, which multiple studies have linked to bee colony collapse.

Research suggests sulfoxaflor may also harm pollinators. Most recently an August study in Nature linked the pesticide to reduced bumblebee reproduction.

"Sulfoxaflor-exposed colonies had a 54 percent reduction in the total number of sexual offspring produced compared with control colonies," the authors wrote. "Sulfoxaflor exposure could lead to similar environmental impacts as neonicotinoids if used on crops that attract bees in the absence of evidence-based legislation."

Neonicotinoid "replacements are just a new method of creating pretty much the same widespread harm," said Nathan Donley, a senior scientist with the Center for Biological Diversity, in a statement. "This is not the right way forward."

The EPA had previously classified sulfoxaflor "very highly toxic" to bees. The agency approved the chemical in two brand name pesticides in 2013, but two years later the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the approval because there wasn't enough evidence that the products were safe for bees.

In 2016 the pesticide was re-registered but, due to the court ruling, the EPA prohibited use "on crops attractive to bees before and during bloom" and during times when bees would be foraging.

In addition, sulfoxaflor has been used on an estimated 17.5 million acres of farmland under "emergency exemptions" granted by the EPA over the past couple years. This practice of granting emergency exemptions for pesticide use was recently criticized in a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of the Inspector General report.

"We found that the [EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs] does not have outcome measures in place to determine whether the emergency exemption process protects human health and the environment," the report stated.

The EPA will accept comments on Dow's sulfoxaflor application until November 13.

Print Friendly and PDF
SUBSCRIBE TO EHN'S MUST-READ DAILY NEWSLETTER: ABOVE THE FOLD
From our Newsroom

A toxic travelogue

The first four stops on a tour tracing American history through its pollution.

Breast cancer: Hundreds of chemicals identified as potential risk factors

Researchers find nearly 300 chemicals linked to breast cancer-contributing hormones in everyday products, and call for a renewed focus on women's exposure risks.

My island does not want to be resilient. We want a reclamation.

Unlearning academic jargon to understand and amplify beauty and power in Puerto Rico.

Measuring Houston’s environmental injustice from space

Satellites show communities of color are far more exposed to pollution in Houston, offering a potential new way to close data gaps and tackle disparities.

Fractured: The body burden of living near fracking

EHN.org scientific investigation finds western Pennsylvania families near fracking are exposed to harmful chemicals, and regulations fail to protect communities' mental, physical, and social health.

The real story behind PFAS and Congress’ effort to clean up contamination: Op-ed

Former EPA official Jim Jones sets the record straight on 'the forever chemical' as lawmakers take up the PFAS Action Act

Above The Fold

Daily & Weekly newsletters all free.