HB 19-BAN NEONICOTINOID PESTICIDES  2:06:44 PM CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 19, "An Act limiting the application of neonicotinoid pesticides." 2:07:08 PM REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND, speaking as the sponsor of HB 19, remarked: One in three bites of food we eat relies on pollinators. Alaska's primary pollinators are native bumble bees; the diversity of native bees in Alaska is astonishing. About 4,000 different species have been cataloged in North America, and of those, 49 are found in Alaska. Bumble bees are the most prominent of those and are excellent pollinators, especially of Alaska's berry species .... More than 9 million European honeybees are imported into Alaska each year for honey production. These bees play a significant role in pollinating Alaska's crops and wildlands. Alaskan beekeepers are starting to overwinter bees in order to develop heartier Alaskan bee stock. Bee populations have been in an alarming decline since 2006, in many parts of the world. For the first time this year, a bumble bee species in the United States was declared endangered by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Widespread use of a relatively new class of toxic pesticide, neonicotinoids, is a significant contributing factor. In addition to killing bees outright, research has shown that even low levels of neonicotinoids impair bees' ability to find their way back to the hive, collect food, produce new queens, and mount an effective immune response. This legislation would protect both agriculture and wild plants that rely on pollinators. The bill aims to prevent the spread of these pesticides before they impact Alaskan agriculture. Over two-thirds of the ... farmers involved with the Alaska Grown program grow crops that depend on bees for pollination. So, in spirit of Co-Chair Tarr's third annual Food Security Week, we introduce this bill, not only to protect Alaska's pollinators but to protect Alaska's growing agricultural industry. 2:09:37 PM CO-CHAIR TARR moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 19, Version 30-LS0219\D, Nauman, 3/8/17, as the working document. CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON objected for discussion purposes. 2:10:03 PM JOANNA SCHULTZ, Staff, Representative Harriett Drummond, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Drummond, prime sponsor of HB 19, informed the committee the main difference between the original version of the bill and Version D is that under Version D, if [neonicotinoid] pesticides are used, then [the treated seeds, foliage, or soil], must remain in the greenhouse for the remainder of their life span. In addition, the bill exempts certified pesticide applicators and allows certified pesticide "users" to continue using pesticides outside or inside a greenhouse. In response to Co-Chair Josephson, she clarified that [under Version D], anything the pesticides have been used on must stay in a greenhouse. 2:11:20 PM REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER said he has heard that bees are dying around the world and he asked whether there is evidence that is currently happening in Alaska. REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND replied that it is not happening in Alaska yet, because the neonicotinoid class of pesticides is not widely used in Alaska at this time. The goal of the proposed legislation is to prevent the bees in Alaska, which are mostly wild pollinators, from being impacted by the use of neonicotinoid pesticides. REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER questioned how bee activity is recorded in Alaska. REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND answered through the Department of Environmental Conservation. 2:13:21 PM REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER restated his question as to how the state will know whether the use of the pesticide has affected bees in Alaska. 2:13:58 PM CHRISTINA CARPENTER, Director, Division of Environmental Health, Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), answered that DEC is not directly tracking bee kill-off in Alaska, but the department works with its counterparts in other states to track those bee kill-offs throughout the nation and also works with the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2:14:59 PM REPRESENTATIVE WESTLAKE asked whether there are any unintended consequences Ms. Carpenter has seen in other states from using neonicotinoid pesticides. MS. CARPENTER offered to provide the committee with some examples. 2:16:05 PM REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND concluded her presentation of HB 19 by warning that the legislature needs to stop the spread of neonicotinoid pesticides to prevent their widespread use in Alaska. 2:16:23 PM CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON observed the bill directs that the use of the pesticides would have to be entirely within a greenhouse and whatever is being grown would have to stay in the greenhouse. He asked, "Is the idea that if a private person wants to take a risk with exposure, that's up to the individual?" REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND indicated yes. She clarified that the bill references commercial greenhouses and pointed out it is unknown whether seedlings coming up from the Lower 48 have been pretreated with neonicotinoids. Large home improvement stores and stores such as Fred Meyer, sell thousands of seedlings that are grown elsewhere, and Alaska has no control over how they've been treated unless they come from a state that forbids the use of neonicotinoids. Furthermore, some states may not forbid use in a greenhouse where some seedlings are started; the goal of the legislation is to keep use of the pesticides from spreading in Alaska. Representative Drummond explained that use by an individual in his/her own backyard may not seem significant; however, bees spend the summer in her backyard and she does not want to expose them to neonicotinoids. Representative Drummond described the legislation as a contribution to a much larger effort. 2:18:26 PM REPRESENTATIVE PARISH asked where else this ban has been enforced, and to what effect. MS. SCHULTZ offered her understanding that Maryland passed a ban last year that focuses on the restriction of sales rather than on usage, and the state will allow existing products to be sold for two years before the ban takes full effect. In addition, certain cities have enacted bans, for example, Portland and Eugene, Oregon, and Spokane, Washington. REPRESENTATIVE PARISH asked whether there have been any efforts internationally. MS. SCHULTZ said the European Union, in 2013, enacted a ban and has been reviewing the ban either last year or this year. REPRESENTATIVE PARISH asked whether the European Union has seen any effects on the bee population since enacting the ban. MS. SCHULTZ said she has not seen studies but surmised that is because they are still in the process of being conducted. She added, "But that was the goal of the ... ban, so that they could really see if it ... made a difference." 2:20:09 PM CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON expressed his understanding that Minnesota is a cutting-edge jurisdiction, in terms of banning some of these pesticides. He asked whether other states ban at least some classes of pesticides. MS. SCHULTZ agreed Minnesota has been working on some related legislation, but only Maryland passed legislation to ban the sale of neonicotinoids, [with the exemption to] certified pesticide applicators. 2:20:48 PM REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH inquired as to the availability of the neonicotinoid pesticides. 2:21:14 PM REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND advised [neonicotinoid pesticides] are already available in the retail market. She said she is unsure whether or how professional applicators are using [neonicotinoid] pesticides. She related that her staff contacted all the growers in Alaska that were available for comment and none of them are using [neonicotinoid pesticides]. Notwithstanding that, she remarked that anyone can go to [Alaska Mill Feed & Garden Center] and purchase products that include neonicotinoid pesticides. REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked if there is a brand name to look for in the list of ingredients on a particular product. REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND answered that there are a number of these classes of pesticides. REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH explained his consideration is for the average customer walking into a store to buy a pest killer, not the professionals that "know what they're doing." He asked again if there is a brand name to identify. REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND answered, "Bayer is one of them." She said that until she learned about neonicotinoid pesticides, she had been unaware she was applying them to her plants for many years. She described the product as expensive - about $150 for 1.5 gallons. She said she limits her use of the product she bought [containing neonicotinoid pesticides] to only when she sees aphids. She explained that the products are not supposed to be used when plants are flowering, because that is when bees come to the plants to pollenate them. She said the average user may not follow the rules, but commercial users are exempt because they are supposed to be applying the pesticide at the appropriate time in the plants' cycles. REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked if the pesticide used to obliterate wasps can also damage bees. REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND answered that she is not sure, but she noted that there are some wasps in the pollinator class. She added, "But if you're just attacking wasps, I can't imagine that it's going to impact flowers nearby." 2:25:43 PM REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER questioned whether wasps, bees, and bumblebees are all the same classification of insect. REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND said she doesn't know. Notwithstanding that, she related that the 49 pollinators identified in Alaska include not only bees of various types, but also wasps and certain varieties of flies. 2:27:13 PM ROB CARTER, Manager, Plant Materials Center (PMC), Division of Agriculture, Department of Natural Resources (DNR), offered that most [pesticides], including neonicotinoid pesticides, are not selective: "They will kill things." In response to a follow-up question from Representative Rauscher, he said he would not state that the pesticides kill "all" insects. He said, "I will say that ... these do have significant impact on a large majority of the insects out there. That is their intention and that is their use and why they were created." 2:27:45 PM REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER remarked that wasps eat aphids. He offered his understanding that wasps had been brought into Alaska for that specific purpose. He asked, "So, if these are on the plant, the aphids are there, and the wasp eats the aphid, then what's the deal?" 2:27:56 PM MR. CARTER answered that wasps and bees are in the same kingdom, phylum, and class, but are in a different suborder. He confirmed there are parasitic wasps that attack aphids. He said [neonicotinoid pesticides] also kill aphids, but he does not know if a wasp would be affected by eating an aphid that had fed on a plant that had been treated with a neonicotinoid pesticide. 2:29:55 PM REPRESENTATIVE WESTLAKE said he applauds HB 19, but he expressed concern about unintended consequences. He questioned whether the proposed legislation might result in a situation in which there are trees along a highway being killed by pests, but "we can't do anything about it." 2:30:32 PM MS. SCHULTZ pointed out that Version D would not ban the application of neonicotinoid pesticides by certified applicators, which generally would be the ones treating a pest invasion alongside a highway. 2:31:06 PM CO-CHAIR TARR noted that she is a botanist who has worked on this issue for about 20 years. She opined that the changes in Version D are reasonable, because most of the concern about the application of [neonicotinoid pesticides] is in regard to those individuals who are untrained and over apply the product or use it under the wrong conditions. Limiting the use of neonicotinoid pesticides to commercially trained applicators manages "improper application in the environment" as well as protecting the applicators from any unnecessary exposure. 2:32:01 PM CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON expressed his support of HB 19 and his concern regarding the health of the bee population in the U.S. He stated his assumption that the proposed legislation pertains to healthy ecosystems, but surmised it may also link to economic systems in Alaska. He asked the bill sponsor to explain "why bees are important in that respect." REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND answered that over two-thirds of the farmers in the Alaska Grown program depend upon bees to pollinate their crops. She reemphasized the proportion of the world's food that relies on pollination. She stated, "There are billions of bees that are bred and moved around in the world of agriculture to be there at the appropriate time for pollinating those particular crops. It's a huge industry in the Lower 48." CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON drew attention to the fiscal note. He noted that he is not a legislator who subscribes to the idea that in tough fiscal times no legislation should ever cost anything. He invited the bill sponsor to comment on the fiscal note. REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND replied that she is having difficulty believing that DEC needs "one entire person to track a single pesticide" when it is already tracking a number of other chemicals. She added, "But it's hard for me to question the professionals in this manner." 2:34:04 PM MS. SCHULTZ pointed out that the fiscal note aligns with the original bill version; therefore, it does not include "the certified applicators piece." She said, "That may and should lower the fiscal note." 2:34:24 PM REPRESENTATIVE PARISH questioned why the bill sponsor chose to focus on the application rather than sale of [neonicotinoid pesticides]. He said studies have shown that [neonicotinoid pesticides] can also kill birds and potentially mammals and fish, as well. 2:35:00 PM CO-CHAIR TARR, based on her experience with similar legislation in the past, imparted that "you cannot ban the sale, because it violates the U.S. Constitution Interstate Commerce Clause." The choice, she explained, is to limit how the product is used in Alaska. 2:35:27 PM CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON noted that last year, on the federal level, there was a "fairly controversial" bipartisan effort regarding "further restrictions on chemicals and that sort of thing." MS. SCHULTZ, after ascertaining that Co-Chair Josephson had been referring to Maryland, offered her understanding that "they have restricted where you can purchase these pesticides; so, you can purchase neonicotinoid pesticides where you can also purchase restricted use pesticides." She said she is not aware of any stores in Alaska that "strictly sell restricted use pesticides." 2:36:26 PM REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER mentioned that beekeepers are concerned about [neonicotinoid pesticides], and he said he wants to learn as much as possible about the issue before voting on the proposed legislation. He referred to reading material that states that a single kernel of corn treated with neonicotinoid pesticides can kill a songbird that ingests it and "as little as one-tenth of a coated kernel seed per day during egg-laying season can impair reproduction..." He questioned how weather such as rain or snow may affect the strength or neonicotinoid pesticides on plants and whether there could be runoff that could affect other plants. MS. SCHULTZ stated that she is not an expert. Notwithstanding that, she offered her understanding that the chemicals enter the plant and end up in the pollen that is collected by the bees. 2:39:35 PM CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON imparted to anyone curious about the issue that the proper federal law to look at is the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), which he offered his understanding had not recently been amended. He added, "It was TOSCA, which was the Toxic Chemicals Act that was just..." CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON opened public testimony on HB 19. 2:40:14 PM DAVID OTNESS expressed appreciation that the issue before the committee is being addressed. He opined that the onus should be on the manufacturers of pesticides to first prove that they are not harmful. He said [neonicotinoid pesticides] have been linked as the source of "massive die-offs." He characterized neonicotinoid pesticides as a powerful poison, and he offered his understanding that they are derived from the tobacco plant, which in itself is a powerful drug. He concluded, "Before things get to the point where there could be conflicts of people wanting to use this on a commercial scale, I think it's excellent that we address it proactively right now and sort of take that attitude with much of what we're facing ahead of us here. I think it would ... clarify a lot of things for the public, and also those who might want to use it to begin with." 2:42:15 PM LOUIS TOZZI noted that he had sent an e-mail to the committee, but would address a few important points today. Regarding the threat neonicotinoid pesticides have on bees, he explained that the biggest issue is that neonicotinoid pesticides are systemic; all tissue of the plants - including the nectar and pollen - pick up and retain the pesticides, which "makes the plant itself a pesticide." Bees gather nectar, which has low levels of the pesticide, but in the process of making honey from that nectar, water evaporates, which essentially has the effect of concentrating [the neonicotinoid pesticides]. Mr. Tozzi advised that because neonicotinoid pesticides are long-lived, they tend to last in the plant for the entire life of the plant. He said, "So while applying them when the plant is blooming is an issue, it ... could have been applied much sooner than that and it still presents an impact to the honey bees." MR. TOZZI directed attention to language in the bill that read, "applied to the soil in granular form". He advised this is a big problem, because "it creates a loophole where a farmer who purchases ... or greenhouse person who purchases treated seed from ... outside of Alaska could potentially plant that seed outdoors." He explained this possibility would exist because the bill language, in only specifying granular form, would not prevent "a liquid or a seed with a treatment on it." MR. TOZZI suggested another possible issue is that after application, these chemicals will often "drift out" as a dry residue to areas beyond the intended farm fields, and the neonicotinoid pesticides are readily picked up by the indigenous plants in the adjacent countryside. 2:46:32 PM REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER asked what Mr. Tozzi's credentials are regarding [neonicotinoid pesticides]. MR. TOZZI answered that he is a beekeeper and part of a group of beekeepers working to breed an Alaska-hardy bee so that beekeeping in Alaska can be more sustainable. He said bees overwinter in Alaska, but not without much intervention on the part of beekeepers. He concluded, "And so, I don't have scientific background other than what I need to know as a beekeeper." 2:47:43 PM The committee took a brief at-ease at 2:48 p.m. 2:48:20 PM CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON indicated that he would like to hear from Ms. Carpenter regarding Mr. Tozzi's comment that treated seeds could be placed outside and thus circumvent a prohibition on the granular form of [neonicotinoid pesticides]. 2:48:50 PM REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER, regarding the systemic nature of [neonicotinoid pesticides], said he would like to know if there are other pesticides that are also [systemic]. He further questioned if the comments about [neonicotinoid pesticides] becoming part of honey could also apply to other pesticides. 2:49:38 PM MS. CARPENTER offered to follow up with information. 2:50:09 PM REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH said he has friends in Fairbanks that are beekeepers and understands the biggest challenge in overwintering the bees is in keeping them fed. He asked if bees are more resistant to one pesticide over another or whether the problem with the neonicotinoid pesticides is that they are longer lived. 2:51:17 PM MR. TOZZI answered that "the pesticides" are long-lived and will last through winter after being brought back to the hive. He reiterated his explanation about the evaporation of water from the honey resulting in a more concentrated level of pesticide. He said one theory as to the mid-winter disappearance of bees in the Lower 48 is that the bees, having ingested the pesticide, which is a neurotoxin, "lose track of where they're supposed to be and what they're supposed to be doing and then fly off in the middle of winter." Mr. Tozzi said he has heard anecdotally of that happening in Alaska, but he said he cannot say that is what the cause was. Mr. Tozzi noted that the pesticides are also stored in the beeswax, which is an economic factor, because "clean beeswax is something that's very difficult to come by." He said the ongoing low level [of pesticides] to the colonies makes it much more difficult for them to survive the winter. 2:53:59 PM PAMELA K. MILLER, Biologist and Executive Director, Alaska Community Action on Toxics (ACAT), had her written testimony paraphrased by Patti J. Saunders. Ms. Miller's testimony - a letter to Representative Drummond dated March 15, 2017, [included in the committee packet] - read as follows [original punctuation provided]: I am writing on behalf of Alaska Community Action on Toxics, a statewide non-profit environmental health research and advocacy organization. Thank you for your introduction of HB 19, "An Act limiting the application of neonicotinoid pesticides." We strongly endorse this bill as an important measure to protect bees and other pollinators so crucial to a majority of our crops that serve as vital food resources. Neonicotinoid pesticides have long been associated with harm to bees and other pollinators. In 2016, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released the first risk assessment of neonicotinoid pesticides and concluded that they can cause significant harm to honeybees. Increasing independent peer-reviewed scientific evidence has demonstrated that the widespread use of the dangerous class of neonicotinoid pesticides is a factor in the precipitous decline of bees and other pollinators. Studies have shown serious adverse effects to bees including navigational ability, mobility, and reproduction. Even small exposures to neonicotinoid pesticides can damage bees' ability to gather pollen, impair their memory and social behavior, weaken their immune systems, and harm colony health and longevity. Scientists have shown that exposure to certain neonicotinoid pesticides reduces bees' immune defenses, promoting infections associated with such diseases as deformed wing virus. Recent scientific studies have shown that chronic exposure of honeybees to environmental levels of neonicotinoid pesticides can impair their learning and memory. Another study reported that wild bees exposed to neonicotinoid-coated seeds had reduced nesting and were not successful in building brood cells for new larvae. In addition, chronic exposure to one of the most commonly used neonicotinoid pesticides (imidacloprid) was found to be associated with reduced brood production, reduced colony growth, and an 85% reduction in the production of bumblebee queens. Neonicotinoid pesticides are also found to have adverse effects on many other non-target and beneficial organisms, including butterflies, birds, and aquatic insects. There are also emerging concerns about the possible adverse neurodevelopmental effects of neonicotinoid pesticides on children. We believe the evidence supports the need for urgent legislative action. We urge swift passage of this bill to suspend the use of these harmful chemicals in Alaska. 2:57:40 PM REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked how widespread [neonicotinoid pesticides] are commercially compared to other pesticides. PATTI J. SAUNDERS, Development Director, Alaska Community Action on Toxics (ACAT), answered that they are commonly available, but she has not done the research yet to know the percentages. She stated, "Just reading the label isn't necessarily going to help people, because this class of pesticides is not labeled as a class." For example, someone might see "imidacloprid" may be on the label, but someone reading that may not realize that it is [a neonicotinoid pesticide that is killing bees]. She said education of both sellers and consumers is necessary. She said she thinks there is already a lot of concern among regarding neonicotinoid pesticides, and she surmised that Alaskans would welcome more information about "these endocrine disrupting pesticides." 2:59:34 PM CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON removed his objection to the previous motion to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 19, Version 30-LS0219\D, Nauman, 3/8/17, as the working document. There being no further objection, Version D was before the committee. 2:59:50 PM CO-CHAIR JOSEPHSON closed public testimony on HB 19 and announced that HB 19 was held over.