A Precarious Balance: Can New York’s “Birds and Bees Protection Act” Save Pollinators Without Harming Mohawk Valley Farms?
By David LaGuerre
There is a quiet but critical conversation happening in the fields and farmhouses of the Mohawk Valley. It is a conversation about science, economics, and the very future of our food system. The upcoming “Corn and Soybean Seed Treatment Field Day” at SUNY Cobleskill is more than just an agricultural workshop; it is a forum for navigating one of the most significant environmental laws to affect New York farmers in a generation. The “Birds and Bees Protection Act,” a new state law restricting a widely used class of pesticides called neonicotinoids, aims to protect our vital pollinators. But it also presents a profound challenge to local farmers, forcing a difficult reckoning between environmental stewardship and economic survival. This is not a simple story of good versus evil, but a complex balancing act with high stakes for us all.
Understanding the “Birds and Bees Protection Act”
Signed into law in late 2023, the Birds and Bees Protection Act (S. 1856-A/A. 7640) is a landmark piece of environmental legislation for New York State. The law’s primary provisions include a ban on the sale and use of corn, soybean, and wheat seeds coated with five specific neonicotinoid pesticides, which will take effect in 2029 (originally slated for 2027 but delayed to allow for transition). It also prohibits the use of these chemicals for most non-agricultural turf and ornamental purposes on an earlier timeline.
The law is not an absolute ban. It includes waiver provisions that allow the state to grant temporary exemptions for farmers if there is a demonstrated pest threat and a lack of commercially available alternatives. This “sensible and flexible model,” as supporters call it, is designed to phase out the most widespread and, they argue, unnecessary uses of these chemicals.
The scientific rationale behind the law is compelling. Neonicotinoids, or “neonics,” are neurotoxic insecticides that are systemic, meaning they are absorbed into every part of the plant, from the roots to the pollen. A major 2020 report from Cornell University, which reviewed hundreds of studies, concluded that the most common uses of neonics in New York—particularly on crop seeds—pose substantial risks to pollinators while providing little to no economic benefit to farmers in most cases. Research has linked neonics to mass bee die-offs, or “colony collapse disorder,” and has shown that they can harm birds, fish, and other wildlife by contaminating soil and waterways. With an estimated 80-90% of the neonics entering New York’s environment coming from these now-restricted uses, the law targets the largest sources of contamination.
The View from the Tractor: Farmers’ Concerns and Economic Realities
For many farmers in the Mohawk Valley and across the state, the issue is not so simple. The New York Farm Bureau, the state’s largest agricultural advocacy group, has been a vocal opponent of the law.
The “Voice of New York Agriculture”
The Farm Bureau argues that the legislation sets a dangerous precedent by having lawmakers, rather than scientific experts at the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), ban a class of pesticides. Their primary concern is that removing neonic-treated seeds—which they see as a targeted, safer application method—will force farmers to revert to older, more broadly sprayed pesticides that could be more harmful to the environment and farmworkers. As Farm Bureau President David Fisher stated, this could move the state “backward” on its environmental goals.
There are also significant economic concerns. Farmers worry that the ban will limit their access to the high-yield seed varieties they depend on, as seed producers may not create unique, untreated versions just for the New York market. This could lead to higher costs, lower yields, and increased financial pressure on already-strained farm operations.
The Question of Efficacy and Alternatives
The counterargument, supported by the Cornell report and other research, is that the economic benefits of these seed treatments are often negligible. A multi-state study on soybeans found little to no yield benefit from neonicotinoid seed treatments. Another analysis found no corn yield benefit 83% of the time across 15 states. This suggests that farmers are often paying for a chemical “insurance policy” that they do not actually need, while the environmental costs are borne by the public.
This disagreement gets to the heart of the matter: it is a conflict between two different philosophies of risk management. The conventional agricultural model has increasingly relied on pre-emptive, chemical-first interventions like seed coatings to mitigate the risk of pest damage. The new law, and the environmental movement behind it, advocates for a shift toward Integrated Pest Management (IPM), a systems-level approach that involves scouting for pests, assessing actual risk, and using chemical treatments only as a last resort.
The Path Forward: The Role of Research and Adaptation
Navigating this complex transition is precisely the goal of events like the upcoming field day at SUNY Cobleskill. Hosted by Cornell IPM, the event is designed to provide growers and crop consultants with the latest research on IPM strategies and to help them prepare for the 2029 implementation date. This is where the theoretical debate meets the practical realities of farming.
This shift also aligns with New York’s broader climate goals. The state’s Climate Action Plan calls for a more sustainable agricultural sector that reduces greenhouse gas emissions and builds soil health. Reducing reliance on synthetic nitrogen-based pesticides and promoting farming practices that enhance biodiversity are key components of this vision.
The Birds and Bees Protection Act presents a pivotal challenge for the Mohawk Valley. It asks our agricultural community to change long-standing practices and embrace a new model of farming. This transition will undoubtedly be difficult and will require significant public investment in research, technical assistance, and financial support to ensure our farmers can thrive. But the principle at its core is sound: we cannot build a healthy future for our communities on a foundation of ecological harm. Protecting the pollinators that sustain our food system is not a choice; it is a necessity. The path forward lies in finding a balance where a healthy environment and a healthy agricultural economy are not competing interests, but two sides of the same coin.
What are your thoughts on the new pesticide law? We invite farmers, gardeners, and community members to share their perspectives in the comments section.
