# Royal Wildlife Trusts Call for Ban on Neonicotinoids



## borderbeeman (Dec 16, 2010)

http://smallbluemarble.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Wildlife-Trusts-Neonicotinoid-position-statement-FINAL-October-2012.pdf

The Royal Society of Wildlife Trusts (RSWT) operates as an umbrella body for the 47 individual Wildlife Trusts, covering the whole of the UK. 

*ABSTRACT*

*The Wildlife Trusts’ position*

1. There is a growing body of evidence that shows that neonicotinoids have a detrimental effect at sub-lethal doses on insect pollinators. For this reason, *The Wildlife Trusts believe that until it
can be categorically proven that neonicotinoids are not adversely impacting pollinator
populations, and by extension ecosystem health, Government should adopt the precautionary
principle and place a moratorium on their use on all outdoor crops. *

*Background*

2. Since their introduction in 1991, there has been a growing concern that neonicotinoid 

insecticides could be harmful to insect pollinators at sub-lethal doses. Neonicotinoids have been cited as a contributory factor in Colony Collapse Disorder and recent research regarding their effects on bee foraging behaviour appears to substantiate this. 

3. Insect pollinators provide a vital ecosystem service to the UK’s farmers and fruit growers. It is estimated a collapse in pollinators would cost the UK economy c. £1.8 billion per year.


4. Most plant communities rely on pollinating insects to reproduce and therefore spread (apart from species such as grasses which are wind pollinated). They also form a vital part of the food chain for other species such as birds, reptiles and amphibians. It follows that any insecticide that drastically reduces pollinator numbers will have effects beyond the agricultural sector and will ultimately affect the health and function of entire ecosystems. 

5. The registration documents/fact sheets for the individual neonicotinoids state that they are toxic or highly toxic to bees; either acutely, or chronically via pollen and nectar

6. However, the manufacturers of the insecticides claim that neonicotinoids do not cause direct bee mortality at small doses. Defra is of the view that the body of evidence assessed so far supports the conclusion that neonicotinoids do not threaten honey bee populations if properly used. The Scottish Government, which has an advisory role in the UK’s pesticide regulation, is adopting the same approach. 

*What are neonicotinoids?*

7. Neonicotinoids are a group of systemic insecticides routinely used in modern farming systems to help protect crops such as oilseed rape, maize, sugarbeet, sunflowers and potatoes from sap sucking insects such as aphids and other insect herbivores. 

8. In 1991, the first nicotine-based insecticide, imidacloprid (Gaucho®), was introduced into the USA by Bayer CropScience. It was licensed in Europe in 1994. 

9. Other neonicotinoids include clothianidin, acetamiprid, thiacloprid, thiamethoxam, dinotefuran and nitenpyram.

*How neonicotinoids work*

10. The active chemical works by interfering with the transmission of stimuli in an insect’s nervous system. More specifically, the chemical has an affinity for nicotinic acetylcholine receptors which are important neuro-transmitter Receptors. The binding of the chemical with these receptors results in paralysis and death of the insect. This neural pathway is more abundant in insects than mammals and birds making the chemical much more toxic to insects. However, research has shown that neonicotinoids do act on mammalian pathways and could damage human health

11. Neonicotinoids bind irreversibly [to brain synapses], causing permanent damage. This damage is cumulative, meaning that toxic effects are produced in a time-dependent manner, no matter how low the
level of exposure

*Wider environmental impacts*

12. Neonicotinoids could have wider environmental effects. They are water soluble and mobile in soil, where they are also very persistent. Research has shown major contamination of Dutch surface water with imidacloprid, which has been linked to declines in invertebrate-dependent bird species 

*Colony Collapse Disorder*

18. Colony collapse disorder (CCD) is a recent, widespread phenomenon affecting honey bee 
colonies in the Northern hemisphere. It is characterized by a sudden disappearance of honey
bees from the hive. The syndrome is mysterious in that the there are often no corpses found, and although there are often many disease organisms present, no outward signs of disease, pests, or parasites exist. Multiple causes of CCD have been proposed, such as combinations of pesticides, pathogens, parasites and natural habitat degradation. 

19. In some European countries, increasing concern regarding the connection between CCD and
neonicotinoids has led to a partial or full ban of some neonicotinoids. As early as *1994*, French beekeepers noticed that over the course of a few days, after sunflowers had bloomed, a
substantial number of their hives would collapse *because the worker bees flew off and never returned, leaving the queen and immature workers to starve.* French beekeepers believed the
root cause was the new insecticide *Gaucho®, *an imidacloprid based neonicotinoid which was
being applied to sunflowers for the first time. It took French beekeepers nearly 10 years to get imidacloprid banned in France for use on sunflowers and maize. Other European countries that have a partial or full ban of some of neonicotinoid products include Germany, Italy and Slovenia.


----------



## Stromnessbees (Jan 3, 2010)

Thank you for posting this, Bbman.

It seems there are a lot of beekeepers who don't know why they are losing their hives. 
And yet, the information is right here ...


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

Once again allegations with no studies... this tune is getting old.


----------



## wildbranch2007 (Dec 3, 2008)

Stromnessbees said:


> Thank you for posting this, Bbman.


I not one to look for a tag team match, but I suspect we have one here.


----------



## gmcharlie (May 9, 2009)

kinda suspecting it actually the same person.......


----------



## borderbeeman (Dec 16, 2010)

gmcharlie said:


> kinda suspecting it actually the same person.......


Well you three seem to have been working as a tag-team for years, real slick.


----------



## RAK (May 2, 2010)

why are you posting these worthless bans that are not going to happen? Whats up with all your threads being about neonicotinoids??


----------



## mac (May 1, 2005)

Ignorance is bliss. Why do ya'll keep responding. http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2013/feb/16/india-rice-farmers-revolution?CMP=twt_gu Kumar, a shy young farmer in Nalanda district of India's poorest state Bihar, had – using only farmyard manure and without any herbicides – grown an astonishing 22.4 tonnes of rice on one hectare of land. This was a world record a group of poverty-stricken Indian rice and potato farmers who harvested confirmed world-record yields of rice and potatoes. Best of all: They did it completely sans-GMOs or even chemicals of any kind. http://grist.org/food/miracle-grow-indian-farmers-smash-crop-yield-records-without-gmos/ it's obvious we don't need pestisides. neonicotinoids have never been proven safe the reserch is a sham.


----------



## borderbeeman (Dec 16, 2010)

RAK said:


> why are you posting these worthless bans that are not going to happen? Whats up with all your threads being about neonicotinoids??


My threads are 'all about neonicotinoids' because virtually every independent scientist in every country has concluded that neonics are responsible for a global pandemic of bee and polliantor deaths that threatens the very survival of wildlife and agriculture alll over the world. No bees means no fruit and vegetables; no wildflowers; no wildlife. Many governments around the world have already BANNED these pesticides - France banned them way back in 2000AD. Germany has banned their use on bee-related crops like corn, canola and sunflowers. Italy banned their use on corn after tens of thousands of colonies died in the Po Valley at corn planting time; since the ban, the bees are back and making honey.

The overwhelming mass of EVIDENCE clearly points to neonicotinoids as the cause of all this economic and ecological misery. 

America has suffered the greatest bee-losses of any country on the planet. It is STILL suffering the greatest bee losses on the planet. Why are YOU not concerned about it? Why are YOU not trying to do anything about it?

Maybe you live in a bee -paradise and your bees are healthy and happy. In which case, good luck to you.
But for most American migratory bee farmers, losses are very high - and show no signs of diminishing.
It's not going to stop; it's not going to go away; we already know how other countries stopped their bees dying - they banned neonicotinoids. Guess
what? Their bees came back, the farmers did not go to the wall because they changed their pest-management; they just stopped using pesticides routinely, all the time, with no crop rotation.
It's a win-win situation. 
Why would you not want to follow suit?


----------



## praxis178 (Dec 26, 2012)

Their freedom to express an opinion is balanced by your freedom to not listen/read what they have to say. 

BTW the only way that a ban like this won't 'get up' is if no-one does anything. 

I personally think there is way too little known about these chemicals in the LONG term to roll them out into wide spread use. That was the point originally of the provisional EPA approval option, to allow for small scale use to get some real world data. Not to go into full scale open market usage as happens now.

So if you don't like what he has to say, don't read his posts.....


----------



## wildbranch2007 (Dec 3, 2008)

praxis178 said:


> So if you don't like what he has to say, don't read his posts.....


better point if we all stop posting to his threads, just maybe he/she/they will all go away.


----------



## wildbranch2007 (Dec 3, 2008)

mac said:


> Ignorance is bliss. Why do ya'll keep responding. http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2013/feb/16/india-rice-farmers-revolution?CMP=twt_gu Kumar, a shy young farmer in Nalanda district of India's poorest state Bihar, had – using only farmyard manure and without any herbicides – grown an astonishing 22.4 tonnes of rice on one hectare of land.


from the same rag and author, If they are growing so much food in India, why take over Africa to grow food:scratch:

Indian investors are forcing Ethiopians off their land

Thousands of Ethiopians are being relocated or have already fled as their land is sold off to foreign investors without their consent

•
John Vidal in Delhi <--- the guardian again

•



Karuturi Global, the Indian farm conglomerate and one of the world's largest rose growers, which has leased 350,000 ha in Gambella province to grow palm oil, cereals maize and biofuel crops for under $1.10 per hectare per year, declined to comment. A spokesman said: "This has nothing to do with us."

Ethiopia has leased an area the size of France to foreign investors since 2008. Of this, 600,000 ha has been handed on 99-year leases to 10 large Indian companies. Many smaller companies are believed to have also taken long leases. Indian companies are said to be investing about $5bn in Ethiopian farmland, but little is expected to benefit Ethiopia directly. According to Oakland, the companies have been handed generous tax breaks and incentives as well as some of the cheapest land in the world.



The sales in Africa, Latin America and Asia have been led by farm conglomerates 





<---- must really need the food in India
now I'm done no need to post any more as I have tallied up the replies, the majority of posters IMHO know the score regarding the posters from Scotland, If I should slip please remind me. as my buddy says thank you


----------



## RAK (May 2, 2010)

borderbeeman said:


> America has suffered the greatest bee-losses of any country on the planet. It is STILL suffering the greatest bee losses on the planet. Why are YOU not concerned about it? Why are YOU not trying to do anything about it?QUOTE]
> 
> There are those few beekeepers that lost some hives in 06 and they overexagerated it on TV. I know a large handful of beekeepers who lose no more than 15% and not from ccd. Your point is neos cause ccd but let me tell you one thing.CCD is VCD. I left 40 hives untreated from mites and they collapsed just like they describe "ccd". Guys lose bees to mites and they blame it on something that do not exsist. I have NEVER seen a properly treated, requeend and fed proper NUTRITION lost in a few weeks.
> 
> AND your saying that US losses more bees than anyone?? Thats because there is one employee per 1000 hives and boss makes more money losing 30% of hives but keeping many more. you excpect a 15k operation to not lose bees??


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Stromnessbees said:


> It seems there are a lot of beekeepers who don't know why they are losing their hives. And yet, the information is right here ...


I'm just now catching up on "these" threads.

I favor letting members control how/where a thread goes and not step in and moderate it. Generally the fluff and nonsense in a thread get identified pretty quickly (a lot of sharp beekeepers here) and pointed out for what it is. I'm using your comment as an example. You have grouped all beekeepers who have lost hives together and in one broad swipe, concluded they all died due to neonicotinoids. When discussion is based on comments like that, it is seen as trolling, as is calling members you don't agree with, shills.

I'm going to leave the existing threads on this topic alone, but I don't want to see the continuation of more threads started under this topic in this manner. If you have personal experience to share, fine, but we've seen enough of simply posting media content on the topic. I'm including borderbeeman in this as well.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

wildbranch2007 said:


> better point if we all stop posting to his threads, just maybe he/she/they will all go away.


i'm taking it one step farther than that.

fortunately, beesource has a function that i never dreamed of using before.

click on:

settings
edit ignore list

borderbeeman and stromnessbees are now on mine.

(don't feel bad chaps, i'm probably on a few of those lists meself)


----------



## JRG13 (May 11, 2012)

It's funny cuz they act like we're ignorant about it or something.... or we're too stupid to understand pesticides kills bees, ooops, I did it, cats out of the bag now, pesticides kill bees everyone, get them banned!!!


----------



## 123_Bee (Jan 30, 2012)

I was once a photographer for a one of the wildlife trusts. Bear in mind that to do the job, as a volunteer, I had to fill in an application form, provide references, samples of my work and attend a couple of interviews. I stopped taking photographs for them for two reasons. 

We were directed NOT to take photographs of any bird nests at any time of the year because we would, obviously, be disturbing nesting birds (which is illegal) - even though we would more than likely be photographing the unusual and obviously visible nests probably near the top of a tree, using at least a 300mm lens. The alternative would be photographing a "found" nest during the winter, when there are no leaves and limited nesting activity.

When the directive came that all photographers had to have CRB (criminal records bureau) checks to be able to take photographs anywhere on the trust's land I didn't think they were being serious. They were serious, because every adult is a potential paedophile. Copies of the CRB checks and associated documents (copy of passport, bank statement etc) were to be kept in a filing cabinet where they could be easily referenced, they felt no need to keep them under lock and key.

Members of the public, who are not trust volunteers, are allowed free access to sites and do almost anything they want, without let or hindrance because few of the sites are staffed. So the rules were made for those who wanted to do something useful for the trust.

In that Trust majority of the paid staff are straight out of university, they get national minimum wage and are only marking time before moving on to something better. The rest of the work is done by unpaid volunteers, many are retired or in between raising children and returning to work. There's nothing wrong with that, as long as neither idealism or ignorance affect decision and policy making.

There are reports on more than one UK forum about wildlife trusts refusing to allow hives on their land unless they contain the native black bee.


----------



## Stromnessbees (Jan 3, 2010)

Barry said:


> ...
> You have grouped all beekeepers who have lost hives together and in one broad swipe, concluded they all died due to neonicotinoids. ...


Point taken, Barry.
I will admit that this reply was sent in a rush, I will be a bit more nuanced again in the future.


----------

