COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on Honeybee Health
Date: 2010-12-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU control, animal disease, apiculture, health control

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 6.12.2010 
COM(2010) 714 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 

on Honeybee Health 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
  
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 

on Honeybee Health 

I. 

Introduction 

The  EU  honeybee  population  (Apis  mellifera)  plays  an  important  role  in  both 
pollination  and  the  production  of  honey  and  other  apiculture  products.  That  is  why 
the EU has established certain harmonised rules to protect and maintain the health of 
bees,  while  Member  States  may  regulate  other  aspects  of  bee  keeping  and  related 
activities.  Bee  keepers  and  their  associations  are  themselves  active  in  other,  non-
regulated  areas  such  as  implementing  good  bee  keeping  practices  and  guidelines. 
This  complex  system  has  worked  successfully  for  decades.  Recently,  however,  an 
increase  in  bee  mortality  has  been  reported  in  several  countries  within  and  outside 
the EU. 

It is important to protect bee health proactively, taking into account the particularities 
of beekeeping, the different actors involved, and the principles of proportionality and 
subsidiarity. 

The  Animal  Health  Strategy  for  the  European  Union  (2007-2013  –  "Prevention  is 
better than cure"1), was adopted in 2007 and was followed up in 2008 by an Action 
Plan2 with specific actions grouped under four pillars: 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Prioritisation of EU intervention; 

A modern EU animal health framework; 

Improving prevention and crisis preparedness; and 

Science, innovation and research. 

Partnership  and  communication  with  stakeholders  are  two  key  principles  of  the 
Strategy.  Possibilities  for  non-legislative  initiatives  to  promote  a  higher  level  of 
responsibility  for,  and  awareness  of,  diseases  amongst  producers  are  also  being 
explored. 

In the spirit of the Strategy beekeeping organisations concerned about bee health in 
the  EU  recently  called  for  more  focus  on  to  the  issue.  In  November  2008,  the 
European  Parliament  also  passed  a  resolution  on  the  situation  in  the  beekeeping 
sector3.  This  called  on  the  Commission  to  carry  out  specific  actions  and  to  ensure 
that those actions were coordinated. 

1 
2 
3 

COM(2007) 539 final, http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/diseases/strategy/index_en.htm 
COM(2008) 545 final, http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/diseases/strategy/documents_en.htm 
P6_TA(2008)0567 – 20 November 2008. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

                                                 
The  Commission  has  already  launched  a  number  of  initiatives  to  address  the 
concerns of the beekeeping sector and others are planned. 

The  objective  of  this  Communication  is  to  clarify  the  key  issues  related  to  bee 
health and key actions that the Commission intends to take to address them.  

This Communication should serve as a basis for further discussion with the European 
Parliament, the Council as well as Member State authorities and stakeholders. This 
should contribute to identifying possible further actions needed at EU level. 

II. 

The EU beekeeping sector 

Beekeeping  is  a  widely-developed  activity  in  the  EU,  both  at  professional  (keepers 
with  over  150  hives)  and  hobby  level.  There  are  around  700,000  beekeepers  in  the 
EU out of which around 97% are non-professional accounting for around 67% of EU 
hives. Honey production is estimated to be close to 200.000 tons. Beekeeping is also 
associated  with  the  production  of  other  products  such  as  wax,  royal  jelly,  propolis, 
etc. 

Bees are also important pollinators together with other insects and organisms.  

The factors that need to be considered regarding the sector include the different kinds 
of beekeeping (professional or hobby, stationary or mobile apiaries, transhumance); 
the  significant  differences  between  bee  health  and  technology  when  compared  to 
animals  such  as  cattle,  poultry,  etc;  the  different  regions  (climate,  traditional/local 
production); and the distribution of diseases. The specific nature of the bee sector as 
outlined above generates multiple needs, approaches, views and practices. 

III.  What affects bee health?  

In  the  past  decade  several  health  problems  have  affected  the  beekeeping  sector  in 
different countries worldwide.  

In particular, in recent years, there have been several reports of increased mortality in 
bees  both  in  the  EU  and  elsewhere.  This  has  caused  serious  concern  all  over  the 
world, but scientific studies have not been able to determine the exact cause or the 
extent of these increased mortalities. 

Nevertheless,  the  health  of  bees  is  linked  with  many  factors  of  a  different  nature 
(bacterial,  viral,  parasitic,  etc);  availability  of  appropriate  treatments;  invasive 
species; and environmental changes. Other factors to be considered include the use of 
pesticides in agriculture. At least in order to clarify if and to which extent they may 
play a role in bee health.  

As regards genetically modified organisms (GMOs), although so far no evidence has 
been found for a link between them and bees' health, the Commission will continue 
to closely follow any developments in this area. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

IV. 

EU animal health framework for bees 

(1)  Existing animal health requirements for the protection of bee health in the EU 

The  legislation  in  force4  provides  for  animal  health  certification  and 
requirements  for  the  movements  of  bees  between  Member  States.  These 
requirements  are  intended  to  prevent  and  control  a  number  of  bee  diseases, 
namely American and European foulbrood, small hive beetle and Tropilaelaps 
mite,  which  can  spread  via  the  movement  of  bees.  The  small  hive  beetle 
(Aethina  tumida)  and  the  Tropilaelaps  mite  are  exotic  to  the  EU.  Their 
notification  is  thus  obligatory,  so  that  Member  States  may  take  immediate 
action in the case of an outbreak.  

However,  the  above  requirements  do  not  cover  an  important  bee  parasite 
(Varroa) that is present and well established in the EU, because restricting bee 
movements  would  not  limit  the  spread  of  this  disease  agent,  and  would  be  a 
considerable burden on beekeepers. Other diseases considered endemic in the 
EU are treated in a similar way. Financial support is given to Member States in 
order, inter alia, to fight Varroa (see chapter X). 

(2)  Protection of bee health against exotic diseases  

There  are  animal  health  requirements  for  imports  from  third  countries  of  live 
bees and bumble bees to avoid introduction into the EU of exotic bee diseases. 
These have been applied since 20005.  

The  small  hive  beetle  and  the  Tropilaelaps  mite  caused  major  losses  to  the 
beekeeping  sector  of  the  countries  in  which  they  had  been  introduced,  and 
therefore  the  EU  import  rules  provide  that  only  queen  bees  and  colonies  of 
bumble  bees  from  biosecure  premises  can  be  imported  from  third  countries. 
These  requirements  have  been  put  in  place  in  order  to  reduce  the  risk  of 
introducing new diseases into the EU. 

The fulfilment of these animal health requirements is checked upon entry into 
the EU in veterinary border inspection posts, where documentary, identity and 
physical  checks  are  carried  out  by  official  veterinarians.  These  measures 
guarantee  the  safety  of  bee  imports  while  ensuring  genetic  resources  for 
beekeepers and respecting the needs of pollinators especially in green houses. 

(3)  The Animal Health Strategy and bee health  

The Animal Health Strategy is intended to provide a single and clear regulatory 
framework  for  animal  health.  The  Commission  is  currently  preparing  a 
proposal for an "Animal Health Law" which will over time replace the current 
basic veterinary legislation of almost 60 Directives and Regulations on animal 

4 

5 

Directive 92/65/EEC laying down animal health requirements governing trade in and imports into the 
Community of animals, se-men, ova and embryos not subject to animal health requirements laid down 
in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A (I) to Directive 90/425/EEC (OJ L 268, 14.9.1992, 
p. 52). 
Decision 2000/462/EC, OJ L 183, 22.7.2000, p. 18, that has been recently updated by Regulation (EU) 
No 206/2010. OJ L 73, 20.3.2010, p. 1. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
health  conditions  for  trade  and  import  of  live  animals  and  their  products, 
disease control measures, identification rules etc. The final proposal is planned 
for  adoption in early  2012. The  aim  is to simplify existing legislation, and to 
introduce, a more preventive approach to disease control in line with the new 
Strategy.  

In the framework of the preparatory process for the creation of the new Animal 
Health  Law,  and  in  particular  during  the  consultation  phase,  bee  health  was 
repeatedly mentioned by the veterinary profession and beekeepers as one of the 
areas  which  could  benefit  from  further  harmonisation  of  EU  animal  health 
legislation. 

The  Commission  is  still  assessing  possible  implications  for  the  bee  sector. 
However,  it  already  seems  clear  that  a  general  Animal  Health  Law  could 
provide the legal framework for essential elements such as general definitions, 
and  principles  for  disease  control  measures  and  movements,  while  other 
elements could be established through delegated or implementing acts. A more 
frequent use of guidance documents at EU and/or national level, or at the level 
of  the  sector  concerned,  could  also  be  envisaged  to  address  issues  for  which 
legislation at EU level would not be appropriate. 

(4)  A need for appropriate scientific and technical knowledge about bee health.  

The problems of the bee-keeping sector and the decline in the bee population 
all  over  Europe  and  the  rest  of  the  world  are  complex  and  diverse  and  have 
raised  various  concerns,  among  them  the  lack  of  adequate  medicines  to  treat 
bee diseases.  

The  2009  EFSA  project  entitled  "Bee  mortality  and  bee  surveillance  in 
Europe"6  suggests  that  there  are  many  factors  involved  in  the  causes  of  the 
decline in the bee population. Among those that have been considered are bee 
diseases  and  pests,  pesticide  poisoning,  the  impact  of  genetically  modified 
crops, and stress linked to changes in nutrition and climatic conditions. 

As yet, no direct causal link between the increased bee mortalities and specific 
substances  or  agents  has  been  established,  it  is  still  unclear  what  should  be 
done to combat it effectively.  

In  the  absence  of  data  and  results  of  monitoring  action,  it  is  impossible  to 
understand what the real situation is. As a consequence, it is impossible to take 
appropriate actions on bee health. It is clear, however, that surveillance plays a 
major role in this exercise. 

The  main  conclusions  of  the  EFSA  Project  indicate  that  the  surveillance 
systems  in  the  EU  Member  States  are,  in  general,  weak.  There  is  a  lack  of 
representative  data  at  country  level  and  comparable  data  regarding  colony 
losses  at  EU  level.  There  is  also  a  general  lack  of  standardisation  and 
harmonisation  at  EU  level  as  regards  the  data  collected.  No  effective 

6 

http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/27e.pdf 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
harmonised  control  system  for  bees  has  been  set  up  to  estimate  the  extent  of 
bee mortalities or to prevent them as much as possible. 

The Commission aims to start a pilot surveillance programme by the end of 
2011. 

(5)  EU Reference Laboratory (EURL) for bee health  

EU  Reference  Laboratories  (EURLs)  are  essential  tools  in  the  framework  of 
risk management in the field of animal health. Their role has been recognised 
by  relevant  EU  legislation  on  official  controls7,  and  by  vertical  Directives  on 
EU measures for the control of certain animal diseases.  

Scientifically sound and uniform testing is a fundamental element for reliable 
disease  diagnosis  and  for  the  application  of  the  necessary  control  and 
eradication measures. EURLs play an important role as regards scientific and 
technical support in the area of animal health, and to support the activities of 
the  Commission  and  the  Member  States  in  relation  to  animal  disease 
surveillance,  control  and  eradication  (e.g.  typing  of  viruses,  monitoring  of 
diseases, development of specific tests). EURLs play an important role in the 
international arena, in areas such as standardisation of analytical methods. 

The  evaluation  of  EU  Animal  Health  Policy8  highlighted  that  "laboratory 
networks  on  animal  health  have  contributed  positively  to  help  achieve  the 
objectives  of  the  Animal  Health  Policy  in  safeguarding  human  and  animal 
health". The Animal Health Strategy for the EU emphasises how important it is 
to  maintain  and  further  improve  EU  diagnostic  capability  (for  example, 
funding of laboratory networking). 

As part of the Strategy a specific external evaluation of EURLs in the field of 
animal  health  and  live  animals  has  recently  been  finalised9.  One  of  the 
recommendations in the evaluation was the setting up of a new EURL for bee 
health10.  

Therefore the Commission intends to designate a EURL for bee health which 
should become operational by April 2011.  

This EURL will be tasked with addressing the scientific issues identified in the 
above-mentioned EFSA report, including establishing the basic conditions for 
the implementation of effective surveillance programmes. The first task of the 
EU Reference Laboratory on bee health will be to provide technical support to 
the  pilot  surveillance  programme  mentioned  above.  Financial  support  to  this 
laboratory will be ensured within currently available resources. 

7 

8 
9 
10 

Regulation  (EC)  No  882/2004  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  29  April  2004  on 
official controls, OJ L 165, 30.4.2004, p. 1. 
http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/diseases/strategy/final_report_en.htm 
http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/diseases/laboratories/eval_com_ref_labs_report_112009_en.pdf 
Currently there is only a EURL for residue testing carrying out tests on honey, but there is no EURL 
dealing with bee health issues. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
(6) 

Improve knowledge on bee health – the contribution of the Better Training for 
Safer Food programme 

Focus on bee health has been stepped up as part of the Better Training for Safer 
Food initiative11.  

During 2010 and 2011 a total of 160 participants from all EU Member States 
and also from seven non-EU countries learned, or will learn, about all aspects 
of  bee  health  and  beekeeping.  The  four  training  courses  planned  include  the 
EU health requirements on intra EU trade and imports from third countries. 

The  two  courses  that  have  taken  place  so  far  have  disseminated  up-to-date 
knowledge  among  79  government  officials  to  improve  their  understanding  of 
honeybee  health  problems.  These  officials  are  expected  to  act  as  catalysts  to 
improve  awareness  and  cooperation  in  their  countries  among  competent 
authorities and concerned groups at national, regional and local levels. 

V. 

Availability of veterinary medicines for bees  

According  to  beekeeper  associations,  there  are  not  enough  authorised  medicinal 
products  available  to  treat  diseases  in  bees.  This  is  a  general  problem  occurring 
where  the  market  for  veterinary  medicines  is  small  and  the  expected  return  on 
investment  for  companies  is  low.  The  term  often  used  to  describe  these  small 
markets  are  "minor  uses/minor  species"  (MUMS).  Several  actions  have  been 
undertaken, in particular by the European Medicine Agency12 13. 

Specific  provisions  aimed  at  promoting  innovation  and  the  development  of  new 
veterinary  medicinal  products  by  small  and  medium-sized  enterprises  include 
administrative  and  procedural  assistance  or,  as  appropriate,  fee  reductions,  fee 
exemptions or fee deferrals14.  

The  availability  of  veterinary  medicinal  products  (including  those  for  bees)  is  also 
raised  in  the  context  of  the  review  of  the  legal  framework  for  such  (MUMS) 
products.  

Stakeholders had the opportunity in the public consultation to express their views on 
the  strengths and weaknesses of the current legal framework and made  suggestions 
for  how  it  could  be  improved.  The  responses  received  will  be  used  by  the 
Commission to draft the impact assessment on the review and, where appropriate, to 

11 
12 

13 

14 

http://ec.europa.eu/food/training_strategy/training/health_bees_exotic_animals_en.htm 
The  European  Medicines  Agency  implemented  the  Policy  for  Classification  and  Incentives  for 
Veterinary  medicinal  products  indicated  for  Minor  Use  Minor  Species  /Limited  markets  - 
http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Regulatory_and_procedural_guideline/2009/
10/WC500005157.pdf 
The  European  Medicines  Agency  organised  in  December  2009,  a  workshop  to  discuss  this  specific 
aspect concerning bee health. 
http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/liveanimals/bees/docs/EMA_conclusions.pdf  
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2049/2005 of 15 December 2005 laying down, pursuant to Regulation 
(EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council, rules regarding the payment of fees 
to, and the receipt of administrative assistance from, the European Medicines Agency by micro, small 
and medium-sized enterprises (OJ L 329, 15.12.2005, p. 4). 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
 
draft  proposals  to  change  this  legal  framework.  A  legal  proposal  is  scheduled  for 
adoption in 2012.  

VI. 

Food safety aspects (residues in honey)  

According to the relevant legislation15 Member States shall ensure that, where there 
is  no  authorised  veterinary  medicinal  product  in  a  Member  State  for  a  condition 
affecting an animal species, measures exist that would allow a veterinarian, by way 
of exception, to use medicines off-label within strict limits. This procedure is called 
"the cascade". 

For  substances  used  under  the  cascade  system,  there  are  no  clear  rules  on  the 
Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs). This creates legal uncertainty for both producers 
(beekeepers and veterinarians) and consumers (competent authorities responsible for 
food safety, and ultimately, the consumer) and may lead to potential disruption of the 
internal market for honey.  

The  Commission  will  adopt  rules  on  MRLs  for  substances  used  under  the  cascade 
system  as  well  as  on  offsetting  reference  points  for  action.  This  will  facilitate 
harmonised control of food placed on the market across the EU and will ultimately 
improve the clarity and certainty of the EU legal framework.  

Fully harmonised requirements are in place in the EU as regards veterinary controls 
for  imported  live  animals  and  products  of  animal  origin  including  honey  and  other 
apiculture products. These controls are carried out by the competent authorities of the 
Member States at the EU border inspection posts in order to ensure that the products 
imported from non-EU countries respect the EU health import conditions, and offer 
guarantees equivalent to those that apply to EU products. 

VII. 

Pesticides  

As  regards  pesticides,  a  new  European  Parliament  and  Council  Regulation  (EC)16 
was  adopted  in  2009  concerning  the  placing  of  plant  protection  products  on  the 
market.  This  new  Regulation  replaces  Council  Directive  91/414/EEC.  It  maintains 
the provision according to which pesticides can only be approved at EU level if their 
use  has  no  unacceptable  effect  on  bee  health  or  bees  or  its  use  leads  to  negligible 
exposure of honeybees17.  

The effects of pesticides on bees are assessed prior to approval and appropriate risk 
mitigation  measures,  if  required,  are  imposed.  Where  the  Commission  becomes 
aware of adverse effects due to the use of pesticides, further risk mitigation measures 
can be taken. This has been the case for some insecticides, where accidental releases 
occurred during the sowing of treated seeds.18 

Furthermore,  the  Commission  is  currently  revising  the  data  requirements  for  the 
submission  of  pesticide  dossiers  also  to  enhance  the  protection  of  honeybees. 

15 
16 
17 
18 

Article 11 of Directive 2001/82/EC, OJ L 311, 28.11.2001, p. 1. 
Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 1. 
See Annex II point 3.8.3 of Regulation 1107/2009. 
Commission Directive 2010/21/EU, OJ L 65, 13.3.2010, p. 27. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

                                                 
Stakeholders  had  the  opportunity  to  express  their  views  on  the  strengths  and 
weaknesses of the current legal framework and how it could be improved. 

VIII.  Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) 

As  regards  GMOs,  increased  bee  mortality  has  been  reported  all-over  the  world, 
however,  no  difference  has  been  reported  between  the  areas  where  GMOs  are 
extensively cultivated (like the Americas) compared to those areas in which GMOs 
are much less common (like in Europe), or even in those EU Member States in which 
GMO cultivation has been prohibited. This situation does not support the hypothesis 
that increased bee mortality is related to an increase in the cultivation of GMOs. 

EU legislation is very prudent in this regard. Before a genetically modified plant or 
GMO  can  be  released  into  the  environment  and/or  cultivated,  it  needs  to  be 
authorised  under  Directive  2001/18/EC19  or  Regulation  (EC)  No.  1829/200320 
following  a  thorough  scientific  risk  assessment  of  the  EFSA,  which  includes  inter 
alia, the potential adverse effects of GMOs on bees.  

IX. 

Protecting bees by addressing biodiversity loss 

Bee  health  is  also  affected  by  biodiversity  loss.  One  of  the  main  direct  causes  of 
biodiversity loss is land-use change and mismanaged intensification on the one hand, 
and  land  abandonment  on  the  other  hand,  as  well  as  the  loss  of  traditional  farming 
and forestry practices, which have often generated species rich habitats. Habitat loss 
and fragmentation, pollution and pathogens are some of the potential factors behind 
this  trend.  Other  drivers  may  be  the  disruption of pollination  timing due  to climate 
change;  the  spread  of  invasive  insect  species  out-competing  native  pollinators;  and 
invasive plants drawing native pollinators away from native plants. 

The Commission is promoting research on conservation, restoration and sustainable 
use of pollinator diversity in agriculture.  

There  is  growing  scientific  evidence  that  bees  which  have  access  to  a  mixture  of 
pollen  from  different  plants  are  healthier  than  those  fed  only  one  type  of  pollen. 
Results of a recent study21 suggest that an environment with sufficient biodiversity to 
maintain the ecosystem service that is pollination is critical for bee health.  

In the context of European agriculture, the Rural Development Programmes offer a 
range  of  agri-environmental  measures  to  encourage  biodiversity.  These  include 
measures relevant to beekeepers, such as providing plants to attract honeybees. Such 
measures  have  been  proven  to  generate  substantial  environmental  benefits, 
particularly  in  the  way  they  support  biodiversity  through  agriculture,  and  they  are 
beneficial for honeybees as well, as they limit the risk of insufficient pollination.  

19 
20 
21 

OJ L 106, 17.4.2001, p. 1. 
OJ L 268, 18.10.2003, p. 1. 
By INRA (Cedric Alaux, François Ducloz, Didier Crauser and Yves Le Conte, 2010 - Biology Letters. 
published online 20 January 2010 ; doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2009.0986). 

EN 

9 

   EN 

                                                 
The Commission is also preparing a Communication on the EU Biodiversity Strategy 
to achieve the EU 2020 biodiversity target, which will look at ways of preventing or 
mitigating  the  loss  of  biodiversity  by  addressing  its  cause.  The  implementation  of 
this strategy is expected to have a beneficial effect on bee health. 

X. 

Common agricultural policy and bee health  

In addition to the agricultural and environmental measures described above, a series 
of  measures  to  support  the  beekeeping  sector  are  set  down  in  Council  Regulation 
(EC) No 1234/2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and 
on  specific  provisions  for  certain  agricultural  products  (Single  CMO  Regulation)22. 
These measures may be included in the apiculture programmes drawn up by Member 
States and if considered eligible the expenditure concerned can be part-financed by 
the EU. The programmes are undertaken on a tri-annual basis.  

Although  the  main  aim  of  the  measures  is  to  improve  the  efficiency  of  production 
and  marketing  of  honey,  part  of  the  expenditure  is  devoted  to  varroasis  prevention 
and the restocking of hives.  

A  report  has  been  presented  by  the  Commission  to  the  Council  and  European 
Parliament  on  the  application  of  the  measures  to  improve  the  conditions  for  the 
production  and  marketing  of  apiculture  products  for  the  period  2008-201023.  The 
report  concluded  that  the  mechanism  for  setting  up  national  programmes  has  been 
very beneficial for the beekeeping sector, both from the point of view of the Member 
States and beekeepers themselves. 

In  September  2010  the  Commission  approved  the  national  programmes  of  the 
27 Member  States  to  improve  the  production  and  marketing  of  apiculture  products 
for the period 2011-2013. The EU contribution to the financing of the programmes 
has  increased  by  almost  25  percent  compared  to  the  previous  period  (2008-2010), 
from 26 M€ to 32 M€ per year. 

XI. 

Research on bee health 

The  EU  supports  research  projects  in  bee  health  through  the  7th  Framework 
Programme (FP7).  

In  total  the  EU  budget  already  dedicated  to  research  related  to  honeybee  and  other 
pollinators amounts to approximately 10 millions Euros. The current projects24 deal 
with  the  decline  of  both  wild  and  domesticated  pollinators,  including  honeybee 
colonies,  in  Europe  and  its  potential  causes,  as  well  as  the  development  of 
appropriate diagnostic tools. 

In addition, the Commission is supporting the COLOSS25 COST action that has built 
up  a  network  of  researchers  and  other  stakeholders  across  Europe  to  follow  the 
evolution  of  colony  losses  and  to  join  forces  with  participants  in  national  research 

22 
23 
24 
25 

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007 p. 1, Article 106 thereof. 
COM(2010) 267 final. 
Current projects are Bee Doc, Cleanhive and STEP. 
http://www.coloss.org/ 

EN 

10 

   EN 

                                                 
programmes  to  understand  and  combat  the  factors  responsible  for  major  colony 
losses. 

XII. 

Communicating on bee health issues 

One  of  the  Commission's  key  objectives  is  to  improve  communication  between 
relevant  players,  at  EU  or  national,  regional  or  local  level  and  also  across  policy 
areas.  While  this  can  be  done  in  many  ways,  it  is  expected  that  the  recently 
developed Commission internet page26 will serve as one of the European focal points 
for  interested  parties.  It  offers  sectoral  information  on  a  range  of  activities  and 
legislation relevant to bee health. It also offers links to other animal health, research, 
pesticide  etc.  pages  as  further  sources  of  information.  The  Commission  intends  to 
hold  further  discussions  with  stakeholders  about  how  to  improve  communication 
activities. 

XIII.  Global link to international activities  

The  World  Organisation  for  Animal  Health  (OIE),  the  recognised  international 
standard  setting  organisation  for  animal  health,  recently  issued  a  statement  on  bee 
health27  and  proposed  to  the  international  community  "to  intensify  the  research  on 
the  causes  of  the  mortality  of  bees  and  to  better  control  and  fight  against  the 
numerous  emerging  and  already  known  diseases."  Bee  health  also  features  in  its 
5th Strategic  Plan  for  2011-2015.  In  addition  it  developed  disease  cards  on  bee 
diseases28.  

The  Commission  is  cooperating  closely  with  OIE  with  a  view  to  exchanging 
scientific  information  concerning  bee  health  and  to  develop  synergies  and  avoid 
overlaps with future actions. 

XIV.  Conclusions 

The  Commission  has  already  undertaken  many  actions  across  several  policy  areas 
both  to  gain  a  better  understanding  of  the  factors  that  influence  bee  health  and  to 
better tackle the problems already identified. The ongoing actions must be continued 
and where necessary reinforced, based on an appropriate assessment of the possible 
risks for animal and human health and, in the wider sense, risks for the environment. 
The Commission must take into account the relevant socio-economic aspects and the 
need for the sector to remain competitive on the global market. 

The  Commission  is  committed  to  taking  a  range  of  actions,  as  outlined  in  this 
Communication.  It  is  important  to  understand  that  such  actions  can  only  be 
successful  if  all  interested  stakeholders  take  part  in  a  constructive  and  transparent 
manner.  

Therefore, the Commission will initiate discussions in the appropriate fora to obtain 
extensive feed back on its intentions, and to improve its assessment and management 
of the bee health situation.  

26 
27 
28 

http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/liveanimals/bees/index_en.htm 
http://www.oie.int/eng/press/en_100428.htm 
http://www.oie.int/eng/ressources/BEES-EN.pdf 

EN 

11 

   EN 

                                                 
It is clear, however, that it will not be enough to take action at European level. Areas 
in which progess needs to be made include, but are not limited to, better biosecurity 
and production practices by bee keepers; development of new bees medicines by the 
industry; or designing improved training programmes for authorities and beekepers. 

Non-governmental organisations and beekeeping industry platforms in particular can 
play  a  dual  role  both  to  initiate  and  implement  many  new  actions.  In  the  relatively 
less regulated areas of bee keeping, it is highly likely that improved guidance from 
national  and  international  organisations  and  bee  keepers  could  deliver  significant 
benefits and would be fully within the spirit of proportionality and subsidiarity.  

The Commission is interested to hear the opinion of the European Parliament and the 
Council on the course of actions identified in this Communication.  

It  is  important  to  understand  that  such  initiatives  can  only  be  successful  if  all  the 
interested stakeholders participate in a constructive and transparent manner. The role 
of  beekeepers  and  of  the  competent  authorities  in  the  Member  States  is  key  to  the 
development of effective action.  

EN 

12 

   EN