Land conversion and pesticide use degrade forage areas for honey bees in America's beekeeping epicenter.

A diverse range of threats have been associated with managed-bee declines globally. Recent increases of two known threats, land-use change and pesticide use, have resulted from agricultural expansion and intensification notably in the top honey-producing state in the United States: North Dakota. This study investigated the dual threat from land conversion and pesticide use surrounding ~14,000 registered apiaries in North Dakota from 2001 to 2014. We estimated the annual total insecticide use (kg) on major crops within 1.6 km of apiary sites. Of the eight insecticides quantified, six showed significant increasing trends over the time period. Specifically, applications of the newly established neonicotinoids Chlothianidin, Imidacloprid and Thiamethoxam, increased annually by 1329 kg, 686 kg, 795 kg, respectively. Also, the use of Chlorpyrifos, which was well-established in the state by 2001 and is highly toxic to honey bees, increased by ~8,800 kg annually from 6,500 kg in 2001 to 115,000 kg in 2014 on corn, soybeans and wheat. We further evaluated the relative quality changes of natural/semi-natural land covers surrounding apiaries in 2006, 2010 and 2014, a period of significant increases in cropland area. In areas surrounding apiaries, we observed changes in multiple indices of forage quality that reflect the deteriorating landscape surrounding registered apiary sites due to land-use change and pesticide-use increases. Overall, our results suggest that the application of foliar-applied insecticides, including pyrethroids and one organophosphate, increased surrounding apiaries when the use of neonicotinoid seed treatments surged and the area for producing corn and soybeans expanded. Spatially, these threats were most pronounced in southeastern North Dakota, a region hosting a high density of apiary sites that has recently experienced corn and soybean expansion. Our results highlight the value of natural and semi-natural land covers as sources of pollinator forage and refugia for bees against pesticide exposure. Our study provides insights for targeting conservation efforts to improve forage quality benefiting managed pollinators.

Past role and future outlook of the Conservation Reserve Program for supporting honey bees in the Great Plains.

Human dependence on insect pollinators continues to grow even as pollinators face global declines. The Northern Great Plains (NGP), a region often referred to as America's last honey bee (Apis mellifera) refuge, has undergone rapid land-cover change due to cropland expansion and weakened land conservation programs. We conducted a trend analysis and estimated conversion rates of Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) enrollments around bee apiaries from 2006 to 2016 and developed models to identify areas of habitat loss. Our analysis revealed that NGP apiaries lost over 53% of lands enrolled in the CRP, and the rate of loss was highest in areas of high apiary density. We estimated over 163,000 ha of CRP lands in 2006 within 1.6 km of apiaries was converted to row crops by 2012. We also evaluated how alternative scenarios of future CRP acreage caps may affect habitat suitability for supporting honey bee colonies. Our scenario revealed that a further reduction in CRP lands to 7.7 million ha nationally would reduce the number of apiaries in the NGP that meet defined forage criteria by 28% on average. Alternatively, increasing the national cap to 15 million ha would increase the number of NGP apiaries that meet defined forage criteria by 155%. Our scenarios also show that strategic placement of CRP lands near existing apiaries increased the number of apiaries that meet forage criteria by 182%. Our research will be useful for informing the potential consequences of future US farm bill policy and land management in the epicenter of the US beekeeping industry.

Identifying the Driving Factors of Water Quality in a Sub-Watershed of the Republican River Basin, Kansas USA.

Studies have shown that the agricultural expansion and land use changes in the Midwest of the U.S. are major drivers for increased nonpoint source pollution throughout the regional river systems. In this study, we empirically examined the relationship of planted area and production of three dominant crops with nitrate flux in the Republican River, Kansas, a sub-watershed of Mississippi River Basin. Our results show that land use in the region could not explain the observed changes in nitrate flux in the river. Instead, after including explanatory variables such as precipitation, growing degree days, and well water irrigation in the regression model we found that irrigation and spring precipitation could explain >85% of the variability in nitrate flux from 2000 to 2014. This suggests that changes in crop acreage and production alone cannot explain variability in nitrate flux. Future agricultural policy for the region should focus on controlling both the timing and amount of fertilizer applied to the field to reduce the potential leaching of excess fertilizer through spring time runoff and/or over-irrigation into nearby river systems.

Climate change and health costs of air emissions from biofuels and gasoline.

Environmental impacts of energy use can impose large costs on society. We quantify and monetize the life-cycle climate-change and health effects of greenhouse gas (GHG) and fine particulate matter (PM(2.5)) emissions from gasoline, corn ethanol, and cellulosic ethanol. For each billion ethanol-equivalent gallons of fuel produced and combusted in the US, the combined climate-change and health costs are $469 million for gasoline, $472-952 million for corn ethanol depending on biorefinery heat source (natural gas, corn stover, or coal) and technology, but only $123-208 million for cellulosic ethanol depending on feedstock (prairie biomass, Miscanthus, corn stover, or switchgrass). Moreover, a geographically explicit life-cycle analysis that tracks PM(2.5) emissions and exposure relative to U.S. population shows regional shifts in health costs dependent on fuel production systems. Because cellulosic ethanol can offer health benefits from PM(2.5) reduction that are of comparable importance to its climate-change benefits from GHG reduction, a shift from gasoline to cellulosic ethanol has greater advantages than previously recognized. These advantages are critically dependent on the source of land used to produce biomass for biofuels, on the magnitude of any indirect land use that may result, and on other as yet unmeasured environmental impacts of biofuels.