Protect kids from drift!

Protect kids from drift!

With your help, we’ve gotten pesticide drift on the policy radar. Now, help us keep the pressure on for real change! Donate today »

Mr. President: Bees need help, now

Mr. President: Bees need help, now


Urge Obama's new task force to enact real and rapid protections for honey bees. Act Now »

Feeding the World

Feeding the World

What would a food system geared towards eradicating hunger look like? Much like sound farming, it all starts at the roots... Learn more »

Stand with farmworkers

Stand with farmworkers

New rules protecting farmworkers from pesticides are finally in the works. Tell EPA to make them strong! Sign on »

What's on your watermelon?

What's on your watermelon?

Summer fruits and veggies can contain residues of pesticides known to be neurotoxic, cancer-causing or otherwise harmful. Learn more »

Pesticide Action Network's picture

Last week, Syngenta filed a legal challenge against the European Union's decision to suspend use of its pesticide, thiamethoxam. At the heart of the challenge? Syngenta says their product is wrongly accused of contributing to bee declines.

But the independent science detailing harm to bees from this and other pesticides is clear. And earlier this year, after reviewing the evidence for themselves, European policymakers determined that three widely used neonicotinoids — including thiamethoxam — pose a "high acute risk" to honey bees. Still, the pesticide corporation is protesting. Vehemently.

Judy Hatcher's picture

At a gathering in Malaysia this week, I sat with a small group of activists from China, Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and other countries. English is a second or third language for many, but upon hearing the phrase “a progressive global phaseout and ban of highly hazardous pesticides,” everyone in the room nodded vigorously and said, “Yes, yes!”

It’s an idea whose time has come.

Paul Towers's picture

In a letter submitted yesterday, scientists called out California officials for downplaying evidence of health hazards — including cancer — posed by a widely used fumigant pesticide.

Often applied to the state's strawberry fields, new rules may pave the way for even more use of chloropicrin unless policymakers follow recommendations from both state and independent scientists. This story is all too familiar.

Pesticide Action Network's picture

Last week, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced new labels intended to better protect bees from neonicotinoid pesticides. While seemingly a move in the right direction — and explicit acknowledgement from the agency that neonics indeed pose a threat to bee populations — these labels fail to establish truly meaningful protections.

There is no clear path for enforcing EPA's new labels. And even if followed to the letter, the labels fail to address a primary route of exposure through pre-treated seeds. Neonics are systemic, permeating the plant (including pollen and nectar), and are commonly applied as seed coatings to widely planted crops like corn. In short, EPA's labels appear to be an empty gesture.

Linda Wells's picture

It’s amazing what can happen in a year. Just ten months ago, we watched as the ballot initiative to label genetically engineered (GE) food in California — Prop 37 — was defeated by massive spending from the "Big 6" pesticide and GE corporations. And now there is more momentum than ever for GE labeling across the country.

With bills already passed in Maine and Connecticut, a big fight gearing up in Washington State, and stores implementing their own GE labeling policies, it seems Monsanto and other opponents of labeling won't be able to hold back the tide for much longer.