Todd Harmer

Without bees, there is no food, so keeping hives healthy is of utmost importance. That job is becoming more difficult thanks to an outbreak of disease and the effects of climate change.

That’s where special apiary inspectors come in, who check on the health of keepers’ bees to help prevent the spread of honeybee diseases and pests.

Marie Cairns, a bee keeper who runs a small apiary in the Cowichan Valley, had her hives checked on Friday by Tara Galpin, an apiary inspector for South Vancouver Island and the Gulf Islands.

“First of all, it was all about the pollination, but then the more you learn about bees the more fascinating they are,” Cairns said.

Cairns has been bee keeping in the valley for nine years. She got her inspection for free, as any bee keeper can, so she can sell some of her hive.

“You have bees and you want your own bees to stay healthy, so you want their bees to be healthy because they fly and bring back disease if you don’t or mites or anything else,” she said.

Galpin is looking for a few different diseases and pests. One that comes up often is the varroa mite, a parasitic mite that feeds on honey bees and causes a disease called varroosis.

“They feed out the fat body of the bee, so it’s like if we had the size of a rat on our human body feeding on our liver,” Galpin explained.

Unfortunately, Cairns’ bees had too many mites. “My first time failing,” she said.

But this experienced bee keeper is unfazed, and will work with the inspector to apply the appropriate treatment.

Galpin says unpredictable spring weather due to climate change—that have been cooler and damper—is helping to spread fungal disease and doesn’t allow bees to forage for food when they need it most.

Keeping bees in good shape is important, as along with other native pollinators they play a key role in sustaining B.C.’s food system, and contribute an estimated $250 million to the province’s economy.

The inspector says losses this year in bee colonies is between 30 to 40 per cent—climate change and the spread of disease keeping the pressure on bees and their keepers.

“More than anything, we need diversity of plants for our bees to forage from and diversity in our food landscapes,” she said.

Importing bees plays a major role in maintaining the bee population across Canada, and combined with the work of inspectors like Galpin, they’re ensuring bees keep food on our table.

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: Disease and climate change put pressure on bees and their keepers: apiary inspector | CTV News

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking an important step to determine whether the herbicide dimethyl tetrachloroterephthalate (DCPA) can continue to be used safely in light of significant health risks identified. The Agency is releasing and requesting public comment on an Occupational and Residential Exposure (ORE) assessment on pesticide products containing DCPA, showing risks to workers and others exposed to the pesticide, with the most serious of risks to the fetuses of pregnant individuals. Additionally, EPA is releasing a companion document summarizing EPA’s ongoing review of DCPA, the health risks the Agency has identified, and potential next steps for the Agency. Given the potential for serious, permanent, and irreversible health risks, EPA is considering whether feasible mitigation measures exist that would address these potential risks or whether canceling the registration of all products containing DCPA is necessary. Given the potential that cancellation of this pesticide could take several years to complete, EPA is releasing this assessment in order to provide the public with timely information about its risks.

Background on DCPA

DCPA is an herbicide registered to control weeds in both agricultural and non-agricultural settings. Agricultural crops include cole crops (e.g., broccoli, Brussels sprouts, cabbage), onions, and other vegetables. Non-agricultural uses include non-residential turf and ornamentals.

DCPA is currently undergoing registration review, a process that requires re-evaluation of registered pesticides every 15 years to ensure that as the ability to assess risk evolves and as policies and practices change, pesticides continue to meet the statutory standard of causing no unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment.

The data EPA examined showed that the dose that caused adverse effects in the fetuses of pregnant rats exposed to DCPA was very low, and these effects were observed at a dose lower than the dose that affected the pregnant rats themselves. Significant thyroid hormone changes were observed in the fetuses in a 2022 study that EPA had ordered the registrant for DCPA to conduct in 2013. In general, changes in fetal thyroid hormones are linked to low birth weight, impaired brain development, decreased IQ, and impaired motor skills observed later in life. These thyroid hormone effects are harmful to the fetuses of individuals of child-bearing age that could be exposed to DCPA. The differences in the doses affecting the pregnant rats and their fetuses, extrapolated to humans, mean that a pregnant individual could be exposed to DCPA without experiencing adverse health effects to their own body, while the fetus being carried could experience permanent and significant lifelong adverse effects.

In 2013, the Agency issued a Data Call-In to the pesticide registrant, AMVAC, requiring it to submit more than 20 studies to support the existing registrations of DCPA. Between 2013 and 2021, numerous studies submitted by AMVAC were deemed insufficient by the Agency, and some studies, including the thyroid toxicity test, had not been submitted. In April 2022, EPA issued a Notice of Intent to Suspend (NOITS) for the DCPA technical-grade (high-concentration) product based on the registrant’s failure to submit the complete set of required data, leaving large uncertainties in risk estimates, including data on DCPA’s thyroid toxicity. In August 2022, after the issuance of the NOITS, the Agency received the thyroid toxicity data that showed the significant changes in the fetal thyroid effects discussed above.

Occupational and Residential Exposure Assessment and Companion Document

The Agency found that based on the currently allowed uses of DCPA, there is potential for some people to be exposed to DCPA at levels approaching those that, based on the rat thyroid toxicity test, are expected to result in adverse effects in humans. For the most common uses of DCPA, there are risks of concern for workers applying and supporting applications of DCPA, using typical equipment at the maximum application rate, even when personal protective equipment and engineering controls are used. There are specific concerns for the fetuses of pregnant individuals who apply DCPA. Based on current labels, some pregnant individuals could be subjected to exposures from 10 to 1,500 times greater than what is considered safe.

Furthermore, risks to fetuses of individuals entering areas where DCPA has already been applied (post-application workers involved in tasks such as transplanting, weeding, and harvesting) are of concern. In addition, living near areas treated with DCPA could also put the fetuses of pregnant individuals at risk. While DCPA does not appear to be widely used on turf, based on the current label directions that allow such use, there are also potential risks of concern for individuals using turf golf courses and athletic fields long after DCPA is applied. The labels currently specify that entry into treated fields must be restricted for 12 hours after application. However, for many crops and tasks, levels of DCPA in the previously treated fields remain of concern for 30 days or more.

In addition to the ORE assessment, EPA is releasing a companion document that summarizes the Agency’s findings from the thyroid toxicity data received in response to a DCPA Generic Data Call-in and explains the regulatory approach the Agency is considering to address the risks identified in the ORE assessment, in line with the Agency’s commitment to sound science and protecting human health. EPA is also publishing relevant supporting documents, including an analysis of the benefits associated with the use of DCPA. Given the breadth and severity of the potential risks identified by the Agency, the Agency’s current efforts are to determine whether effective and feasible mitigation strategies exist to fully address these risks, and barring any new information provided by public comments, the Agency is considering whether cancelation of all uses and registrations for products containing DCPA is necessary.

EPA will carefully consider public input when addressing these risks. The Agency is committed to transparency as it moves forward with regulatory action on DCPA and will keep the public advised of prospective actions in the registration review process for DCPA.

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/epa-releases-risk-assessment-showing-significant-risks-human-health-herbicide-dcpa

The website site lists many supposed positive attributes of the product, but they have not been proven or vetted.

Before you consider ordering this product, please check with your State or Regional Apiarist and State Pesticide Regulatory Agency.  The National Pesticide Information Center (NPIC; http://npic.orst.edu/mlr.html) provides contact number for State Pesticide Regulatory agencies.

Irelands Minister Hackett launches the National Apiculture Programme 2023 – 2027

From Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine

The Minister of State in the Department of Agriculture Food and the Marine, Senator Pippa Hackett, today launched the National Apiculture Programme supporting the Beekeeper Sector in Ireland.

Launching the Programme the Minister said:

“I am delighted to announce the introduction of the new National Apiculture Programme which will run until the end of 2027. This Programme, which supports research into production standards, demonstrates my department’s continued support to the beekeeping sector in Ireland.”

Support for beekeeping is provided through National Apiculture Programmes which aim through approved applied research projects to improve the general conditions for the production of honey and other apiculture products in the EU. Researchers are invited to submit proposals for the new National Apiculture Programme which will run until 31 December 2027.

The aims of the programme are to:

• provide technical assistance to beekeepers
• combat beehive invaders and diseases, particularly varroasis
• co-operate with specialist bodies for the implementation of applied research programmes in the field of beekeeping and apiculture products

All suitable bodies that can demonstrate the necessary research capabilities, including Universities, Institutes of Technology and Teagasc, are eligible to submit proposals. Projects that involve collaboration between institutions and/or involve the development of critical mass are encouraged.

The deadline for receipt of applications for this call is Friday 30 June 2023. Queries relating to the National Apiculture Programme 2023-2027 can be emailed to beekeeping@agriculture.gov.i

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: gov.ie – Minister Hackett launches the National Apiculture Programme 2023 – 2027 (www.gov.ie)

UNESCO and Guerlain have launched a state-of-the-art female beekeeping entrepreneurship programme, “Women for Bees.” Implemented in UNESCO designated biosphere reserves around the world with the support of the French training centre, the Observatoire Français d’Apidologie (OFA), the programme will have actor, film maker and humanitarian activist Angelina Jolie for a Godmother, helping promote its twin objectives of women’s empowerment and biodiversity conservation.

Starting on 21 June 2021, ten women from five biosphere reserves will be welcomed to a 30-day accelerated training course at OFA’s Domaine de la Sainte-Baume (Provence, France) every year. Over five years, 50 participants will learn the theoretical and practical bases of beekeeping, including the running of a professional apiary. At the end of the training, participants will have acquired all the protocols allowing them to sustain the life of their bee colonies and to become fully professional beekeeper-entrepreneurs, and members of an international network of female beekeepers.

Focusing on the protection of bees, their welfare and repopulation, as well as education on bees, the programme aims to enable women’s social emancipation through an expertise-driven sustainable professional activity. It also aims to contribute to the repopulation of bees, and to raising awareness of their importance as pollinators bearing in mind that animals play a major part in the pollination of 90% of the planet’s wild flowers.

Because the role of women in biodiversity management and decision-making processes is not fully recognized, supporting and promoting their contribution as agents of change is essential and a global priority for UNESCO. The Women for Bees programme not only highlights our interdependency with other living species, it also encourages women to be designers of change, to create, educate and experiment with sustainable beekeeping in UNESCO designated Biosphere Reserves as a way of living on Earth in harmony with other species. Such is the spirit of our commitment to biodiversity, and the purpose of our global partnership with LVMH*.
Audrey Azoulay, UNESCO Director-General

Angelina Jolie, who as Godmother of the programme will meet with the female beekeepers and track their progress, said: “When women gain skills and knowledge their instinct is to help raise others. I’m excited to meet the women taking part in this programme from all over the world. I look forward to getting to know them and learning about their culture and environment and the role bees play in that. I hope the training will strengthen their independence, their livelihoods and their communities.”

Guerlain Chief Executive Officer Véronique Courtois said: “I’m personally very proud of the “Women for Bees” Guerlain x UNESCO programme which manages to combine two core pillars of our Maison’s strong commitment, In the Name of Beauty: Bees conservation on one side and women empowerment on the other side, a pledge for one of the nature’s most precious wonder & a concrete positive social impact for women of the world. I believe each of us and each organization has a role to play to serve society and to fulfil a goal of a more beautiful and responsible world which is bigger than us.”

The five-year programme is part of a partnership between UNESCO and the LVMH group to support UNESCO’s scientific Man and the Biosphere (MAB) programme and its World Network of Biosphere Reserves that has been conducting pioneering research into the interaction between human activity and the environment to advance sustainable development.

The biosphere reserves involved during the programme’s first two years include Central Balkan (Bulgaria), Tonle Sap (Cambodia), Xishuangbanna (China), Kafa (Ethiopia), Iles et Mer d’Iroise (France), Sila (Italy), Katunskiy (Russia), Volcans (Rwanda), and Kozjansko & Obsotelje (Slovenia).

By 2025, 2,500 hives will have been built within 25 UNESCO biosphere reserves. The 50 women to graduate by that year, will have been trained and supported in establishing their own beekeeping operations while participating in a vital, socially beneficial project. Indeed beekeeping can generate income for disadvantaged rural populations and improve food security in areas where agricultural production is minimal.

Angelina Jolie, long associated with Guerlain, will support the programme as a committed advocate of women’s rights, environmental conservation and humanitarian values.

*LVMH is Guerlain’s holding company

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: https://en.unesco.org/news/unesco-and-guerlain-empower-women-and-support-biodiversity-through-women-bees-programme-under

After three years in the United States Air Force, he worked 65-plus years for The A. I. Root Company from Advertising Manager to General Manager, to Vice President, to President, to Chairman of the Board, and as a valued member of the Board of Directors. He was also the Executive Publisher of Bee Culture Magazine for many successful years during his time in The A. I. Root Company.

John was on Medina City Council for 14 years with the last 10 years as President and 37 years on Medina General Hospital with 10 years as Chairman.

John was President of the Honey Industry Council of America from 1962-1963 and 1976-1977, President of the Ohio Agricultural Council from 1973-1974, President and Chairman of the Board for the Eastern Apicultural Society of North America, Inc. in 1978 and Chairman of the Board from 1983-1984, as well as Key Advisory Commission of the Agricultural Technical Institute for nine years (1984-1993). There are numerous other organizations that John served in over the years.

By Scott Weybright, College of Agricultural, Human, and Natural Resource Sciences

A massively destructive hurricane in Florida last year, a very stormy winter in California, and higher than average colony losses mean that 2023 is positioned to be a bad year for honey bees.

“I talked with a beekeeper recently who hadn’t lost more than 20% of his colonies in several years but lost 90% of his bees this year,” said Tim Lawrence, a recently retired Washington State University Extension associate professor who worked with the insects. “And he’s far from alone. I’ve heard from many beekeepers suffering high losses this year.”

Lawrence wrote about the potentially bad year for WSU Tree Fruit Extension’s website.

The decrease is likely due to viruses exacerbated by varroa destructor mites, the main cause for honey bee decline, Lawrence said. The mites kill honey bee brood (pupae and larvae), introduce numerous viruses, and severely weaken adult bees and their immune systems, making them more prone to disease.

WSU scientists have several research projects involving varroa mites, honey bee reproduction and mating, plus beekeeping workshops and other supports to help the industry pollinate crops around Washington.

In most years, beekeepers who experienced significant losses would resupply by purchasing the insects from beekeepers in Florida. Unfortunately, the bee population in the Sunshine State took a massive hit from Hurricane Ian last year, limiting the supply.

Generally, the pollinator season starts in late February in California almond groves. Beekeepers from around the country bring their bees west to pollinate these early-blooming trees. But the steady series of atmospheric rivers dumping significant rain on California has limited the number of flying days bees have had to pollinate.

Bees generally fly when temperatures are above 54 degrees and winds aren’t too strong. The limited flying days also impact honey bee queens because they mate in the air. Less flight time means less mating, which means fewer and delayed bees and queens for sale that beekeepers rely upon.

“It’s been brutal,” Lawrence said. “Beekeepers are used to adapting, but getting hit from so many angles is a huge challenge.”

And all that could impact Washington crops that depend on hiring the domesticated pollinators.

“If I had an apple, pear, or cherry orchard, I wouldn’t wait to contact your beekeeper this year,” Lawrence said. “A lot can happen between now and when those crops bloom, but early crops could really be impacted. For growers back east, it’s likely there may not be any bees for the blueberry season.”

On the flip side, the unusually wet winter in California could lead to a phenomenal honey crop.

“Seeing the mountains and hills down there, the snow melt will probably lead to a tremendous flower bloom,” Lawrence said. “There may be fewer bees, but those present will have plenty of food to collect.”

Honey bees can have a big impact on wallets. For consumers, fewer bees for pollinating could lead to fewer apples or cherries in stores. That leads to higher prices for the fruit that does make it to market.

“Bees have had a tough time this year,” Lawrence said. “Beekeepers are good at keeping them going, but it’s the biggest challenge I’ve seen since at least 2005, when we started to witness major losses of honey bee colonies.”

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: For honey bees, 2023 is potentially a bad year – WSU Insider

On Wednesday, members of the IR-4 team joined a public meeting exploring potential changes to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) and Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) current oversight of pest management products. These changes could impact IR-4’s ability to serve the beekeeping industry with pest management products that help keep honey bees healthy.

While IR-4 is best known for its work supporting pest management in food and environmental horticulture crops, our efforts gaining product registrations for honey bee health have been vital to beekeepers, and to the countless specialty crop growers who rely on honey bee pollination. In particular, The IR-4 Project has played a major role in making Varroa mite treatments available to beekeepers. IR-4 has been involved in 9 out of the 10 active ingredients available to beekeepers for Varroa mite control (see Appendix*), and is currently aiding another registration.

The assistance IR-4 provides to the beekeeping industry includes supporting Section 18 approvals for emergency use, conducting magnitude of the residue studies on honey and beeswax, and submitting registration and tolerance packages to EPA. Additionally, IR-4 has extensive experience funding honey bee-related efficacy studies and pollinator protection.

Potential oversight changes on the table

The protection of honey bee colonies is of vital importance to IR-4, to the beekeeping industry, and to the specialty crop growers we serve. Moving forward, IR-4’s ability to serve the honey bee industry may be hampered by a proposed change in the oversight of certain products, like those that keepVarroa mites in check. The EPA and FDA are considering how best to modernize their respective oversight responsibilities, with the goal of improving protection of human, animal, and environmental health. They seek input from stakeholders to better understand potential outcomes of changes to current jurisdictions.

EPA Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention hosted a virtual public meeting with the FDA Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) on March 22, 2023, which was attended by IR-4 team members. EPA’s public comment period is now open, inviting feedback from stakeholders. The agencies also shared a new white paper, “A Modern Approach to EPA and FDA Product Oversight.” Read more about the proposed changes on Bee Culture.

A move of Varroa mite control products from EPA to FDA jurisdiction would prevent IR-4 from continuing to serve beekeepers and protect honey bee colonies. IR-4’s regulatory work is highly specialized in partnership with EPA. IR-4 experts emphasize that there are no equivalent public agencies that could provide IR-4’s level of expertise in facilitating registrations with FDA. Without IR-4, the registrations of newer, safer pest management products available to beekeepers would diminish.

IR-4’s view on jurisdictional change, the role of each agency

In terms of expertise, IR-4 sees EPA as a more logical fit for Varroa mite oversight than FDA. EPA has the history and a well-established system for regulating topical pesticides applied to animals, particularly those that do not impact human health and infectious diseases.

FDA is better able to regulate pesticide products that are ingested, systemic, or do impact human health, such as topical tick products and certain antibiotics administered to animals when there is concern with resistance to human antibiotics (e.g. terramycin and honey bees). In general, FDA has expertise when evaluating pesticides applied, administered, or fed to vertebrate animals. When it comes to considering the regulation of topical pesticides applied to invertebrates like honey bees, FDA is lacking in experience compared to EPA.

EPA has long-standing honey bee ecotoxicology guideline requirements, evaluation procedures and models, and incidence-reporting schemes. Pesticides applied to invertebrates to control another invertebrate in particular are best regulated by EPA (e.g. honey bees and Varroa mite), which has proven evaluation guidelines for safety on beneficial organisms, and is best able to evaluate efficacy data with insects.

EPA also has lower registration fees and timelines compared to FDA. Regulation by FDA may be more challenging for manufactures and more cost prohibitive, particularly for those producers in niche industries (e.g. honey bee pesticides). Large companies producing topical products for ticks and fleas, in contrast, are able to expend the resources for the lengthy FDA registration process, knowing the consumer market is large enough for them to recoup those costs.

IR-4 contends that control products for insect pests that attack honey bees should remain within EPA jurisdiction. The current regulatory approach is clear and appropriate: anything topical and non-systemic goes through EPA, while anything systemic (within the animal being fed) goes through FDA. With maintained EPA jurisdiction, IR-4 can continue to facilitate pathways to new products for the battle against resistance-prone Varroa mites (and other destructive pests), supporting beekeepers nationwide.

Would you like to weigh in on the issue? IR-4 and Bee Culture encourages stakeholders to submit feedback during the comment period, which is now open. To share your written feedback with EPA, visit the docket and enter your comment. You can also visit regulations.gov and enter the docket number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2023-0103 (sometimes the direct link is slow to load).

Public comments will be accepted through 11:59 p.m. ET on April 24, 2023.

*View this story on IR-4’s website to see the Appendix outlining IR-4’s role in 9 out of 10 active ingredients currently approved for Varroa mite management.

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: https://www.ir4project.org/news/epa-and-fda/

EPA RULES ON OXALIC ACID AND GLYCERIN

Below is an overview of the EPA’s response to Vermont’s approval of the use of Oxalic Acid and Glycerin for the treatment of Varroa. To read the entire response, see the download link.

• The use described (Oxalic and Glycerin) does not fall within the scope of exemptions from the term “to use any registered pesticide in a manner inconsistent with its labeling”
• “It shall be unlawful for any person to use any registered pesticide in a manner inconsistent with its labeling” as stated in Section 12 (a)(2)(G) of FIFRA
• The existing label states the following: “Only apply Oxalic Acid Dihydrate as a solution when mixed with sugar water.”
• Therefore, the instructions on the bulletin to mix the pesticide with glycerin are outside the scope of FIFRA Section 2(ee)

Download PDF

Virtual Public Meeting: EPA and FDA Product Oversight

MARCH 22, 2023

Date:

March 22, 2023

Time:

1:00 PM – 4:00 PM ET

Organized By:

Center for Veterinary Medicine

Attend

Register for This Event

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention is co-hosting a virtual public meeting with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) on March 22, 2023. Additionally, EPA is opening a docket for the agencies to receive public comment on their current approach to the oversight of various products regulated as either pesticides by EPA or new animal drugs by FDA. The agencies are also announcing the availability of a whitepaper entitled, “WHITEPAPER: A Modern Approach to EPA and FDA Product Oversight,” which describes the current challenges and highlights the potential benefits of a modernized approach for oversight of these products.

EPA and FDA are considering how best to update their respective oversight responsibilities for specific products in an efficient and transparent manner and in alignment with each agency’s expertise, with the goal of improving protection of human, animal, and environmental health. The purpose of the public comment period and virtual public meeting is to obtain feedback from stakeholders on the whitepaper and ideas for modernizing EPA and FDA’s approach to product oversight.

Background

Currently, EPA and FDA determine regulatory oversight of pesticides and new animal drugs based on the rationale described in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the agencies signed in 1971 and revised in 1973. Since that time, pesticide and animal drug technologies—and both agencies’ understanding of these technologies—have evolved.

For example, parasite treatment products applied topically to animals (including pets) generally are regulated by EPA if they remain on the skin to control only external parasites (e.g., collars or spot-ons to control fleas and ticks) and by FDA if they are absorbed systemically into the bloodstream. The agencies now understand that many of the topically administered products currently regulated by EPA do not remain on the skin and are actually absorbed into the bloodstream, highlighting challenges with the current approach and raising different safety concerns than originally anticipated.

Additionally, genetically engineered (“GE”) pest animals, which are gaining interest as a pest control tool that can reduce the need for conventional pesticides, were not envisioned 50 years ago when the original regulatory approach was developed. As agreed in the 2016 National Strategy for Modernizing the Regulatory System for Biotechnology Products, EPA and FDA have considered how to update their respective responsibilities with the goal of developing an efficient, transparent, and predictable approach for overseeing GE insects. Recently, Executive Order 14081, issued September 12, 2022, has further directed the agencies to improve the clarity and efficiency of the regulatory process for biotechnology products, underscoring the need for continued coordination between the agencies on biotechnology. The whitepaper and public meeting only address EPA and FDA oversight.

The agencies’ current approach to determining whether EPA or FDA is the appropriate regulator of certain products does not effectively reflect or accommodate scientific advancement, and it has become clear in some cases that the current approach has resulted in misalignment between product characteristics and the agency better equipped to regulate the product. A modernized approach would ensure that the oversight of these products better aligns with each agency’s expertise, accounts for scientific advancement, avoids redundancy, better protects animal health and safety, and improves regulatory clarity for regulated entities, animal owners, veterinarians, and other stakeholders.

Public Meeting Information

The virtual public meeting will focus on the whitepaper and the following questions. We are not seeking input or comments about any specific products, other federal agencies’ product oversight, or other topics outside the scope of the whitepaper and the questions below. We are particularly interested in receiving comments from the public on the following:

1. What do you perceive as the strengths and weaknesses of each agency in regulating these types of products?
2. Are there additional or different challenges that EPA and FDA did not identify in the whitepaper?
3. How can EPA and FDA communicate with their stakeholders about the regulation of these products in a clearer and more transparent manner?
4. For regulated entities, how have you historically determined which agency to approach first to bring your product to market?
5. For consumers, do you know who is regulating the products you use on your animal(s)? If you have a concern or complaint about a specific product, do you know which agency to contact?
6. How should EPA and FDA modify product oversight to better align with each agency’s mission and expertise?
7. What difficulties would you envision if EPA and FDA were to modify product oversight to better align with each agency’s mission and expertise, and how could they be mitigated?

Registration

Stakeholders interested in attending the virtual public meeting must register no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on March 15, 2023. Interested persons should register online at https://www.eventbrite.com/e/547810324427External Link Disclaimer and will need to provide contact information for each attendee, including name, title, affiliation, address, email, telephone number, and if reasonable accommodations due to a disability are needed. Early registration is recommended. Registrants will receive confirmation when their registration has been received and will be provided the webcast link. Registrants should ensure they retain the webcast link email and should check their “junk mail” folder if they do not receive an automatic confirmation with the webcast link after registering.

Requests for Presenting Oral Comments

During online registration you may indicate if you wish to make oral comments during the virtual public meeting. Registrants requesting to present oral comments should provide information regarding which topics they intend to address at the time of registration. We will do our best to accommodate requests to present oral comments.

Individuals and organizations with common interests are urged to consolidate or coordinate their comments. All requests to make oral comments must be received by March 15, 2023.

We will determine the amount of time allotted to each presenter and notify participants by March 21, 2023. No commercial or promotional material will be permitted to be presented or distributed at the public meeting.

Submitting Electronic or Written Comments

Comments submitted to the docket and/or presented at the public meeting should be limited to the questions/topics posed in the Federal Register Notice only, as described above.

Upon publication of the Federal Register notice, public comments will be accepted through 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of April 24, 2023.

Comments can be submitted electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal, starting on February 23, 2023. All comment submissions received must reference Docket No. EPA-HQ-OPP-2023-0103. All comments received will be placed in the docket.

Do not electronically submit any information you consider Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Additional information on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at the EPA Docket Center.

Following the public meeting and the close of the comment period, the EPA and FDA will consider comments received in determining next steps.

Event Materials

WHITEPAPER: A Modern Approach to EPA and FDA Product Oversight

Virtual Public Meeting: EPA and FDA Product Oversight

MARCH 22, 2023

Date:

March 22, 2023

Time:

1:00 PM – 4:00 PM ET

Organized By:

Center for Veterinary Medicine

Attend

Register for This Event

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention is co-hosting a virtual public meeting with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) on March 22, 2023. Additionally, EPA is opening a docket for the agencies to receive public comment on their current approach to the oversight of various products regulated as either pesticides by EPA or new animal drugs by FDA. The agencies are also announcing the availability of a whitepaper entitled, “WHITEPAPER: A Modern Approach to EPA and FDA Product Oversight,” which describes the current challenges and highlights the potential benefits of a modernized approach for oversight of these products.

EPA and FDA are considering how best to update their respective oversight responsibilities for specific products in an efficient and transparent manner and in alignment with each agency’s expertise, with the goal of improving protection of human, animal, and environmental health. The purpose of the public comment period and virtual public meeting is to obtain feedback from stakeholders on the whitepaper and ideas for modernizing EPA and FDA’s approach to product oversight.

Background

Currently, EPA and FDA determine regulatory oversight of pesticides and new animal drugs based on the rationale described in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the agencies signed in 1971 and revised in 1973. Since that time, pesticide and animal drug technologies—and both agencies’ understanding of these technologies—have evolved.

For example, parasite treatment products applied topically to animals (including pets) generally are regulated by EPA if they remain on the skin to control only external parasites (e.g., collars or spot-ons to control fleas and ticks) and by FDA if they are absorbed systemically into the bloodstream. The agencies now understand that many of the topically administered products currently regulated by EPA do not remain on the skin and are actually absorbed into the bloodstream, highlighting challenges with the current approach and raising different safety concerns than originally anticipated.

Additionally, genetically engineered (“GE”) pest animals, which are gaining interest as a pest control tool that can reduce the need for conventional pesticides, were not envisioned 50 years ago when the original regulatory approach was developed. As agreed in the 2016 National Strategy for Modernizing the Regulatory System for Biotechnology Products, EPA and FDA have considered how to update their respective responsibilities with the goal of developing an efficient, transparent, and predictable approach for overseeing GE insects. Recently, Executive Order 14081, issued September 12, 2022, has further directed the agencies to improve the clarity and efficiency of the regulatory process for biotechnology products, underscoring the need for continued coordination between the agencies on biotechnology. The whitepaper and public meeting only address EPA and FDA oversight.

The agencies’ current approach to determining whether EPA or FDA is the appropriate regulator of certain products does not effectively reflect or accommodate scientific advancement, and it has become clear in some cases that the current approach has resulted in misalignment between product characteristics and the agency better equipped to regulate the product. A modernized approach would ensure that the oversight of these products better aligns with each agency’s expertise, accounts for scientific advancement, avoids redundancy, better protects animal health and safety, and improves regulatory clarity for regulated entities, animal owners, veterinarians, and other stakeholders.

Public Meeting Information

The virtual public meeting will focus on the whitepaper and the following questions. We are not seeking input or comments about any specific products, other federal agencies’ product oversight, or other topics outside the scope of the whitepaper and the questions below. We are particularly interested in receiving comments from the public on the following:

1. What do you perceive as the strengths and weaknesses of each agency in regulating these types of products?
2. Are there additional or different challenges that EPA and FDA did not identify in the whitepaper?
3. How can EPA and FDA communicate with their stakeholders about the regulation of these products in a clearer and more transparent manner?
4. For regulated entities, how have you historically determined which agency to approach first to bring your product to market?
5. For consumers, do you know who is regulating the products you use on your animal(s)? If you have a concern or complaint about a specific product, do you know which agency to contact?
6. How should EPA and FDA modify product oversight to better align with each agency’s mission and expertise?
7. What difficulties would you envision if EPA and FDA were to modify product oversight to better align with each agency’s mission and expertise, and how could they be mitigated?

Registration

Stakeholders interested in attending the virtual public meeting must register no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on March 15, 2023. Interested persons should register online at https://www.eventbrite.com/e/547810324427External Link Disclaimer and will need to provide contact information for each attendee, including name, title, affiliation, address, email, telephone number, and if reasonable accommodations due to a disability are needed. Early registration is recommended. Registrants will receive confirmation when their registration has been received and will be provided the webcast link. Registrants should ensure they retain the webcast link email and should check their “junk mail” folder if they do not receive an automatic confirmation with the webcast link after registering.

Requests for Presenting Oral Comments

During online registration you may indicate if you wish to make oral comments during the virtual public meeting. Registrants requesting to present oral comments should provide information regarding which topics they intend to address at the time of registration. We will do our best to accommodate requests to present oral comments.

Individuals and organizations with common interests are urged to consolidate or coordinate their comments. All requests to make oral comments must be received by March 15, 2023.

We will determine the amount of time allotted to each presenter and notify participants by March 21, 2023. No commercial or promotional material will be permitted to be presented or distributed at the public meeting.

Submitting Electronic or Written Comments

Comments submitted to the docket and/or presented at the public meeting should be limited to the questions/topics posed in the Federal Register Notice only, as described above.

Upon publication of the Federal Register notice, public comments will be accepted through 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of April 24, 2023.

Comments can be submitted electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal, starting on February 23, 2023. All comment submissions received must reference Docket No. EPA-HQ-OPP-2023-0103. All comments received will be placed in the docket.

Do not electronically submit any information you consider Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Additional information on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at the EPA Docket Center.

Following the public meeting and the close of the comment period, the EPA and FDA will consider comments received in determining next steps.

Event Materials

WHITEPAPER: A Modern Approach to EPA and FDA Product Oversight

Davis and his family have been in the business for 15 years, and since the incident, he claims that half of his bee colonies have dropped dead.

Author: Ashley Bornancin

EAST PALESTINE, Ohio — The owner of Hilltop Honey Farm in East Palestine said that since the train derailment three weeks ago, he’s worried that the label on his product will deter people from buying from him.

Steve Davis said all of the honey from his 15 locations is safe to purchase and consume since it was harvested in the spring of 2022 and he and his team are working to keep their current honey safe. However, he’s concerned there will be a stigma surrounding all local East Palestine businesses.

Davis and his family have been in the business for 15 years, and since the incident, he claims that half of his bee colonies have dropped dead.

Credit: Hilltop Honey Farm

Davis explains honey bees can travel up to 5 miles, so one contamination can affect honey farmers in the span of several miles.

“I believe it was from the ones that were closer. They are they’re all dead, like 12 of them. The other ones that are a little bit further away, had a little bit of survival, but I’m not real sure how they’re doing,” said Davis.

He reached out to Norfolk Southern to conduct testing but said he was initially turned away since he lives two miles from the crash site.

Davis had to meet with a Texas-based law firm to hire an investigator to test his water, soil and equipment.

Davis fears the expense could be upwards of ten thousand dollars, money he just recently spent this year on new equipment.

“That’s just really heartbreaking for me, because that was a lot of money and a lot of extra work that we did,” he said. “I’m not just worried about us. We’re worried about other beekeepers.”.

10TV reached out to Norfolk Southern for comment on the situation. A representative said they will reimburse Davis for all of his water testing expenses and will work with the farm on investigating.

Connor Spielmaker, a spokesperson for Norfolk Southern provided the following response:

“Testing results on the water and air conducted by Ohio EPA as well as Norfolk Southern and other agencies has been and remains safe. Norfolk Southern remains committed to the citizens of East Palestine, our family assistance center remains open for affected residents and we will work with this resident on his concerns and reimburse him for his well water testing.”

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: Owner of honey farm in East Palestine worried about future sales | 10tv.com

ARS Administrator Simon Liu

USDA Names Simon Liu as New ARS Administrator

For media inquiries contact: Jan Suszkiw, (202) 734-1176

The U.S. Department of Agriculture named Simon Liu, Ph.D., the Administrator of the Agricultural Research Service (ARS). In this role, Liu will lead the agency in its efforts to leverage the latest advances in science and technology and develop innovative solutions to agricultural challenges facing the nation and world.

While Liu was officially named as ARS Administrator on Jan. 4, 2023, he has been acting in this role since June 2022. Prior to holding this position, Liu was the Associate Administrator for the agency’s Research Management and Operations for more than seven years. He first joined ARS in 2010 as Director of the National Agricultural Library (NAL), which houses the world’s largest collections devoted to agriculture and related sciences.

“The Department, nation, and the world look to ARS to provide cutting-edge discoveries and solutions that are rooted in quality, objective science,” said USDA Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics and Chief Scientist Chavonda Jacobs-Young. “Research is the key to strengthening and adapting agriculture to meet the needs of today and the challenges we face tomorrow. Dr. Liu’s decades of public service and previous leadership roles within ARS make him the perfect fit to lead the agency into the future. His experience, expertise, and dedication to excellence in both program and administration will continue to serve ARS well as a premier scientific organization.”

As ARS Administrator, Liu and his senior leadership team administer more than 660 research projects spread across four National Program Areas.  These research projects are conducted by 2,000 scientists and post-doctoral researchers assigned to 90-plus research locations nationwide, including a few laboratories overseas.

“It’s an honor to be a part of such an innovative research agency that provides scientific excellence through agricultural discoveries,” said Liu. “These discoveries support the nourishment of all people while sustaining our nation’s agroecosystem and natural resources.  As administrator, I will continue supporting and advancing the great work that our more than 8,000 employees do every day.”

Liu now leads an agency with a storied, 70-year history of scientific and technological excellence that includes the mass production of the antibiotic penicillin, xanthan gum, key nutrient findings, animal disease vaccines, edible films, guayule-based tire rubber and bio-synthetic oils, to name just a few.

Before joining ARS, Liu served as Associate Director of the National Library of Medicine (NLM) and Director of the NLM Computer and Communications System. Prior to his service at NLM, he held leadership positions with the U.S. Departments of Justice and Treasury, following work in the private sector where he led information system development and space mission studies to support NASA mission and operations.

Liu attended university in his native Taiwan and pursued graduate studies in the United States, where he earned master’s degrees in Computer Science, Business Administration and Government from Indiana University, the University of Maryland and Johns Hopkins University. He also earned two doctoral degrees: an Ed.D. in Higher Education Administration and a Ph.D. in Computer Science from George Washington University.

Liu serves as an adjunct faculty member with graduate school appointments at several of his alma maters and is active in professional societies and associations. He has served as editor-in-chief of an information technology magazine and editor of four journals in the past 20 years. Liu has published a book and more than 80 book chapters, journal articles and conference papers.

The Agricultural Research Service is the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s chief scientific in-house research agency. Daily, ARS focuses on solutions to agricultural problems affecting America. Each dollar invested in U.S. agricultural research results in $20 of economic impact.

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: https://www.ars.usda.gov/news-events/news/research-news/2023/usda-names-simon-liu-as-new-ars-administrator/

This year, The IR-4 Project commemorates 60 years of operation. Since its establishment by land grant universities and the U.S. Department of Agriculture in 1963, IR-4 has championed specialty crop growers by facilitating the registration of safe, effective pest management solutions to meet their unique needs.

Specialty crops (which include fruits, vegetables, nuts, herbs, and horticulture crops) are not typically served by agrochemical companies’ registration efforts. Larger acreage, “major crops” (like corn and soybeans) typically yield higher returns on investment. This “minor use problem” spurred the founding of IR-4.

IR-4 upholds specialty crops as essential components of a healthy diet, a thriving landscape, and a robust U.S. economy. Since its founding, IR-4 has secured over 23,000 pest management product registrations through the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for food crops (and countless others for ornamental crops). IR-4 evaluates a range of tools — including reduced-risk chemical and bio-based pesticides, as well as emerging technologies and integrated solutions.

IR-4 helps secure pest management products for specialty crops— including fruits, vegetables, nuts, herbs and flowers. Image courtesy of NC State University.

Notable registrations facilitated by IR-4 include Chlorantraniliprole (a reduced-risk conventional pesticide) and Spinosad (a bio-based insecticide approved for both conventional and organic growers). As a result of IR-4’s submissions, these products are approved by EPA for use on numerous specialty crops. IR-4 also spearheaded the registration of several biopesticides to manage Varroa mites in honeybee colonies. These registrations help reduce dietary exposure to pesticides, increase growers’ pest management options, and secure the vitality of the U.S. food supply.

According to an economic impact study by Michigan State University in 2022, IR-4 contributes $8.97 billion annually to the gross domestic product. Additionally, seven jobs today can be attributed to every $1,000 of public investment in IR-4.

Federally funded through USDA, IR-4 works closely with the USDA National Institute for Food and Agriculture (NIFA), USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS), EPA, and international partners to conduct research, facilitate registrations, and harmonize global regulations.

“Not many government-funded organizations survive for 60 years on a year-to-year funding basis,” said Dr. Jerry Baron, Executive Director of The IR-4 Project. “We continue to be relevant to our stakeholders in the farming community. Because of our relevance, they continue to support us in many ways, including letting the decision-makers in Washington D.C. know the importance of the organization— why this program should continue to exist, now and into the future.”

Headquartered at North Carolina State University since 2021(formerly at Rutgers University), IR-4 spans the U.S. through four regional offices, each working closely with growers, commodity groups, state liaisons, land grant university researchers, extension, and industry leaders. Regional offices are located at: University of Florida, University of Maryland Eastern Shore, Michigan State University, and University of California, Davis.

As the future of pest management and its regulation grows increasingly complex, IR-4 has the expertise to guide the specialty crop community forward with innovative, pragmatic solutions. While commemorating 60 years of impact through 2023, IR-4 invites the specialty crop community to follow along, learn more about the project, and take part in its evolving, multifaceted work. Visit the IR-4 website to connect via email, newsletter, or social media.

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: https://www.ir4project.org/news/60yearsannouncement/

Canadian Honey Council

February 2023

It is indeed unfortunate that the American Beekeepers Federation, the American Honey Producers Association and those Canadian operators having an interest in importing American packaged bees are attempting to capitalize on the fear of introducing tropilaelaps mites.

The Canadian Honey Council would much have preferred if the ABF and the AHPA had first contacted the CHC for information regarding status, demand, and possible rationale for border opening. The CHC would have appreciated nothing more than to add to a substantive history of working together in a mutually beneficial manner. As it is, the CHC feels it necessary to clarify some issues concerning Canada’s permitted importation of package bees, particularly from Australia as well as the threat of the introduction of tropilaelaps mites. With respect, the two issues should have been dealt with separately, but they have unfortunately been intertwined.

The CHC represents every provincial beekeeping organization in Canada and as such, speaks for all beekeepers. The package issue in Canada is divisive, but it is important to note that the interest group calling for the opening of the US border does not represent all commercial operations nor is it even clear they represent a majority of commercial operations. They do, however represent a substantial number of colonies in certain regions of the country and we continue to listen to those from all points of view.

The CHC and the ABF have had a good working relationship. More recently, we have expanded our relationship building to work closer with the American Honey Producers Association. While honey sales, adulterated honey and trans-shipped honey has been a primary concern, stock issues, particularly related to queen sales has also been important. Working with California queen producers, the Canadian Honey Council was able to ease some of their reporting burdens and when “Africanized bees” were found in the quarantine zone, we were quickly able to work with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency based on science and agreed to developed strategies to mitigate the issue. Consequently, imports were resumed in a timely manner.

Last year, Canadian beekeepers from most areas in the country experienced devastating losses and the demand to stock increased dramatically. Calls to open the border to US packages intensified, firstly focusing on receiving packages from the northern California quarantine zone, then expanding to Georgia and now the mainland US. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency put out an open call for additional research to see if there were any changes to the risks that had been identified in a 2013 risk assessment of US packages. Four risks were identified in 2013

• amitraz resistant mites, • small hive beetle, • AFB resistance • Africanized bees.

The CHC has indicated that if the science supports the decision to open the border, the border should open. However, it is not up to beekeepers or associations to determine if the science is sound, it is up to the experts at CFIA that evaluate the honey bee health status in Canada and the potential bee exporting country. For example,…..

To Read the Complete Document go to https://honeycouncil.ca/

Links from the CHC:

Canadian-Honey-Council-Statement-on-Importation-of-bees-tropilaelapes-Feb-2023.pdf (honeycouncil.ca)

Canadian Honey Council – Serving Beekeepers since 1940

News – Canadian Honey Council