Quiero saber acerca de...

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 24, 2021 / Rules and Regulations species, including rusty patched bumble bee, buff-tailed bumble bee, and eastern bumble bee Pisa et al. 2015, p. 69;
Goulson 2013, pp. 78; Colla and Packer 2008, p. 10; Lundin et al. 2015, p. 7.
Neonicotinoids are a broad class of insecticides based on nicotine compounds used in a variety of agricultural applications; they act as a neurotoxin, affecting the central nervous system of insects by interfering with the receptors of the insects nervous system, causing overstimulation, paralysis, and death Douglas and Tooker 2015, pp.
50905092. The neonicotinoid family of insecticides includes acetamiprid, clothianidin, imidacloprid, nitenpyram, nithiazine, thiacloprid, and thiamethoxam. In the range of the Franklins bumble bee Jackson, Douglas, and Josephine Counties in Oregon, as well as Trinity and Siskiyou Counties in California, the first reported use of imidacloprid was in 1996, thiamethoxam in 2001, and clothianidin in 2004. The use of neonicotinoid pesticides continued in the range of the species through 2006, when the last observation of the Franklins bumble bee was recorded.
Across all five counties, total estimated applications of these three neonicotinoids increased from 53.31
pounds lbs 24.19 kilograms kg in 1996, to 1,144.6 lbs 519.9 kg in 2014.
However, the exponential growth of neonicotinoid applications started in 2011, 5 years after the last observation of the species. The vast majority of neonicotinoids are used as seed treatments on grains and other field crops Oregon Department of Agriculture 2018, pers. comm., and total agricultural land within the historical range of the species is less than 2 percent of the total land base 2011 National Land Cover Data Set and 2016 USDA Crop Data Layers CDL in Syngenta 2019, pers. comm.
No studies have investigated the effects of pesticide use on the Franklins bumble bee, and no discoveries have been documented of any Franklins bumble bees injured or killed by pesticides. The Franklins bumble bee is a habitat generalist and is not known to have a close association with agricultural lands; therefore, it may have less exposure to pesticides than some other Bombus species. However, pesticide use occurs in the range of the Franklins bumble bee. The similarity in foraging traits that the Franklins bumble bee has with both honey bees and the other Bombus species e.g., generalist foragers collecting pollen from similar food sources allows us to infer that Franklins bumble bee
VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:55 Aug 23, 2021

Jkt 253001

populations are likely to suffer exposure to and impacts from pesticides in similar measure to other Bombus species when the Franklins bumble bee is in areas where pesticides are applied.
Effects of Small Population Size The Franklins bumble bee is rare and has always had very small populations relative to other similar, native bumble bees in the western United States, and likely has low genetic diversity due to the haplodiploid genetic system it shares with all Bombus species Zayed 2009, p. 238. These factors make the species more vulnerable to habitat change or loss, parasites, diseases, stochastic events, and other natural disasters such as droughts Xerces Society and Thorp 2010, p. 20. Between 1998 and 2006, the number of Franklins bumble bee observations went from a high of 98 at 11 locations, to a lone individual in 2006. No observations of the Franklins bumble bee have occurred since 2006, despite an increase in survey effort. Diploid male production has been detected in naturally occurring populations of bumble bees, and recent modeling work has shown that diploid male production may initiate a rapid extinction vortex a situation in which genetic and demographic traits and environmental conditions reinforce each other in a downward spiral, leading to extinction Goulsen et al. 2008, p. 11.8. Because of inbreeding and the production of sterile males, the haplodiploid genetic system makes bumble bees very vulnerable when populations get small Colla 2018, pers. comm.. Although we have no direct evidence that small population size or a rapid extinction vortex contributed to the decline of the species, the genetic system and historically small population size of the Franklins bumble bee likely heightened the species vulnerability to other threats in the environment; we, therefore, consider the effects of small population size a synergistic threat to the species.
Competition With Nonnative Bees The European honey bee Apis mellifera was first introduced to eastern North America in the early 1620s, and into California in the early 1850s Xerces Society and Thorp 2010, p. 21.
The resource needs of the European honey bee and native Bombus species may overlap, resulting in the potential for increased competition for resources Thomson 2004, p. 458; Thomson 2006, p. 407. Decreased foraging activity and lowered reproductive success of Bombus colonies have been noted near European honey bee hives Evans 2001,
PO 00000

Frm 00021

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

47229

pp. 3233; Thomson 2004, p. 458;
Thomson 2006, p. 407. Additionally, the size of workers of native Bombus species were noticeably reduced where European honey bees were present, which may be detrimental to Bombus colony success Goulson and Sparrow 2009, p. 177. It is likely that the effects discussed in these studies are local in space and time, and most pronounced where floral resources are limited and large numbers of commercial European honey bee colonies are introduced Xerces Society and Thorp 2010, p. 21.
We have no information to indicate that any area of Franklins bumble bee habitat in the range of the species has limited floral resources and large numbers of European honey bees. We have no information related to the specific placement of commercial honey bee colonies in or near Franklins bumble bee habitat. Furthermore, European honey bees have been present without noticeable declines in Bombus populations over large portions of their ranges Xerces Society and Thorp 2010, p. 21, and we have no new information that connects competition from European honey bees to the decline of the Franklins bumble bee.
There is potential for nonnative, commercially raised bumble bees to naturalize and outcompete native bumble bees for limited resources such as nesting sites and forage areas. Five commercially reared eastern bumble bee workers and one queen were captured in the wild near greenhouses where commercial bumble bees are used, suggesting this species may have naturalized outside of its native range.
The eastern bumble bee, which has a native range in eastern North America, was detected in western Canada Ratti and Colla 2010, pp. 2931. In Japan, nonnative buff-tailed bumble bee colonies founded by bees that had escaped from commercially produced colonies had more than four times the mean reproductive output of native bumble bees Matsumura et al. 2004, p.
93. In England, commercially raised buff-tailed bumble bee colonies had higher nectar-foraging rates and greater reproductive output than a native subspecies of the buff-tailed bumble bee Ings et al. 2006, p. 940. Colonies of eastern bumble bee were imported to pollinate agricultural crops and strawberries in Grants Pass, Oregon, in the range of the Franklins bumble bee Xerces Society and Thorp 2010, p. 18.
Although nonnative Bombus species in the range of Franklins bumble bee could outcompete Franklins bumble bee for floral resources and nesting habitat, we have no information to definitively connect competition with
E:FRFM24AUR1.SGM

24AUR1