# Europe bans neonics in all 27 countries - landmark day for bees



## borderbeeman

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/apr/29/bee-harming-pesticides-banned-europe










_*A bee collects pollen from a sunflower in Utrecht, the Netherlands.
EU states have voted in favour of a proposal to restrict the use of pesticides linked to serious harm in bees. *_

Europe will enforce the world's first continent-wide ban on widely used insecticides alleged to cause serious harm to bees, after a European commission vote on Monday.

The suspension is a landmark victory for millions of environmental campaigners, backed by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), concerned about a dramatic decline in the bee population. The vote also represents a serious setback for the chemical producers who make billions each year from the products and also UK ministers, who voted against the ban. Both had argued the ban would harm food production.

Although the vote by the 27 EU member states on whether to suspend the insect nerve agents was supported by 15 nations, but did not reach the required majority under voting rules. The hung vote hands the final decision to the European commission, which will implement the ban.

Tonio Borg, health and consumer commissioner, said: _*"Our proposal is based on a number of risks to bee health identified by the EFSA, [so] the European commission will go ahead with its plan in coming weeks."*_

Friends of the Earth's head of campaigns, Andrew Pendleton, said:_ *"This decision is a significant victory for common sense and our beleaguered bee populations. Restricting the use of these pesticides could be an historic milestone on the road to recovery for these crucial pollinators."*_

The UK, which abstained in a previous vote, was heavily criticised for switching to a "no" vote on Monday.

*Joan Walley MP*, chair of parliament's green watchdog, the environmental audit committee, whose investigation had backed a ban and accused ministers of "extraordinary complacency", said the vote was a real step in the right direction, but added: 
_* "A full Commons debate where ministers can be held to account is more pressing than ever."*_
Greenpeace's chief scientist, Doug Parr, said: "By not supporting the ban, environment secretary, Owen Paterson, has exposed the UK government as being in the pocket of big chemical companies and the industrial farming lobby."

On Sunday, the Observer revealed the intense secret lobbying by Paterson and Syngenta.
The environment minister, Lord de Mauley, countered, saying: 

_*"Having a healthy bee population is a top priority for us but we did not support the proposal because our scientific evidence doesn't support it. We will now work with farmers to cope with the consequences as a ban will carry significant costs for them."*_

Syngenta, which makes one of the three neonicotinoids that have been suspended, said: 
_*"The proposal ignores a wealth of evidence from the field that these pesticides do not damage the health of bees. The EC should [instead] address the real reasons for bee health decline: disease, viruses and loss of habitat."*_

Bees and other insects are vital for global food production as they pollinate three-quarters of all crops. The plummeting numbers of pollinators in recent years has been blamed on disease, loss of habitat and, increasingly, the near ubiquitous use of neonicotinoid pesticides.

A series of high-profile scientific studies has linked neonicotinoids – the world's most widely used insecticides – to huge losses in the number of queen bees produced and big rises in the numbers of "disappeared" bees – those that fail to return from foraging trips.

The commission proposed the suspension after the EFSA concluded in January that three neonicotinoids – thiamethoxam, clothianidin and imidacloprid – posed an unnacceptable risk to bees. The three will be banned from use for two years on flowering crops such as corn, oilseed rape and sunflowers, upon which bees feed.

A spokesman for Bayer Cropscience said: "Bayer remains convinced neonicotinoids are safe for bees, when used responsibly and properly … clear scientific evidence has taken a back-seat in the decision-making process."

Prof Simon Potts, a bee expert at the University of Reading, said: "The ban is excellent news for pollinators. The weight of evidence from researchers clearly points to the need to have a phased ban of neonicotinoids. There are several alternatives to using neonicotinoids and farmers will benefit from healthy pollinator populations as they provide substantial economic benefits to crop pollination."

Neonicotinoids have been widely used for more than decade and are less harmful than some of the sprays they replaced, but scientific studies have increasingly linked them to poor bee health.

Many observers, including the National Farmers' Union, accept that EU regulation is inadequate, as it only tests on honeybees and not the wild pollinators that service 90% of plants. The regulatory testing also only considers short-term effects and does not consider the combined effects of multiple pesticides. The chemical industry has warned that a ban on neonicotinoids would lead to the return of older, more harmful pesticides and crop losses but campaigners point out this has not happened during temporary suspensions in France, Italy and Germany and that the use of natural pest predators and crop rotation can tackle problems.

"It is imperative that any alternative chemicals to be used in their place must first pass the same tests failed by the neonicotinoids," said Dr Christopher Connolly, a bee expert at the University of Dundee. "The recent findings have highlighted an urgent need for more rigorous safety testing protocols."

Those who voted in favour - who WON the vote were:
Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Spain, France, Cyprus, Germany, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Slovenia and Sweden 

In Brussels, the countries that voted* against the ban *were: the UK, Czech Republic, Italy, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Austria and Portugal. 

Those who abstained were Ireland, Lithuania, Finland and Greece


----------



## Uberwilhelm

Outstanding news indeed. I hope the US gov is paying attention.


----------



## Oldtimer

Be interesting to see how reversion to traditional insecticides and application methods will affect the bees.


----------



## gmcharlie

Uberwilhelm said:


> Outstanding news indeed. I hope the US gov is paying attention.


Easy, there tickled pink... yields will drop, and sales of us commodities will continue to rise........ Now the trumpets will swear its the root of all our problems even though they have already learned to handle the mites... So the do-gooders without data will continue to try to get them banned here.....
but hey that euro sure worked great!


----------



## RiodeLobo

Well that is indeed a large scale experiment.


----------



## JStinson

> Well that is indeed a large scale experiment.


Indeed

"This decision is a significant victory for common sense and our beleaguered bee populations..."

Most proponents of knee jerk bans seem to quote common sense instead of science. 

Where is their proof? How is this going to affect crop yields? Food prices? 

I'm anxious to read about the unintended consequences of this.


----------



## Andrew Dewey

JStinson said:


> Indeed
> 
> "This decision is a significant victory for common sense and our beleaguered bee populations..."
> 
> Most proponents of knee jerk bans seem to quote common sense instead of science.
> 
> Where is their proof? How is this going to affect crop yields? Food prices?
> 
> I'm anxious to read about the unintended consequences of this.


You took the words out of my mouth. We'll see what the results are at the end of the ban. I predict results which can be spun at least 18 different ways.


----------



## Spark

JStinson said:


> Where is their proof? How is this going to affect crop yields? Food prices?


I'm curious..upon introduction of said pesticides did you see a major price reduction at the register for vegetables and such? Big question though ... will 2 years be long enough to show one way or another if the ban will provide enough evidence to show the damage done and better yet will crops yield more? less? or stay the same?


----------



## borderbeeman

French bee-farmers lost over 1 million colonies in 2 years - 1994-1996 - following the introduction of Bayer's 'Gaucho' on sunflower crops at that time. Sunflower honey was the most valuable honey crop in France and accounted for 80% of bekeepers income - the honey harvest crashed by over 50% and the number of colonies fell by a similar amount. 

After four years of raging debate, in which Bayer denied everything, The French Government banned neonics on: corn, canola and sunflowers in 2000AD, after it convened the highest level Scientific Committee that is possible under the French Constitution. The Committee considered over 120 peer-reviewed scientific studies and banned the neonics - thirteen years ago! The ban has never been taken off. 

What happened to beekeepers?

The bee numbers rebounded; the national honey crop doubled again.

What happened to the farmers?
The short answer is 'nothing'. Farmers went back to crop-rotation and using softer, non systemic pesticides IN RESPONSE to actual attacks by insects - instead of the blanket 'insurance-policy' use of systemic neonics on every seed, in every field, on every crop of corn, canola and sunflowers.

If you take a trip to France, you will find the farmers fat, happy and drinking their favourite wine. Agriculture in France is booming - no drop in yields or profits.

Conclusion, despite what the poison industry tells you, farmers do NOT have to use systemic poisons on every seed, in every field, year after year.

FRENCH DOCUMENTARY : INTRODUCTION OF IMIDACLPRID IN 1994 CAUSED ONE MILLION DEAD BEE COLONIES BY 1997

I strongly recommend that you watch at least the first 5 minutes of this documentary; it is a compelling testimony as to the destruction of the French beekeeping industry by Bayer's pesticides and the complete failure of all the European regulators and so-called watchdogs (EFSA).

The documentary is in French, but the sub-titles are in English – and the visual evidence is compelling. 


The French bee-deaths documentary 'Temoin Genant' (Embarassing Witness) is now on Youtube; it deals with the disaster which struck the French beekeeping industry from -1994 – 1999, when over 400,000 bee colonies a year died, following the introduction of Bayer’s systemic neurotoxin Imidacloprid/ 'Gaucho' for use on sunflowers and maize.

CLICK BELOW TO WATCH THE VIDEOS


This is the link for Part One:

http://youtu.be/9boueJGtLPY

Part Two

http://youtu.be/XM2Agj68uCk

Part three

http://youtu.be/CC9fWFE8ExM

Part Four

http://youtu.be/okA8pxkoXX4


----------



## gmcharlie

borderbeeman said:


> French bee-farmers lost over 1 million colonies in 2 years - 1994-1996 - following the introduction of Bayer's 'Gaucho' on sunflower crops at that time. Sunflower honey was the most valuable honey crop in France and accounted for 80% of bekeepers income - the honey harvest crashed by over 50% and the number of colonies fell by a similar amount.


Way to be on the stick, 20 years later! wohooo...

FYI Corn prices up the limit yeserday!!! thanks !


----------



## borderbeeman

gmcharlie said:


> Way to be on the stick, 20 years later! wohooo...
> 
> FYI Corn prices up the limit yeserday!!! thanks !


Yeh, given that American bee farmers have lost 5,650,000 colonies since 2007 - that's 'official' EPA/.USDA figures, your concern for your fellow Americans is deeply moving. With people like you around, 'who can stand against us'; this is the attitude that won the war: devil take the hindmost, I'm getting richer.

If you add in the bee colonies which died since 1998, when neonics started to be used on a large scale, and from 2003, when Clothianidin was illegally given a 'conditional' license by the EPA without completing any field or life-cycle studies, many estimate that American bee farmers have lost over 10,000,000 colonies since the late 1990s.

At $200 a hive that's $2 billion worth of bees.

Many bee farmers have gone bankrupt; others have cut their losses and gone out of the business. Some of them have been in the bee business for three generations.

Never mind. You just keep planting those neurotoxins in the soil. Screw the bees, the birds and the wildlife.
Do you draw water from a well near your fields by any chance?


----------



## hpm08161947

borderbeeman said:


> What happened to the farmers?
> The short answer is 'nothing'. Farmers went back to crop-rotation and using softer, non systemic pesticides IN RESPONSE to actual attacks by insects - instead of the blanket 'insurance-policy' use of systemic neonics on every seed, in every field, on every crop of corn, canola and sunflowers.
> 
> If you take a trip to France, you will find the farmers fat, happy and drinking their favourite wine. Agriculture in France is booming - no drop in yields or profits.


I have not traveled all over Europe, but I have been in a good part of it. When you compare USA agriculture with European agriculture, it seems to be like comparing Apples and Oranges. European agriculture struck me as almost "Small Scale" in comparison to the size of the farming that goes on in this country.


----------



## AstroBee

I'd really like to see the day when Beesource limits the number of posts from a single person on the SAME topic. This seems to be bordering (pun intended) on agenda pushing/fear mongering. If we can't impose such a limit, then perhaps we can move these to the CCD forum, where they may get more traction. It seems that every post Borderbeeman makes is something related to neonics. WE GET IT, you have VERY strong opinions on the dangers of neonics.


----------



## oldforte

Empirical evidence is information that justifies a belief in the truth or falsity of an empirical claim.
Example: Just visited a very knowledgable beekeeper with around 30 hives. He lost half of them last year. He lives back in the hills of Tn . They don't grow corn, soy or any agi crop for many miles (maybe some "weed") that may use pesticides....yet he had similar bee loss as others. The blame was put on vorroa. Had not a thing to do with neonics. 
We don't follow Europe for obvious reasons.


----------



## borderbeeman

AstroBee said:


> I'd really like to see the day when Beesource limits the number of posts from a single person on the SAME topic. This seems to be bordering (pun intended) on agenda pushing/fear mongering. If we can't impose such a limit, then perhaps we can move these to the CCD forum, where they may get more traction. It seems that every post Borderbeeman makes is something related to neonics. WE GET IT, you have VERY strong opinions on the dangers of neonics.


I have posted several things recently because there was a massive political change in the pesticide issue yesterday. The 27 countries of Europe - with a combined population considerably larger than the United States, just decided to BAN the neonics. Sorry if I disturbed your snooze, but for an entire CONTINENT to ban a group of pesticides is pretty earth-shaking news in the small world of beekeeping. Moreover, America has lost 5,650,000 bee colonies since 2007. That is simply devastating. My posts are mostly about neonics because my bees are dying; I am only a hobby beekeeper with ten hives, but I have lost 8 out of 10 colonies this winter. It is not varroa that is killing my bees; it isn't viruses, or bacteria, or climate change, or any of the other smokescreen diversions the industry puts out. It is because the landscape all around me, for 20 miles in every direction is dominated by yellow oilseed rape fields, and green barley and wheat fields. Every single seed, in every single field is treated with a neurotoxic poison that is 7,000 times more deadly to bees than DDT.

The honeybees, the butterflies, the bumblebees, the hoverflies, the lacewings, the earthworms - are all disappearing from the entire landscape - because neonics are designed to kill them very effectively. There has been a 50-70% decline in the 19 most common farmland birds in the UK: sparrows and starlings, once seen in flocks of thousands, are now just gone, not a trace. Skylarks are down 86% in 20 years; partridges by 90-%; linnets, yellowhammers, goldfinches - all of them in massive decline. Why do you think this is happening? Simple answer, there are barely any insects, caterpillars or earthworms in the entire landscape. No aphids means no sparrow chicks; no grubs or caterpillars means no skylark chicks.

So - pardon me for being concerned - but we are talking about general ecosystem collapse here. 
Anyone who thinks that 'the environment' is of less value than money, should try holding their breath while counting their dollars.


----------



## shinbone

I am just a hobbiest and I have not followed the details of the neonic controversy. 

However, to me, borderbeeman is so over-the-top foaming-at-the mouth biased, that I do not trust a single word he/she says without corroboration from another source. If he/she says the sun has risen, I look out the window to check.

That's just me.


----------



## borderbeeman

shinbone said:


> I am just a hobbiest and I have not followed the details of the neonic controversy.
> 
> However, to me, borderbeeman is so over-the-top foaming-at-the mouth biased, that I do not believe a single word he says without corroboration from another source. If he says the sun has risen, I look out the window to check.
> 
> That's just me.


Industry strategy number 5 - if someone offers a piece of evidence that you can't counter - attack the person, rather than the content of the discussion. it's called an 'ad hominem' attack and its been in the Playbook since the time of Aristotle, who first listed the ten kinds of 'false arguments'.

BTW the only time I foam at the mouth is when my electric toothbrush is buzzing away. PS, the word is 'hobbyist' not 'hobbiest', but I guess spelling isn't your forte; neither is reasoned discussion.
Toodle pip.


----------



## shinbone

borderbeeman - Call it "ad hominem" or anything else you want, you, sir, have zero credibility, and, you did it to yourself.


----------



## trance

First about Varroa: As this article states "If you’re not part of the genetic solution of breeding mite-resistant bees, then you’re part of the problem. Every time you allow drones or swarms to issue from a colony that owes its survival to a miticide application, you’re hindering the natural process of evolution toward mite-resistant bees!"
. 
This is 100% correct. MANY Bee Keepers (From my observations, not all) are so worried about money VS the health of the Bees. If you can't afford to lose your hives to find survivor bees or requeen with VSH lines or other Hygienic types of bees than you probably shouldn't be in it. If you raised dogs or cats you would be called a filthy backyard breeder that is in it for the money rather than the quality of the dog/cats. There has to be change by everyone towards fixing the problem rather than throwing new products on the bees to kill the mites. I understand many bee keepers rely on their Bees for income but you don't have to change everything at once, changing over time and at a pace you can afford is also another strategy as long as you are committed to really having better bees in your apiary. 

About the original article. If food prices go up, I'll eat something else like i do now. I refuse to pay $3.50 for Honey Dew or $6.00 for a Watermelon or $7.00 for a lb of Cherries. I might buy them once a year as a treat and would like more but I'm fine with eating cheaper fruit. Demand also drives prices higher and this sparks a GOLD rush, everyone wants to do it to make money. Someone is always ready to sell their product a bit cheaper. Everything finds a way to work itself out. If we cut these pesticides, another way will be found... Regardless, prices are going higher all the time for food...


----------



## JRG13

You quote our hive losses but that means nothing in this context. How many lost were due directly to neonic applications/usage? We'll never know I bet so quoting total losses of colonies means nothing in this post. I do agree with some of your points though Border. Starlings.... if you miss them so much we can send you the millions we have over here, you can have them back. You claim neonic usage, perhaps it's more of a monoculture issue. Either way, pesticides are going to be used so how can you blanket claim it's solely neonics? Ag practices will change now as well, so again, if bees etc.. recover is it because neonics are banned or is it because there's more diversity in planting.


----------



## trance

Just had a random thought about Humans finding other ways.

Gas is $3.40 a gallon where I live but remember when it first hit $4.00 (Give or take) and the country was in disbelief, where will it stop? People have found a way, we might not have other choices where to buy gas cheaper but we as Humans now have cars that get better MPG including Hybrids like I drive.

at $4.00 a gallon gas....
For the person who drives a 20 MPG truck or car with (Example) a 10 gallon tank will pay $40.00 to fill up only to go another 200 miles.

Those who own a Camry Hybrid that gets 40 MPG pays the same price but goes 400 miles on a 10 gallon tank. (200 more miles)

Point is we are finding other ways when we have little choice to buy expensive gas. So you can look at it this way, the person who owns the Hybrid is really paying $2.00 a gallon (Even if he is not) to go twice as far as the guy with the 20 MPG vehicle. (Of course this is an example and not all cars get 20 or 40. However a Prius can get 51 MPG so...)


Farmers will find other ways... maybe even better ways.


----------



## borderbeeman

well they banned neonics in France on corn, canola and sunflowers in 2000AD - that's thirteen years ago. 
I have not seen food riots or mass starvation in the streets of Paris reported as yet. France has arguably the most diverse agriculture Europe - crop yields are unaffected. As for 'knee jerk' reactions, the first reports of mass bee deaths in relation to neonics was in France in 1992 - that is 21 years ago. The pesticides were supposed to be tested for safety BEFORE they were unleashed on the world. Here we are 21 years down the line and Bayer and Syngenta have just been ordered to go back and do the tests which should have been done but enver were: full bee-life-cycle studies; soil and water persistence; chronic sub lethal poisoning tests. Never done. Nada. Zip. Well, the tests will be done now and they will have to PROVE these pesticides are safe for bees - with the whole world watching.


----------



## AstroBee

borderbeeman said:


> My posts are mostly about neonics because my bees are dying; I am only a hobby beekeeper with ten hives, but I have lost 8 out of 10 colonies this winter. It is not varroa that is killing my bees; it isn't viruses, or bacteria, or climate change, or any of the other smokescreen diversions the industry puts out. It is because the landscape all around me, for 20 miles in every direction is dominated by yellow oilseed rape fields, and green barley and wheat fields. Every single seed, in every single field is treated with a neurotoxic poison that is 7,000 times more deadly to bees than DDT.


Perhaps your queen's genetics are highly inbred? Perhaps you don't have enough experience to examine bee colony and take the appropriate action to rectify problems that would be obvious to someone with more experience. All we seem to know about you is that you're convinced beyond any shadow that neonics are causing the problems that you are seeing. I too live in an area that "every single seed" is treated (corn, cotton, and soybeans), so in the rare times that I'm not snoozing, I've objectively looked at these claims and compared them with my observations. What I see is that there is ZERO deleterious impact on my bees. Many of my colonies sit 10 yards (or less) from cotton and soybean fields. I have brood comb that is 12 years old and still in my colonies. My hives are thriving. I would highly suspect that all my comb would test positive for a host of evil ag chems. I do not treat for varroa, but I invest a lot of effort breeding bees that thrive. 



borderbeeman said:


> The 27 countries of Europe ...


 Wouldn't be the first time lemmings ran off a cliff. 


Thank you moderators for moving this to the appropriate forum.


----------



## gmcharlie

borderbeeman said:


> At $200 a hive that's $2 billion worth of bees.
> 
> Many bee farmers have gone bankrupt; others have cut their losses and gone out of the business. Some of them have been in the bee business for three generations.
> 
> Never mind. You just keep planting those neurotoxins in the soil. Screw the bees, the birds and the wildlife.
> Do you draw water from a well near your fields by any chance?



Yes, my water comes straight from there, as well as the honey we produce. Like all alarmist you assume to blame something beyound your control... here in the US it has been that dang Mite you should have kept over there. 
All those french beeks would be gone then... no bees anywhere,,, and yet here we are..... I have more bees in my Yard than you have ever owned...... And nothing but roundup ready crops cover 70% of my forage area.... All the buggy whip makers are gone fromt he US also.... as well as the Farriers, and the door to door salesmen... its called progress, move along...... But hey if your happy great.... Just stay over there, put your nose in the air, leave us alone and in 20 years show us how all your problems are gone....


----------



## BlueDiamond

borderbeeman said:


> There has been a 50-70% decline in the 19 most common farmland birds in the UK: sparrows and starlings, once seen in flocks of thousands, are now just gone, not a trace.


In the USA, farmland birds swarm in the vicinity of our neonic treated soybean and corn monocultures:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tta4mY_KzBE

Earthworms are abundant in our neonic treated soybean and corn fields: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a13QsgMj4h4

If they wanted to, Bayer & Syngenta could set up Webcams along the perimeter edges of neonic treated Ag fields so that the public could see for themselves all the birds, bees and butterflies that exist there. Or set out cage traps and glue board traps in or near neonic treated fields with webcams focused on the traps recording all the bugs and wildlife that are captured.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

borderbeeman said:


> Industry strategy number 5 - if someone offers a piece of evidence that you can't counter - attack the person, rather than the content of the discussion. it's called an 'ad hominem' attack and its been in the Playbook since the time of Aristotle, who first listed the ten kinds of 'false arguments'.
> 
> BTW the only time I foam at the mouth is when my electric toothbrush is buzzing away. PS, the word is 'hobbyist' not 'hobbiest', but I guess spelling isn't your forte; neither is reasoned discussion.
> Toodle pip.


Lets see how this works. You complain about an "ad hominem" attack, "- *attack the person, rather than the content of the discussion*", then, in the same post, you highlight a simple spelling error of a different poster! Is that the "*reasoned discussion*" that you claim to seek? Haven't you got a more intelligent response? 
Are you familiar with the phrase "its like the pot calling the kettle black"? :scratch: :lpf:

_Toodle pip_, indeed!


:ws: :digging:


----------



## jonathan

borderbeeman said:


> My posts are mostly about neonics because my bees are dying; I am only a hobby beekeeper with ten hives, but I have lost 8 out of 10 colonies this winter. It is not varroa that is killing my bees; it isn't viruses, or bacteria, or climate change, or any of the other smokescreen diversions the industry puts out. It is because the landscape all around me, for 20 miles in every direction is dominated by yellow oilseed rape fields, and green barley and wheat fields.


Canadians manage with 71 million hectares of seed treated oil seed rape? It makes up over 80% of the honey crop.

Australia has neonics everywhere and has no big problems compared to some other places.


----------



## Oldtimer

borderbeeman said:


> If you take a trip to France, you will find the farmers fat, happy and drinking their favourite wine. Agriculture in France is booming - no drop in yields or profits.


This is a rather misleading statement. In fact, French agriculture is heavily govt. subsidised because it is so inefficient. French farmers are incredibly militant and periodically drive tractors etc right into the cities where they stage large and angry demonstrations demanding even higher subsidies. There are thousands of them because they only have a few acres each.
My own country gets most of it's income from agricultural exports, French subsidised agriculture is a bone of contention here because our own agriculture is not subsidised and competing on the world market with heavily subsidised agriculture from the likes of France seems rather unfair.

I'm sure their farmers do spend a bit of time toasting themselves with wine & getting fat though must be a pretty good lifestyle LOL.

As an aside, CCD does not exist here, but neonicitiniods are widely used. There is some concern among our commercial beekeepers about neonicitiniods just incase the stuff we hear from overseas turns out to be true, but as yet, there is no problem.

However it would not be correct to say neonicitiniods are harmless to bees, neonicitiniods are an insecticide, they are designed to kill insects, so of course they will kill bees. But are they more harmful than other insecticides? Well that's the part nobody has shown.


----------



## BlueDiamond

jonathan said:


> Australia has neonics everywhere and has no big problems compared to some other places.


The anti-neonic people do not sincerely care about pollinators, that's why they express no empathy for the extra numbers of pollinators that will be killed by the neonic ban via the conversion of existing wildland into farmland to make up for the deminished crop yields nor do they express empathy for the extra numbers of pollinators that will be killed because farmers have to go back to the old fashioned foliar methods of spraying the crop.


----------



## rhaldridge

I hate to be a buzzkill, but Randy Oliver has a well-reasoned and factual article on this winter's losses. Long story short, he's more inclined to blame the losses on bad weather and beekeeper failure than on neonics.

http://gallery.mailchimp.com/5fd2b1..._Happened_to_the_Bees_This_Spring2013_opt.pdf

Here's my view. I would rather conclude that a problem is my own **** fault, rather than the fault of forces beyond my control. That at least gives me some hope that I can do something about the problem.

One of the things that I believe led Randy Oliver to his conclusions is the existence of Tim Ives, a treatment free beekeeper whose yards are in corn and soy country in Indiana. He's doing fine, with winter losses way below the national average for treated hives. How do you explain this without wondering what he's doing (or isn't doing) compared to the beekeepers who have had such terrible losses this spring?


----------



## borderbeeman

shinbone said:


> I am just a hobbiest and I have not followed the details of the neonic controversy.
> 
> However, to me, borderbeeman is so over-the-top foaming-at-the mouth biased, that I do not trust a single word he/she says without corroboration from another source. If he/she says the sun has risen, I look out the window to check.
> 
> That's just me.


I thought the 'rules' of this forum were intended to defend people from personal attacks, insults and offensive language? Or does that rule only apply to those who are 'pro-pesticides'? I would say that calling someone 'foaming at the mouth biased' is a pretty clear insult in anybody's book? Is the Moderator going to do anything about this?


----------



## borderbeeman

You have more than just neonicotinoids to worry about in new Zealand. The famous Anchor Brand Butter which we have all known and loved here in the UK for generations, was recently found to be laced with DDT - a pesticide that has been banned in this country since 1982 and in America since about 1978.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-67103/Banned-DDT-butter.html


"PESTICIDE residues have been found by UK Government researchers in leading baby food brands, Anchor butter and Birds Eye products aimed at children. A study by the Government's Pesticides Safety Directorate found the banned chemical DDT in a high proportion of samples of *Anchor Butter *sold in the UK.

Other chemicals, mainly fungicides, were found in Alphabites and potato waffles sold by Birds Eye. Two Cow & Gate baby foods contained traces of a fungicide legally sprayed on potatoes.

Apart from DDT all the levels of the other chemicals were within safety levels approved throughout Europe.

*Nine blocks of butter - eight of them Anchor brand - were found to contain DDT, a chemical which has been linked to cancer and effects on the nervous system.*

A spokesman for rural affairs ministry, DEFRA, said the discovery of the DDT in New Zealand is believed to be linked to a pest problem in the country more than a decade ago.

He said:


> 'There was heavy spraying of the landscape at that time and the chemical is believed to have remained in the ground. It appears that it has been absorbed by the grass and then gone into the cows and their milk.'


The finding is highly embarrassing for the New Zealand Milk company which is responsible for the Anchor brand and is currently running a marketing brand boasting of the health benefits of the butter. "

DDT almost wiped out the Peregrine falcon in the UK in the 1960s - along with many other birds, and many human cancers are believed to result from this appalling pesticide - which is extremely lipophilic - fat loving - every single man, woman and child in the UK, Europe and America has DDT in their tissues, especially breast tissue, more than 40 years after it was banned.

It appears that we learn nothing. We are not separate from 'The Environment' - we are part and parcel of it.
when we spray pesticides onto the landscape, we are spraying them into our children's tissues. it all comes back home, there is no 'out there' to throw things away.


----------



## sqkcrk

Driving North w/ a load of bees on my F-450 and listening to the radio I heard about this ban in Europe and it was stated that U.S. Beekeepers are having a really hard time providing pollination to those who need it. Is that accurate? Have any growers who need bees for pollination not gotten them? Very many? Crisis level shortage of pollinating colonies?

I am so far having the best Spring in years. I have gotten pretty close to my goal of filling up all my pallets and nuc boxes w/ bees. Put more bees in NC Blueberrys this year and will be putting more bees than ever in NY Apple orchards this year too. But I am only one beekeeper.


----------



## sqkcrk

borderbeeman said:


> I thought the 'rules' of this forum were intended to defend people from personal attacks, insults and offensive language? Or does that rule only apply to those who are 'pro-pesticides'? I would say that calling someone 'foaming at the mouth biased' is a pretty clear insult in anybody's book? Is the Moderator going to do anything about this?


Everything takes time. Moderation isn't instantaneous. Report the Post if you feel it necassary. Use the triangle at the lower left corner of the Post you object to. Or, shrug your shoulders and ignore the jab.


----------



## Oldtimer

Borderbeeman, you held up what the French are doing as a shining example of success. The reality is different and my post was right on topic, pointing that out.

I'm rather surprised that you kick up about personal attacks, but right after I countered your misleading statements about what's happening in France, you post an off topic, strongly worded criticism of my country. Instead of producing any reasoned rebuttal of what I had said.

Trying to discredit the messenger?

Something about pots and kettles come to mind?

For your information, long time ago DDT was widely used in New Zealand. It's use was severely curtailed by law in the 1970's, and phased out completely by 1989. Being replaced by products such as neonicitiniods.

You think it's a good plan to revert back to the old chemicals of the past?


----------



## hpm08161947

borderbeeman said:


> I thought the 'rules' of this forum were intended to defend people from personal attacks, insults and offensive language? Or does that rule only apply to those who are 'pro-pesticides'? I would say that calling someone 'foaming at the mouth biased' is a pretty clear insult in anybody's book? Is the Moderator going to do anything about this?


I think you have been identified as a "1 issue guy with an agenda", sort of a troll.... out of 160 or so posts I saw nothing but posts about neonics.... Perhaps the mods have decided that if you are not going to contribute in a more varied way, that you can look after yourself.

Tell us about your 10 hives, how did they die... CCD?

BTW.... where are those 20 miles of continuous rape-seed outside Edinburgh? I've been there.. and doubt I saw 20 acres of arable land... unless you count grazing land for Cheviots....


----------



## borderbeeman

shinbone said:


> I am just a hobbiest and I have not followed the details of the neonic controversy.
> 
> However, to me, borderbeeman is so over-the-top foaming-at-the mouth biased, that I do not trust a single word he/she says without corroboration from another source. If he/she says the sun has risen, I look out the window to check.
> 
> That's just me.



PLEASE NOTE:
You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use the Beesource Beekeeping Forums to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You agree to be civil and "observe with both friend and foe the ordinary rules of courtesy." You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by BeeSource.com.

Be civil. Personal attacks are never okay. We can disagree and debate a subject, which is fine. You'll find no "know-it-all's" here. No one on this forum is in a position where they can't be questioned or disagreed with in a civil manner.

MODERATOR - do the rules mean anything, or can anyone call someone 'foaming at the mouth', 'biased' and opine that he does not 'trust a single word'. is this abusive? is this defamatory? Is this civil.

Over to you.


----------



## AstroBee

borderbeeman said:


> I have posted several things recently because there was a massive political change in the pesticide issue yesterday. The 27 countries of Europe - with a combined population considerably larger than the United States, just decided to BAN the neonics. Sorry if I disturbed your snooze, but for an entire CONTINENT to ban a group of pesticides is pretty earth-shaking news in the small world of beekeeping. Moreover, America has lost 5,650,000 bee colonies since 2007. That is simply devastating. My posts are mostly about neonics because my bees are dying; I am only a hobby beekeeper with ten hives, but I have lost 8 out of 10 colonies this winter. It is not varroa that is killing my bees; it isn't viruses, or bacteria, or climate change, or any of the other smokescreen diversions the industry puts out. It is because the landscape all around me, for 20 miles in every direction is dominated by yellow oilseed rape fields, and green barley and wheat fields. Every single seed, in every single field is treated with a neurotoxic poison that is 7,000 times more deadly to bees than DDT.


I didn't find your "snooze" comment very civil either, and in my opinion on par with the "foaming" comment. So just be careful claiming to be a victim - it goes both ways.


----------



## gmcharlie

I am hoping Borderbee, that the moderators have realized you start this with a lot of one issue post, that are based on your opinions and that you totally disregard the information provided to you by dozens of beeks who live under these conditions. I have not seen any of your post where your trying to be a better beekeeper, or actually asking for advice, instead you come and post inflammatory comments and generally try to rile people up.
I don't believe shin bone was attacking you, but accurately describing your methods.......

But mabe Shinbone has been in the neonics and is not in his right mind........


----------



## borderbeeman

Oldtimer said:


> Borderbeeman, you held up what the French are doing as a shining example of success. The reality is different and my post was right on topic, pointing that out.
> 
> I'm rather surprised that you kick up about personal attacks, but right after I countered your misleading statements about what's happening in France, you post an off topic, strongly worded criticism of my country. Instead of producing any reasoned rebuttal of what I had said.
> 
> Trying to discredit the messenger?
> 
> Something about pots and kettles come to mind?
> 
> *For your information, long time ago DDT was widely used in New Zealand.* It's use was severely curtailed by law in the 1970's, and phased out completely by 1989. Being replaced by products such as neonicitiniods.
> 
> You think it's a good plan to revert back to the old chemicals of the past?


My point was that Anchor Butter from New Zealand was just banned in the UK because the ten samples examined contained DDT - in 2013. Several questions arise from that regulatory action:

1. Why were cows eating grass contaminated with DDT? 
2. why did New Zealand farmers spray DDT on grass pasture?
3. why is it showing up in New Zealand milk and butter today?

Maybe you should read up on the lax use of pesticides in your own country?

*http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10857059*

*Sue Kedgley: Government sits on its hands as honey bees die*
Sue Kedgley is a former Green MP.

I've been contacted recently by several beekeepers who are worried about what is happening to our nation's honey bees.

A Bay of Plenty beekeeper recently lost 230 of his beehives - or half of his operation. He's been beekeeping since 1981, and has never had losses like this before.

He says other beekeepers have experienced similar losses. A Northland beekeeper recently lost 900 of his 1000 hives; another has lost 400 hives, and others last year lost half of their hives.

The Bay of Plenty keeper is wondering what is causing such huge losses.

The 2012 winter was harsh, and many factors can contribute to honey bee losses -including pathogens, the Varroa mite (which weakens the immune systems of bees and puts them under stress) and more intensive farming that is wiping out forage and natural food sources for bees.

But *he suspects the main cause of his losses is the ****tail of pesticides and chemicals that are used in many kiwifruit orchards where bees pollinate. *Since the advent of the kiwifruit disease PSA, growers are using even more pesticides on kiwifruit orchards, and he is concerned that some growers, in their desperation to control the disease, have resorted to using illegal as well as legal pesticides and other chemicals.


These beekeepers are not worried only about the bee losses they have witnessed over the past year. They are also worried about the Government's lack of action to help beekeepers, and the lack of any nationwide system of monitoring bees in New Zealand, to establish whether these bee losses are random, or part of a wider pattern.

There used to be a whole section of the Agriculture Department that was focused on helping beekeepers and monitoring the health of honeybees.

But that was disbanded during the era of deregulation, and now there is nobody in Government that beekeepers can turn to for advice, and nobody who is monitoring what is happening to the nation's bees.

There doesn't seem to be anybody within the Ministry for Primary Industries who is responsible for protecting the health of our bees, or for ensuring we don't suffer from the massive bee losses that are occurring in many countries overseas.

And there seems to be little, if any, research going on into the effect of various pesticides on bees - despite the fact that pesticides have become the prime suspect in colony collapse disorder that is decimating bee numbers in many parts of the world.

You would hope that the Government would respond with some urgency to scientific findings that a new generation of pesticides that are widely used in New Zealand are poisonous to bees, even at extremely low doses that had been assumed to be safe.

Our use of this group of pesticides, called neonicotinoids, has vastly increased over recent years. They are used to coat a wide variety of seeds our growers and farmers use, such as grass seed, rye, maize, squash, sweet corn, pumpkin and even brassica.


MY COMMENTS
Seems like New Zealand has exactly the same epidemiology of neonics and bees we have seen in the UK, in France, Germany, Italy and the USA. Australia is exactly the same.


----------



## borderbeeman

Seems to me that you are the person on this forum who spends most of his time trying to 'rile people up'; your usual techiques of sarcasm, insult, name-calling etc is evident in almost everything you post.
This section of the forum is about so-called CCD (which doesn't actually exist - it's a 'false -flag syndrome' created by the industry's spin doctors to divert attention from the simplest and most blindingly obvious cause of global, mass bee-deaths: systemic, neuro-toxic, neonicotinoid insecticides.

I am in touch with dozens of American beekeepers beyond this Forum and I get all the advice I need about how to keep bees from my own bee inspectors and friends over here. 'Trying to be a better beekeeper' in a landscape where 200 million acres of crops are being laced with deadly, bee-killing pesticides, year after year since 1998 - is like re-arranging the deckchairs on the Titanic as she went down.

This debate is about the greatest ecological disaster ever faced in the entire history of beekeeping - ten million hives have been killed in American according to some estimates; for sure, 5,560,000 colonies have been killed since 2007 according to the EPA and USDA.

your role on here seems to be to defend pesticides and GM at all costs. People can make their own minds up as to why you do that; but from what I have seen and witnessed here, you do it all the time, every time, every post - from way back when.

George C Scott delivered one of the greatest lines in film history, in Dr Strangelove, when asked how he knows the Russian ambassador is a 'commie' he replies:

"When a guy walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and hangs around the pond with other ducks - whaddaya think he is????"

Well sir, you defend pesticides and GM till the cows come home; you do it all the time, consistently and with great energy. You also bully, ridicule, attack and try to humiliate anyone who dares to raise their head above the parapet on this devastating issue, that has produced an ecological disaster across the length and breadth of Europe and the USA. It is plain as a pikestaff what you are. You sir - are a duck!


----------



## JRG13

I don't understand why you keep pulling numbers of hives being killed. I'm certain, that 100% of beehives die eventually, so what's your point? There's nothing that proves Neonics killed all those hives or what portion were affected by them. You know what trend I see.... guys losing most of their hives didn't pay enough attention to nutrition or disease issues early enough and it finally caught up with them since winter was rough, drought etc...


----------



## Oldtimer

Thanks for the further information on my poisonous country Borderbeeman.

However it is clear from what you say that you don't live here. You are also not above lying, as per when you were clearly caught out with your claim of being surrounded by 20 miles of continuous rape seed. 

So what you say is not trustworthy, no. 

Yes there were some beekeepers here lost a lot of hives. Events like this have happened from time to time for the more than 40 years since I started in the industry. And pesticides probably play a part, it's likely even. What's more likely in the recent cases though, is lax varroa treatment, combined with the recently introduced N. cerana. And I know for a fact that varroa were the cause in one of the cases, the others are people I don't personally know.

Nationally, hive losses are well below 5%, many beekeepers around 1%. Few to none of the lost hives show classic CCD symptoms. If they did, the industry would very much like to know it is something that's watched out for carefully.

I haven't really come across you before Borderbeeman, but reading this thread, I notice you don't really take anything from what anyone says, and ignore any inconvenient questions. You are here to lecture only, and a lot of what you have said is embellished, and misleading. Other comments posted show that most people see through this, and don't like it.


----------



## Daniel Y

trance said:


> First about Varroa: As this article states "If you’re not part of the genetic solution of breeding mite-resistant bees, then you’re part of the problem. Every time you allow drones or swarms to issue from a colony that owes its survival to a miticide application, you’re hindering the natural process of evolution toward mite-resistant bees!"
> .


How did mites become a problem in the first place? Nobody was treating bees then. In effect you are saying that if a certain percentage, yet unknown of beekeepers start doing what all beekeepers where doing that bees will come to resist a parasite that they where never able to resist int eh first place.

I am aware there are other issues surrounding all of this. breeding for VHS for one. but it would be interesting to know how you see this an eventual outcome. I do not even see direct effort as all that effective. the breeding of VSH for example. I not only do not see it producing very effective results. but to make it worse even if it where the beekeeping community at large is not buying it. So even if breeders did manage to breed the perfectly resistant bee. they would then have the task of selling it. and that is never goign to happen. Only a fraction of beekeepers are going to pay for queens even if they are mite resistant. I have been told on several occasions that the idea of producing 1000 queens per year is not realistic. how could all breeders combined then produce 1.8 million of them a year? In reality breeders would never be capable of filling a demand beyond a small percentage of all colonies.

I don't really mean to pick the comment apart bit by bit. this is actually just a small portion of the entire thought that went through my mind upon reading your claim. it is not realistic. It does not take the real world or what is required to accomplish something into account.

Not to mention that I completely disagree with the idea evolution even exists. The theories put for by Darwin in the Origins of Species where disproven before his own death. he admitted his theory was disproven himself. He stated that at eh time he wrote the book the fossil record was not adequate as evidence. but before his death he admitted that the fossil record had become adequate enough to prove his theory was wrong. for evolution to be correct you would have to be able to find fossils that could not be distinguished from one species to the other. and that clearly is not so. That they teach it does not make it truth. It just makes it taught.


----------



## jonathan

borderbeeman said:


> George C Scott delivered one of the greatest lines in film history, in Dr Strangelove, when asked how he knows the Russian ambassador is a 'commie' he replies:
> 
> "When a guy walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and hangs around the pond with other ducks - whaddaya think he is????"
> 
> Well sir, you defend pesticides and GM till the cows come home; you do it all the time, consistently and with great energy. You also bully, ridicule, attack and try to humiliate anyone who dares to raise their head above the parapet on this devastating issue, that has produced an ecological disaster across the length and breadth of Europe and the USA. It is plain as a pikestaff what you are. You sir - are a duck!


LOL We have been here before with your invented scenes from Dr Strangelove and you have changed the protagonists several times already!

Borderstrangelove 21 Dec 2010

Comedy Genius folks. Enjoy it.

http://www.bbka.org.uk/members/forum.php?c=3&f=8&t=4821&pg=1#post46865


----------



## sqkcrk

JStinson said:


> I'm anxious to read about the unintended consequences of this.


One possible unintended consequence that some of my friends have mentioned is fewer bee yards when other farmers see beekeepers as advisaries.


----------



## Dave Burrup

Sqkcrk
I will second the fewer beeyards. If Admire (Imidicloprid) is removed from use for potato farmers, bee keeping will be a very bad word. Admire has eliminated one of the worst pests of potato farming. The alternative is airial spraying of Organophosphates and Carbamates. These will produce bee kills, imediate ones.
Dave


----------



## Oldtimer

Well Borderbeeman, biggest factor in CCD reported to be varroa mites. 

Probably why they don't have it in Australia.

Quote "The federal report, issued Thursday by the Agriculture Department and the Environmental Protection Agency, said the biggest culprit is the parasitic mite varroa destructor" Unquote.

http://news.yahoo.com/feds-many-causes-dramatic-bee-disappearance-152605922.html

Who woulda thunk!


----------



## trance

Oldtimer said:


> Well Borderbeeman, biggest factor in CCD reported to be varroa mites.
> 
> Probably why they don't have it in Australia.
> 
> Quote "The federal report, issued Thursday by the Agriculture Department and the Environmental Protection Agency, said the biggest culprit is the parasitic mite varroa destructor" Unquote.
> 
> http://news.yahoo.com/feds-many-causes-dramatic-bee-disappearance-152605922.html
> 
> Who woulda thunk!


"The intertwined factors cited include a parasitic mite, multiple viruses, bacteria, poor nutrition, genetics, habitat loss and pesticides."

Most of these can be corrected. It's our will to do it is the real problem.


----------



## AstroBee

Oldtimer said:


> Well Borderbeeman, biggest factor in CCD reported to be varroa mites.
> 
> Probably why they don't have it in Australia.
> 
> Quote "The federal report, issued Thursday by the Agriculture Department and the Environmental Protection Agency, said the biggest culprit is the parasitic mite varroa destructor" Unquote.
> 
> http://news.yahoo.com/feds-many-causes-dramatic-bee-disappearance-152605922.html
> 
> Who woulda thunk!



Let's set our stopwatches to see how long it takes the "pesticide crowd" to discredit this report. I think it hit the AP at 3:46 PM.


----------



## shinbone

deleted


----------



## camero7

Dave Burrup said:


> Sqkcrk
> I will second the fewer beeyards. If Admire (Imidicloprid) is removed from use for potato farmers, bee keeping will be a very bad word. Admire has eliminated one of the worst pests of potato farming. The alternative is airial spraying of Organophosphates and Carbamates. These will produce bee kills, imediate ones.
> Dave


those of us old enough to remember the bee kills from aerial spraying would dread the return of it. I've seen long lines of dead hives from it in the alfalfa fields of my youth.


----------



## thatguy324

i think the thing that is killing bees is a mix of pesticdes mono cultures treatment and varroa

then again this is just what i think you are entitled to your own opinon


----------

