The recent banning of some unpronounceable pesticides has sent a buzz through the genteel world of beekeeping and thrust the humble honeybee into the heart of a furious row between big business, farming, politics and the environmental movement. What happens next in this dispute could have major consequences for all of us as well as the bees. How this unassuming insect became embroiled in such a furore is down to neonicotinoid pesticides. Since their arrival in the early 1990s, neonicotinoids (neonics), initially lauded for being safer than their predecessors, have remained more or less out of the public spotlight. But rumblings that these pesticides harm the health of honeybees have been increasing for the last few years. These rumblings have gradually become a roar with multimillion-signature petitions signed and marches organised in opposition to the chemicals. A report by the European Food Safety Agency earlier this year concluded that neonicotinoids posed a “high acute risk” to pollinators including bees. Despite opposition from the UK Government, the EU has acted and placed a temporary two-year ban on the use of three neonicotinoids — imidacloprid, clothianidin and thiamethoxam. So what is it about neonics that has sent environmentalists into uproar and resulted in leading retailers such as Waitrose, Dobbies and B&Q distancing themselves from the pesticides? Neonics are applied to seeds so they enter every part of the growing plant as it develops — making it poisonous to pests such as aphids. But this presence throughout the whole plant means the pesticide is present in pollen and comes into direct contact with honeybees and other pollinating insects. Over the last decade, bee populations have crashed around the world. Some scientific studies have claimed that neonics have a sub-lethal effect on bees — they don’t kill them outright but can subtly affect their behaviour, leading to declines in the long run. Bee declines are a big deal. Honeybees are said to be responsible for pollinating about one-third of the world’s crop production; in Europe alone they are estimated to contribute more that £18.5bn annually to agriculture. You might think that the neonics ban would be widely applauded by environmentalists and beekeepers alike, but the response has been lukewarm in some quarters. Wildlife charity Buglife, which has been leading calls for the ban, argues that two years doesn’t give bees long enough to recover. Vanessa Amaral-Rogers, from the charity, said: “In reality, a two-year suspension is not enough to see our bee populations recover.

“Neonicotinoids have a half-life (time taken for the chemical to disappear) in soil of over three years, and will still be used in winter crops.” And two neonicotinoids — acetamiprid and thiacloprid — will remain in use despite the ban as they are seen as less harmful. While many beekeepers are opposed to neonics, their official body, the British Beekeepers Association, has “serious concerns” about the ban, arguing that when it comes to pesticides, it’s better the devil you know, as the chemicals used in their place may have even more devastating effects on bee populations. Big business unsurprisingly opposed the move, with manufacturer Bayer arguing that studies on neonics were inconclusive. The Government opposed the ban, which led to criticism from Greenpeace and the RSPB. The National Farmers union (NFU) described the move as catastrophic and warned it could have “significant impacts on food production”.