Oregon lawmakers are considering competing proposals intended to protect pollinators from neonicotinoid pesticides by keeping those chemicals out of the hands of home gardeners.

The original version of House Bill 2679 would classify neonicotinoids as “restricted use” pesticides, which means they could only be used by licensed applicators, with exceptions for lice, tick and flea products.

“Anyone using these chemicals should know how to use them safely,” said Rep. Zach Hudson, D-Troutdale, the bill’s chief sponsor.

Under an amendment to HB 2679 that’s favored by the Oregon Farm Bureau, neonicotinoids wouldn’t be classified as restricted use pesticides but would instead be sold only by licensed pesticide dealers, such as those who supply farmers.

In effect, this would prevent consumers from buying neonicotinoids from home and garden retailers without burdening the small farmers who rely on them for insect control, said Jenny Dresler, the Farm Bureau’s lobbyist.

“Just because an operation is not a licensed pesticide applicator does not mean it’s not experienced in the use of this product,” she said.

The Farm Bureau wants to maximize the number of tools available to growers so they can rotate among chemicals and prevent pests from becoming resistant to certain pesticides, Dresler said.

The organization fears that some producers will increase their dependence on other chemicals rather than obtain the pesticide licenses needed to continue using neonicotinoids.

“We don’t believe a lot of the small farms in Oregon are going to take that next step,” she said.

Oregonians for Food and Shelter, an agribusiness organization, opposes both versions of the bill because neonicotinoids are often the “safest choice” for controlling pests, not only for humans but also for pollinators.

“This bill will inevitably lead to older and more toxic chemistries being substituted for newer and safer ones,” said Katie Murray, the group’s executive director, in submitted testimony.

While both versions of HB 2679 are meant to restrict consumer access to neonicotinoids, supporters of the original bill say it’s the only way to fully prevent inexperienced users from applying the chemicals to residential landscapes.

Proponents of the original bill also say it would build upon existing regulations for restricted use pesticides, while the amended version would require additional rule-making for the Oregon Department of Agriculture, thus driving up the proposal’s fiscal costs.

Neonicotinoids are a relatively new class of pesticides that are considered less dangerous to humans and other mammals than older chemistries, but they’ve come under fire from environmental advocates who say the products contribute to the decline of pollinators.

“Unfortunately, the systemic nature of neonicotinoids means they continue to have effects long after they’ve been applied to a plant,” said Hudson, the bill’s chief sponsor.

Critics argue that neonicotinoids make pollinators less effective at foraging and more susceptible to varroa mites and other parasites, undermining their populations over the long term even when they don’t cause sudden die-offs.

“A lack of reported bee kills is not evidence there is no problem,” said Aaron Anderson, pesticide program specialist for the Xerces Society nonprofit.

Defenders of neonicotinoids claim their risks and benefits have been extensively studied by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and can be used in a way that avoids harming pollinators, which have suffered from habitat loss, diseases and other stressors aside from pesticides.

Certain other pesticides are more toxic than neonicotinoids, but “toxicity is only one dimension of risk,” said Andony Melathopoulos, a pollinator health specialist at Oregon State University who took no position on HB 2679.

For example, chemicals that pose a high risk to insects when sprayed on blooming plants can be less dangerous if they’re used at a different time or manner, he said. “They can be applied in ways that reduce the risk.”