Managed Pollinator Protection Plans –

AAPCO Committee Update

Steven Dwinell and Jeanette Klopchin Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services

National Action for Pollinator Protection

n  ‘National Strategy to Promote the Health of Honey Bees and Other Pollinators’ – May 2015

“Mitigating the effects of pesticides on bees is a high

priority for the federal government, as both bee

pollination and insect control are essential to the success of

agriculture”

n  In August 2014, the EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs expressed interest in working with co-regulators on the development of state and tribal pollinator protection plans.

n  AAPCO formed Pollinator ProtectionPlan Committee – Sep 2014

n  SLA reps n  ASPCRO n  NASDA n  USDA n  CropLife America n  RISE n  National Cotton Council n  NPMA n  NALP n  Apiary Inspectors of

America

n  American Beekeeping Federation

n  American Honey Producers n  American Farm Bureau

Federation n  Almond Board of California n  Minor Crop Farm Alliance n  AmericanHort n  Fieldwatch

Committee Representation

Mission Statement: To assemble information on existing and developing managed pollinator protection plans ; Disseminate this information to stakeholders in order to assist states in the concept development and adoption and to assist USEPA in their efforts; Build a broad stakeholder consensus on effective strategies for protecting pollinators that are the least disruptive to production agriculture and other affected stakeholders.

Managed Pollinator Protection Plan (MP3) Purpose

A way to mitigate the risk of pesticides to bees and other

managed pollinators, while supporting the use of crop protection; developed through open communication and coordination among key stakeholders, including

beekeepers, growers, landowners, pesticide applicators, and pest control operators.

Conclusions and Recommendations  

There is large diversity in crop production systems, and utilization of the crop resource by managed pollinators across the states surveyed. This diversity needs to be reflected in any policy adopted by USEPA. Given the diversity in pest management activities, crop production systems, and pollinator management systems, a phase in period is recommended for any policy adopted by USEPA.

Conclusions and Recommendations  

States can be assisted in development of plans by national organizations that have participated in the development of plans. Resources for developing and implementing managed pollinator protection plans are limited, and these limits will slow development and implementation of managed pollinator protection plans. Updating plan should be a continuous process.

Report Status and Next Steps  

Report was finalized and accepted by AAPCO Board – posted to aapco.org: https://aapco.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/aapco-pollinator-protection-workgroup-march-2015-report.pdf

EPA Activity

n  - June 2015 - ‘Proposal to Mitigate Exposure to Bees from Acutely Toxic Pesticide Products’ n  new label restrictions and proposed language changes n  ‘blooming crops where managed bees are present under

contract pollination services’ – in agricultural settings n  Managed Pollinator Protection Plans (MP3’s)

n  addresses all other scenarios: e.g. foraging bees in/nearby an application sites, non-contract situations, protections afforded to native bee species, etc.

SFIREG Activity

June 2015 - SFIREG Guidance document on MP3 Development

n public stakeholder participation process n  a method for growers/applicators/beekeepers to locate and

contact each other n  recommendations on how to minimize risk of pesticides to

bees (BMP’s tailored for each target) n  a clear defined plan for public outreach n mechanism to measure effectiveness of an MP3 and a

process to periodically review and modify each plan

SFIREG Activity December 2015 - SFIREG Guidance Document on MP3 Evaluation – identified 5 goals areas

1.Behavioral Changes Which Increase Pollinator Protection – communication, collaboration, practice changes 2. Reducing Exposure of Bees to Pesticides – decrease bee kills due to pesticides, decreased pesticides in pollen analysis 3. Improve/Maintain Pollinator Health – adequate healthy hive populations and honey production 4. Compliance – availability of adequate and effective compliance assistance, label modifications protective to pollinators 5. National Improvement in Pollinator Health – this goal is an overall goal to show collectively the success of implementation of state MP3s. A state may choose different or additional objectives, measures or metrics based on their state’s MP3.

Committee Activity

3/11/15 - Washington, D.C. – Discussion of SFIREG Guidance on MP3s and development of comments on NASS survey on colony loss - Developed comments on NASS Annual and Quarterly Colony Loss Surveys 6/9/15 – Conference call and webinar – Discussion of USEPA Proposal to Mitigate Exposure to Bees from Acutely Toxic Pesticides - Reviewed and discussed USEPA Proposal to Mitigate Exposure to Bees from Acutely Toxic Pesticides – Committee did not provide comments

Activities since the report: 12/9/15 – Washington, DC – Discussion of SFIREG Guidance on Measuring Effectiveness of MP3s -Discussed SFIREG Guidance on Measuring Effectiveness of MP3s – chose to focus on development of recommendations for national measures for use by USEPA 2/26/16 – Conference call - Discussion of development of recommendations for national measures for use by USEPA – Reviewed template for evaluation of options based on SFIREG document; will review results of MP3 Symposium

Committee Activity

n Rose Kachadoorian appointed by AAPCO Board as Co-Chair in February, 2016

n Pollen sampling methodology and

interpretation subgroup being formed

Measuring Effectiveness of MP3s

n  Measuring effectiveness is identified as a critical component of MP3s in SFIREG Guidance

n  Identified as a need by USEPA in discussions of pollinator protection policy (to evaluate success of “alternative mitigation” )

n  Committee focusing on recommendations for USEPA

Pollen Sampling for Pesticide Residues

n  Sampling of pollen is being done by several research groups and some states

n  Pollen is from foraging bees and pollen stored in hives

n  Pollen has been analyzed for wide array of pesticide residues

n  Issue is interpretation of results n  Can pollen sampling be used to evaluate effect

of MP3 practices? n  Workgroup being formed

Managed Pollinator Protection Plan Tracking

n  Several groups (NASDA, AAPCO, NASDA, RISE) have been collecting information from states and their MP3 status. EPA is also interested in monitoring the progress of states plans as they develop. Tribal plans tracking is not complete.

n  Data exists for all 50 states n  Completed and developing/ammending additional plans n  Complete n  In final review n  In progress n  In draft form n  To be developed but not yet started n  No plan will be developed

MP3 Data Tracking Elements

n Lead Agency n Contact Person & Information n Plan Status n Stakeholder Engagement Process n Apiary Registry n Mapping Service (communication/notification process) n Target Groups for BMP's n Types of BMP’s n Evaluation Measures n Link to Plan

State MP3 Progress

Complete plans - 7 n  Arizona

n  Colorado n  Florida

n  Georgia

n  Mississippi n  North Dakota

n  Tennessee

Final Review - 9 n  California*

n  Delaware n  Indiana

n  Maine

n  Montana* n  Nevada*

n  Utah n  Wisconsin

n  Wyoming

State MP3 Progress In Development – 20

n  Alabama

n  Arkansas n  D.C

n  Illinois

n  Kentucky n  Maryland

n  Massachusetts n  Michigan

n  Minnesota n  New Hampshire

n  Mexico

n  New York n  North Carolina*

n  Oklahoma

n  Oregon* n  Vermont

n  Virginia n  Pennsylvania

n  Washington n  West Virginia

State MP3 Progress

n  To be developed but not yet started - 13

n  Connecticut n  Hawaii

n  Iowa* n  Kansas

n  Louisiana* n  Missouri

n  Nebraska, n  Ohio

n  South Carolina n  Rhode Island

n  South Dakota n  Texas

n  Texas and Minnesota have plans outside of Agricultural Sector

n  No plan will be developed - 4

n  Alaska n  Idaho,

n  Louisiana*

n  New Jersey*

MP3 – Communication Tools

n  Method for growers, applicators, and beekeepers to locate and contact each other n  Independent or state-based system; Fl, IN,ND, OK, SC n  Drift Watch; DE, Il, KS, MI, MS, MO, NE, NM, WI n  No mapping system: roughly 30%

n  Sample contracts and notification forms n  Stakeholder meetings and defined process n  Public comment, meeting agendas, notices and general transparency

Updating data

n  State MP3 Inventory to be hosted at www.aapco.com under “hot topics”

n  Updated quarterly or as needed n  MP3 Symposium 3/10-3/11/2016

n  States asked to update data during meeting n  Inventory will be emailed later this month n  Providing this information does not create or imply any responsibility

regarding managed pollinator protection plans for your state or agency. This is a request for information only.

MP3 Development n  Target audiences include:

n  growers n  landowners n  farmers n  beekeepers – commercial and hobbyist n  pesticide users n  pesticide applicators n  pest control advisors n  pest management professionals n  general public n  homeowners n  gardeners

Minimize Risk of Pesticides n  BMP’s include:

n  notifications and communication guidelines n  hive locations, identification, and moving n  label interpretations and guidance n  product formulation, application recommendations n  adoption of IPM and crop advisors n  bee-kill reporting n  safe use of in-hive pesticides n  maximizing pollinator health n  outreach “spreading the news”

MP3 - Forage and Habitat n  Partnerships and collaborative projects

n  USDA, US FWS, state level programs n  municipalities, counties, and homeowners n  public land access for apiaries n  habitat creation and enhancement n  pollinator friendly home gardens n  native wildflower information n  alternative cover crops

n  Many states address native pollinator concerns within this section

Measuring Success n  SFIREG Guidance document n  Unique state surveys

n  Florida, North Carolina, Mississippi n  current knowledge, perceptions,

behavior, communications and needs related to pollinator and pesticide awareness

n  survey before MP3 development - n  Hawaii, Wisconsin

n  Progress is expected 2016/2017

Other Elements

n  References n  Helpful website links n  Lists of stakeholders n  Crop specific plans merged – CA, Fl, MI n  Outreach process defined n  Committee/taskforce /working groups

Adam Putnam COMMISSIONER Thanks!

www.freshfromflorida.com

www.FloridaBeeProtection.org