# Clothianidin?



## jaybees (Jun 7, 2010)

We might find out that it is a contributor to CCD. I think that any insecticides
that are released in pollen and nectar should be banned.


----------



## jrbbees (Apr 4, 2010)

Jaybees has it right. Also, if it goes through the plant to the pollen then what keeps it from going to the fruit. That you eat. Or is eating just a little of a killing agent everyday Ok?

I remember one study on avacados. It said that the pestiside toxic intake level over a year was so low that it was not a issue. But when you read the study they made the assumption that a person only ate 1 avacado a year. 
Mexicans only eating 1 avacado a year. Right!!!

And you, do you eat just one ear of corn or 20 corn chips a year?


----------



## wildbranch2007 (Dec 3, 2008)

personnelly its a systemic and I don't want to eat foods that its been applyed to and I have no way to know what those foods are. As far as the bees I pollinated for a truck farmer that planted seeds with it on it and I had no problem with the hives that were used. at that time I asked the farmer what insects it was directed at, and he said it was a minor pest that caused no damage but all the seed were being treated. When I went to by my sweet corn to plant the last 4 or 5 years it was on the seeds(didn't buy), just got done ordering my seed online, untreated.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

So, if there were a petition to ban the stuff available, would you sign it?


----------



## jaybees (Jun 7, 2010)

I will definitely sign it.


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

sqkcrk said:


> What would be the net effect/benefit to beekeeping if this chemical was taken out of the [farmers] arsenal? Is the campaign to ban this chemical something… beekeepers should support?...


I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, “Be very careful what you wish for, because you may receive it.” I currently feel the overall effect will be negative.

There are beeks on this forum who keep bees in a sea of Clothianidin treated corn with no problems. Clothianidin is definitely poisonous to bees, no question. Iron, Vitamin A, Selenium, Copper, Chlorine, Sodium, Zinc, and Fluoride in large amounts are definitely poisonous to humans, but they are in natural or organic foods, sometimes in amounts deadly to humans. These same substances are also in One a Day and Flintstones’ multi-vitamins. I predict that in the not so distance future Mercury, Arsenic, and Lead will also be included in these multi-vitamins. Copper, Zinc, and Selenium are heavy metals, once though verboten, but now we know all 3 are necessary at the biological level to sustain human life. 

If Clothianidin is withdrawn, a more powerful and perhaps more deadly nematicide will replace it. It is certain that an older more deadly nematcide will be employed until a replacement for Clothianidin is ready, perhaps Timit. I’ve used Timit, and it’s bad stuff. 

The EPA, FDA, and USDA are all three government agencies. Regardless of what one thinks of the current or any previous administration, no administration worth its salt should do anything to triple, double, and redouble food prices over night, especially when these price increases are coupled with a disastrous food shortage. Famine may be the reality in a pesticide free world. Everyone should understand that empty bellies vote. These bellies method of casting their ballot varies. Some times they use their fingers and thumbs to mark a paper ballot, more often hungry people vote with their feet, but the majority of the time they vote with their fists, with clubs, with hay forks and with RPGs. Darfur in the Sudan is a good example of all three voting options in action at once. If you doubt this last statement ask King Louis the XVI of France and his wife Marie (let them eat cake) Antoinette what happens to a nation when famine is its constant companion! I believe many anti Bayerites, like the French Churchman Robes Pierre, yearn for option three.

The most often repeated complaint I hear from the anti Bayer lobby is that Bayer is a large multi national corporation (aka collective). This puzzles me since many of the the anti Clothianidin crowd sounds like Internationalist themselves. Internationalist who are Hades bent on collectivizing all human endeavors into one bureau under their collective control. 

Bayer’s next most mentioned shortcoming is greed. Isn’t greed one of those seven deadly sin thingies your mama warned you about as a kid? I suspect however that a majority of the most vocal anti Bayerites rejects the concept of sin as understood in the context of Western democracy and civilization, and instead embrace the idea that any means is justified in achieving their goal of collectivization. This is all so confusing to me… or perhaps it is not. Therefore I would be very careful about banning Clothianidin. 

There was a time when local cotton fields were sprayed 10 or 11 times per season, just to control boll weevils and bud worms. You should try to keep bees under that cloud of chemical residue! You could often smell the pesticide miles away. When cotton patches near me were sprayed, the next morning I left home early so I could collect the dead song birds in my yard before my dogs could get them. I hope for new and better ways to control pest, (like Bt or GMOs) I don’t want to go back to the bad old days of pesticides we enjoyed in the 70s to early 90s. 

I feel we would be making a giant leap backwards by banning Clothianidin now. Every pesticide if used incorrectly will kill bees, as will soap and water. Germs and nematodes are all invisible to the naked eye and both live in the soil. What is the greater danger, soap and water or a cook with dirty hands at 'Tofu Be We'? IMHO until there is a huge amount of… 
S-C-I-E-N-T-I-F-I-C …evidence to the contrary, no action is needed or called for.


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

oops doubled up.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Thanks Scrapfe, that is the kind of trsponse I was looking for. You give me something to think about.


----------



## greengecko (Dec 16, 2008)

There is a newer class of insecticides, the anthranilic diamides, which are considered to have low environmental impact and extremely low toxicity to most non-target animals, including birds, fish and bees.


----------



## Bens-Bees (Sep 18, 2008)

sqkcrk said:


> So, if there were a petition to ban the stuff available, would you sign it?


Yes I would, even after taking Scrapfe's thoughts on the subject into consideration. There is no doubt in my mind that we can come up with something less toxic to bees that still works on the target pests.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Scrapfe said:


> There are beeks on this forum who keep bees in a sea of Clothianidin treated corn with no problems.


While neonics scare me, I have to agree with scrapfe. I'm one of those that keep bees in a sea...or desert if you will...of clothianidin treated corn and soy. Many of my apiaries are located on dairy farms. 

There is a movement to ban these products, nationally and also here locally in Vermont. I asked the main advovate here...a 40 colony beekeeper who couldn't make a living with his bees if he wanted to...to come up with some proof that the product is damaging our bees. I have at least 20 apiaries in corn areas, and I see no problems. I've offered my bees up for testing. Let's pull combs of pollen. Let's take samples of foragers. Let's do something but rant. Nope...they don't want to sample anything. 

Supposedly there is some committee forming, with state reps in Montpelier. I said I will participate as a commercial beekeeper keeping bees in the corn country. But, I refuse to blind side the dairy farmers. Everyone has to be involved in the discussion. We need rational discussion and evidence. I'm keeping an open mind on this, and my eyes open to problems with my bees. If the meeting happens in an open forum I'll be there. If they want to test, my bees are available. If they have some closed door, sensationalistic, fear mongering agenda, I will resist.


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

I get calls from farmers during the season to let me know when and what they are spraying with. Several have told me they choose the ones that are known to be least harmful to bees.

Until I see a lot more proof of these chems being worse than the previous ones used, I cannot support these efforts to ban the neo-nics.


----------



## Yuleluder (Mar 2, 2005)

I'm of the opinion that we really need a change of culture when it comes to pesticides, insecticides, fertilizers and weed killers. Too many people think that when they dump these things on their lawn or gardens that they just sit there forever. Eventually all of the left over crap ends up in our small creeks, streams rivers, bays, and eventually our oceans. I am certainly not a tree hugger type, but all of this stuff adds up and has a dramatic effect on the environment as a whole.

I just saw something that said 90% of the bumblebee population has disappeared in the last 20 years. Although habitat may play a part in those numbers, I'm sure other things are even bigger factors. 

Good marketing by fertilizer and pesticide companies seem to almost make people feel like they need all of this crap on their lawns and gardens. At one time there was a fairly good balance between everything on earth. Humans decided long ago that we could do things much better by adding our great concoctions to the mix. I'm not so sure we are headed down the right path, only time will tell. However the evidence seems to suggests that we our truly degrading our world.


----------



## dcross (Jan 20, 2003)

In a sea of mostly conventionally grown corn/beans/alfalfa here, would rather see lawn weedkiller and fertilizer banned.


----------



## Will O'Brien (Feb 22, 2006)

Scrapfe, I appreciate your ability to think though a seemingly small issue and reveal the larger picture. If our activists, our politicians and our economist did a better job of thinking through and discussing the second and third order effects of the issues that we get excited about we would have much better results.

As for banning (or not) Clothianidin, I have not idea but agree that decisions like that should be based on good research. 

I am trying to keep my bees as naturally as possible because I think that in the long run those methods will be simpler, cheaper and more effective. We should be careful before we blanketly blame chemicals, cell phones etc. on CCD and other issues that plague our bees as quick conclusions prevent us from getting to the true root causes of issues and ultimately to solutions.


----------



## Countryboy (Feb 15, 2009)

I am not aware that clothianidin is in the pesticide applicator's arsenal.

Pesticide applicators do not apply Poncho. Poncho is a seed treatment.

While I doubt that chemicals are doing our bees any favors, I also wonder if the chemicals are really as bad as some folks make them out to be.

I believe Randy Oliver is getting ready to do a study involving feeding clothianidin to bees, to see how it affects them. Personally, I think his study is flawed and the results unusable, because it does not reflect natural exposure to Poncho. (Poncho itself might be fine for bees, but once it gets processed by the plant, it could alter it and make the pollen harmful, or the plant could produce another chemical that reacts with the Poncho and creates a toxin.)


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

Here is a link to the U of Kentucky concerning the corn leaf aphid.
http://www.ca.uky.edu/entomology/entfacts/ef126.asp

I know assuming is dangerous, and this article says nothing about this corn being raised from Clothianidin treated seed. I will leave that evidence to the second hand statement of the truck farmer in New York State who claimed all seeds are treated with Clothianidin?. I will also depend on wildbranch2007’s statement that Clothianidin was on all the sweet corn seed he found commercially.



wildbranch2007 said:


> ... I asked the farmer what insects it [Clothianidin] was directed at, and he said ...all the seed were being treated. When I went to buy sweet corn [seed] it was on the seeds...


First, I need to say that Clothianidin is not directed at any insect, Clothianidin is intended to prevent root damage to crops caused by a microscopic parasitic worm living in the soil called a nematode.

However, if all corn seeds are treated with Clothianidin, and if corn leaf aphids can still live on and suck sap from whorl stage corn treated with Clothianidin (whorl stage corn is the stage when tassels and pollen are produced) without the corn leaf aphids dying, or the next generation of corn leaf aphids being born with two heads etc. I see nothing that would suggest that corn grown from seed treated with Clothianidin is dangerous to honeybees, little less humans. After all bees are much larger than aphids and honeybees don’t exclusively eat corn sap, like the corn leaf aphid does. Futher more bees don't live exclusively on corn plants like some corn leaf aphids must. 

I know this is not SCIENTIFIC evidence, but it is a powerful argument for real SCIENTIFIC evidence before continuing any further down the road to banning Clothianidin. 

Personally, I ascribe to the Dwight David Eisenhower school of skepticism. On the night of January 17 1961, in his final speech as President, Ike not only warned us of the Military Industrial Complex, Ike also warned us of (in my words) the Research University Complex. In other words an elite group of professors and others driving public policy (usually by fear or hysteria) to ensure themselves tenure, lifetime employment, and government grants, in place of using their education to pursue rigorous intellectual curiosity. I feel the much ado about Clothianidin fits this description.


----------



## wildbranch2007 (Dec 3, 2008)

Scrapfe said:


> I will leave that evidence to the second hand statement of the truck farmer in New York State who claimed all seeds are treated with Clothianidin?. I will also depend on wildbranch2007’s statement that Clothianidin was on all the sweet corn seed he found commercially.


I'm not the truck farmer, I'm the beekeeper. When I look up the chemicals i treat all neonics the same.



Scrapfe said:


> First, I need to say that Clothianidin is not directed at any insect, Clothianidin is intended to prevent root damage to crops caused by a microscopic parasitic worm living in the soil called a nematode..


http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/registration/ais/publicreports/5792.pdf



Pests controlled: Corn rootworm, southern corn billbug, chinch flea beetle, corn leaf aphid,

black cutworm, grape colaspis, seedcorn maggot, southern corn leaf

beetle, southern green stinkbug, white grub, thrips, wireworm and flea

beetle < flea beetle neonic was on the original seeds the truck farmer was using



Scrapfe said:


> I see nothing that would suggest that corn grown from seed treated with Clothianidin is dangerous to honeybees, little less humans. After all bees are much larger than aphids and honeybees don’t exclusively eat corn sap, like the corn leaf aphid does.


from the epa web site

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...yiZ2sc&sig=AHIEtbTZXq3O7mpnw4lfgATCYXuPHN-BHg

Application Sites: Clothianidin is registered for seed treatment use on corn and canola. 



Clothianidin has the potential for toxic chronic exposure to honey bees, as well as other nontarget pollinators, through the translocation of clothianidin residues in nectar and pollen. 



The fate and disposition of clothianidin in the environment suggest a compound that is a systemic insecticide that is persistent and mobile, stable to hydrolysis, and has potential to leach to ground water, as well as runoff to surface waters 



Clothianidin is highly toxic to honey bees on an acute contact basis (LD50 > 0.0439 μg/bee). It has the potential for toxic chronic exposure to honey bees, as well as other nontarget pollinators, through the translocation of clothianidin residues in nectar and pollen. In honey bees, the effects of this toxic chronic exposure may include lethal and/or sub-lethal effects in the larvae and reproductive effects in the queen. 



Although nicotine has been used as a pesticide for over 200 years it degraded too rapidly in the environment and lacked the selectivity to be very useful in large scale agricultural situations. However, in order to address this problem, the neonicotinoids (chloronicotinyl insecticides) were developed as a substitute of nicotine, targeting the same receptor site (AChR) and activating post-synaptic acetylcholine receptors but not inhibiting AChE. Clothianidin, like other neonicotinoids, is an agonist of acetylcholine, the neurotransmitter that stimulates the nAChR. In insects, neonicotinoids cause symptoms similar to that of nicotine. The advantage of clothianidin and other neonicotinoids over nicotine is that they are less likely to break down in the environment 


but as i stated in my original post I don't want to eat it, my bees don't appear affected by it, and I actually go to the trouble of asking the farmers around me when they plant their corn etc whats on the seeds and what they spray and most just give me an emply bag so I can copy down and see which neonic is on the seeds.


----------



## bigbearomaha (Sep 3, 2009)

According to Bayer CropScience webpage The intended pest(s) affected by clothianidin is


> Early season pests, soil and leaf pests like aphids, beet leaf miners, black cutworms, corn rootworms, flea beetles, grubs, leafhoppers and wireworm.


According to the EPA registration factsheet of 2003...



> Clothianidin has the potential for toxic chronic exposure to honey bees, as well as other nontarget pollinators, through the translocation of clothianidin residues in nectar and pollen.


There's really not much to debate. According to Bayer (which provided the fact sheet info to the EPA, Clothianidin does have potential through translocation to be lethal to bees.

If people want to argue about the odds of it translocating or the impact/scale of potential effects, that is up for discussion. But to try to say that it has not been determined as possible or the potential of being able to happen, that has been answered already by the manufacturer.



> In other words an elite group of professors and others driving public policy (usually by fear or hysteria) to ensure themselves tenure, lifetime employment, and government grants, in place of using their education to pursue rigorous intellectual curiosity. I feel the much ado about Clothianidin fits this description.


Much the same could be said for those highly paid and elite researchers presenting the new products. For them, there is money and reputation at stake, similar to university researchers. In other words, I trust no scientist on either side of the table.

The only way to be sure of "honest" science is to see objective corroboration in multiple, replicable studies. Allowing input from those proving, those disproving and those third party, hopefully more truly objective, "let's see what we see" researchers as well.


----------



## Delta Bay (Dec 4, 2009)

Evaluation of Pesticide Incident Reports

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/cps-spc/pubs/pest/_decisions/erc2010-4374/index-eng.php

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/cps-spc/pubs/pest/_decisions/erc2010-3391/index-eng.php

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/cps-spc/pubs/pest/_decisions/erc2010-3100/index-eng.php


----------



## humbee (Dec 12, 2010)

It is truly amazing to read some of the opinions on this site. 
In the United States, most of the science is corporate funded. Even the EPAs own scientists warmed of this chemical and it was still allowed. 

Please take a minute and do some research on the international science that has been proven by the Germans (who have always been meticulous about science) and the french (who have always been the particular about food).

http://bayer-kills-bees.com/

have a good day and keep them buzzing :thumbsup:


----------



## TWall (May 19, 2010)

Delta Bay said:


> Evaluation of Pesticide Incident Reports
> 
> http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/cps-spc/pubs/pest/_decisions/erc2010-4374/index-eng.php
> 
> ...


Do you know if there were other incidents in other Provinces? These are all from Quebec. It seems odd that these would be the only incidents in Canada.

Tom


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

wildbranch2007 said:


> ... i treat all neonics the same... but ...I don't want to eat it, *my bees don't appear affected by it,**


*= a statement stressed by the author of this post.

Do you or the rest of us treat all drugs and vaccines the same? Some are good, some ineffective, and others just plain dangerous. All I am saying is to take your time and conclude for yourself what is worth keeping and what poses a danger.

I don’t want to eat it either, but if Louie Pasteur were alive today some people would hunt poor Louie down and burn him at the stake for witchcraft... sorry ladies, sorcery!

Therefore you readily and freely admit that you have no personal knowledge of neonics harming your bees nor any scientific knowledge of neonics harming anyone else’s bees, even though you personally keep bees on farms where treated seeds are planted, and your bees pollinate the ensuing crops? 

We have now come to the devils advocate portion of this post. I’ll be playing the part of the devil think you. 
If it become an economic necessity for the farmers in you area to employ pesticides more deadly to bees than Clothianidin treated seeds, (like synthetic pyrethroids or other deadly pesticides) how many farmers would ask you to remove your hives from their property so the farmer could lessen his liability when applying pesticides? Is the number 5%… 10%... 50%... higher? How many would demand you remove your aperies if allowing your hives to remain meant the farmer went bank-ruptured  ? Do the farmers in your area really put your wellbeing ahead of their own? Think about it long and hard now before you answer.

Remember, "Be careful what you wish for, because you just may receive it!"


----------



## Bud Dingler (Feb 8, 2008)

humbee said:


> It is truly amazing to read some of the opinions on this site.
> In the United States, most of the science is corporate funded. Even the EPAs own scientists warmed of this chemical and it was still allowed.



your confusing the issue. the documented bee kills in germany and apparently canada all involve the chemical coming off the seed treatments during planting. 

no one disputes that the raw chem is deadly to bees. the way its used its not supposed to expose bees to the raw chem because its used as a seed coating 

the funded science on Bayer neonics is corporate funed and some private and even funded by beekeepers. we're more interested in studies that deal with concerns about the pollen and nectar having too high of residue of the systemic chemical. 

one study that Hackenberg and some other beekeepers had Bayer fund btw ended up with kind of a funny ending. 

this is quoted from a BEE L posting 

http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/[email protected]&d=No+Match;Match;Matches&z=4

Hi All,

Some of us were at the American Bee Research Conference today, and watched Dr Dick Rogers present the Movento study that he, Chung Lam, Geoff Williams, and Dave Hackenberg, with the cooperation of the National Honey Bee Advisory Board (NHBAB), ran in citrus groves in Dade County, Florida last season.

This trial was designed to satisfy the suggestions by the NHBAB that tests
be run on normal commercial colonies, with normal used combs, and normal
pathogen levels, with the test and control yards suggested by Dave
Hackenberg.

The trial ran from March through October, with Movento being sprayed onto
bloom on March 26 at label rate (730ml product/ha) while bees were actively
foraging. In fact, the spray rig passed immediately next to the test
colonies.

I believe that most in the audience were impressed by the thoroughness and
meticulousness of the data collection by Dr Rogers and team. They monitored brood viability immediately after spraying, and for the next four months recorded frames covered by bees, capped brood, open brood, frame coverage by honey, and by pollen, varroa and nosema levels.

They also monitored dead bee traps, and noted the age (pupa or adult) and
sex of each dead bee, and whether it had signs of DWV.

They also recorded hive weight, and spirotetramat residues in blossoms,
nectar shook from the combs, and in trapped pollen loads.

There were no differences in brood (larval or pupal) viability for the
several days after spraying.

The colonies were moved by Hackenberg after citrus bloom to apples, then
blueberries, then pumpkins, and were again monitored after each crop.

The control colonies were somewhat stronger before spraying, but were passed up by the Movento colonies during the ensuing months.

To briefly summarize the rest of the data, the Movento colonies started with
9% mite levels, and the controls at 5%. A month later, they had dropped
slightly in the Movento group, and risen in the controls.

Hackenberg treated for mites in May and then twice in June.

Nosema levels were in the range of 1-4M for most of the trial for both
groups.

No colonies died in citrus. More control colonies than Movento colonies
died thereafter at each assessment (last assessment after pumpkins in Oct.),
at which point 8 Movento, and 9 controls had died (out of 12 in each group).

Causes of death appeared to be due to high mite levels and DWV infection, as
evidenced by the high DWV mortality of pupae in the dead bee traps.

Conclusion: Movento sprayed on citrus bloom did not appear to negatively
affect commercial test colonies in either the short or long term.

However, after the trial concluded, Dave Hackenberg told beekeepers that the remaining 4 Movento colonies eventually died, whereas the 3 remaining
control colonies survived. Some beekeepers in the audience felt that that
final mortality was due to some sort of delayed response.

However, this didn't appear plausible to us, since spirotetramat residues
were far below toxic levels at any time of the trial, and rapidly degraded.
From the data at the Oct report, it was clear that ALL colonies were on a
hard downhill trend as far as health was concerned, due to mite levels and
DWV.

I (Randy) personally asked Dave whether next year he would prefer the
orchard to be sprayed with Movento or to go back to existing products. He
said that he would prefer Movento.


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

TWall said:


> ... It seems odd that these [Quebeck reports] would be the only incidents in Canada.


No, I find nothing odd about it. 

Say, isn't Quebec the Canadian province most culturally aligned with continental Europe?


----------



## Countryboy (Feb 15, 2009)

And aren't there individual beekeepers in Alberta who have more colonies than all of the colonies in Quebec?

Maybe there is a reason there aren't high colony counts there....(or prime acreage for growing crops.) Hmm...gotta find a scapegoat - let's blame the seed treatments.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Just to bring this to where others can see it.


----------



## valleyman (Nov 24, 2009)

I haven't been around much since just before Christmas. I have read and read and even commented on this subject.

My conclusion is that clothianidin is probably responsible for large numbers of bee deaths under some conditions.

We must remember that just because the bees are near corn that the seed for which was treated with the pesticide doesn't mean that the bees are going to use it as source for anything. Thereby explaining lack of loss for some.

I don't think from all the data that has been posted here any one with an open mind can think that clothianidin will not kill bees. Notice I said an OPEN MIND.

I don't believe there has been enough independant research/studys done for it to be as widely used as it is as a pesticide because the studys/reports to date have been ignored or biased toward profit or politics. Notice I said INDEPENDENT. I there is such a thing in this world any more.

Having said all this I agree with Scrapfe, what might become the replacement for clothianidin could be a lot worse because the farmers that raise grain have to use every mean availible to them to make a profit, and it is more the grain farmers than just the dairymen, who by the way use a for sure deadly pesticide on their cows, permethrin.

So no I would not sign a petition to remove clothianidin from use. BUT I WOULD DO ANYTHING I CAN TO GET AN INDEPENDENT STUDY ON IT.


----------



## Pilgarlic56 (Aug 6, 2010)

Scrapfe said:


> IMHO until there is a huge amount of…
> S-C-I-E-N-T-I-F-I-C …evidence to the contrary, no action is needed or called for.


This is exactly opposite our very appropriate federal laws which lay the burden of proof on the producer. If they can't prove it's safe, it's not to be registered.

Go try to change that in law... and... by the way... good luck on that one.


----------



## humbee (Dec 12, 2010)

Bud Dingler said:


> your confusing the issue. the documented bee kills in germany and apparently canada all involve the chemical coming off the seed treatments during planting.
> 
> no one disputes that the raw chem is deadly to bees. the way its used its not supposed to expose bees to the raw chem because its used as a seed coating
> 
> ...


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

valleyman said:


> ... no one with an open mind can think that clothianidin will not kill bees...


In my first post I said Clothianidin definately would kill a bee and I hope we can agree that so will a BMW's grill.



valleyman said:


> ... I don't believe there has been enough independant research/studys done...


Nor do I, but independant is the key word.



valleyman said:


> ... Having said all this I agree with Scrapfe... the dairymen... use a for sure deadly pesticide on their cows, permethrin.


 Oh no Valley Man it can’t be true. Pyrethrum is made from dried chrysanthemum flowers, a natural organic substance. When one Googles organic insect control, why Pyrethrum jumps right up. Besides, aren’t Sunflowers, asters, daises, chrysanthemums and marigolds all in the same botanical family and loved by bees? Shoeless Joe, tell me it ain’t true! ...*It is true?*... Ah ha, now the truth has finally reared its ugly hideous head!

:ws

There in that organic garden, lurking like assassins behind the heirloom tomato plants, look its those evil marigolds that are killing the bees, HELP! HELP! HELP!

No offence meant and I hope none taken, but this screed has more scientific basis than currently is in the entire Clothianidin controversy.


----------



## greengecko (Dec 16, 2008)

Pyrethrum, pyrethrins, pyrethroid... confused or intentionally misleading?

:no: Originally pyrethrum WAS made by grinding dried chrysanthemum flowers into a powder. Today, pyrethrum is extracted with solvents and combined with a chemical synergist called piperonyl butoxide producing greater toxicity. Piperonyl butoxide is a possible carcinogen and a potential ground water contaminant.

Permethrin is one of a group of man-made insecticides developed to match or exceed the effectiveness of natural pyrethrum. Pyrethroids are a great example of how a chemical can be highly toxic even though it is based on a botanical source. Chemists have taken pyrethrum as a model and formed a whole group of poisons that have a structure similar to that of the natural compounds. Natural pyrethrum breaks down in as little as 12 hours, pyrethroids are long-lasting, sometimes remaining effective for more than 30 days.

Unfortunately, some marketers continue to claim that pyrethroid insecticides like permethrin are "made from chrysanthmum flowers" implying that they are "natural and safe". These claims are false, and if done intentionally to mislead the claims are unethical.


----------



## Delta Bay (Dec 4, 2009)

If there is no squawking going on is there any reason for the EPA to take a closer look at what could be going on or make changes? From looking at their web pages I would say that they are seeing a need for newer testing requirements. 
The only reason this is happening is because there is enough beekeepers having problems and concerns from the scientific community.




> *Pollinator Protection: Then & Now*
> 
> Our conventional approach to protecting pollinators when registering a pesticide has been to:
> 
> ...


http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/ecosystem/pollinator/then-now.html


Are any of you aware that a "Sticker" is not mandatory in the U.S.?




> The formulation of the pesticide clothianidin used to protect seed corn from corn root worm did not include a polymer seed coating known as a "sticker." This coating makes the pesticide product stick to the seed. Although the formulation used in the US also does not require a “sticker” on corn seed, it is typical practice to use “stickers” on corn seed in the US.


http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/cb/csb_page/updates/2008/bees-act.htm


----------



## greengecko (Dec 16, 2008)

It's probably a good time to repost the following information.

"This portal provides a method for reporting ecological incidents that are suspected or known to be related to pesticide exposures. Ecological incidents are when adverse field effects involve non-target entities such as: wildlife, birds, fish, shell fish, bees, plants, soil, and water."

National Pesticide Information Center Ecological Pesticide Incident Reporting Portal

Information from these reports can help the EPA identify bee kills associated with the use of a specific pesticide or active ingredient. The reports of pesticide incidents can help identify patterns that indicate a potential unreasonable adverse effect of a pesticide.

It would be helpful if every beekeeping organization posted a link to the portal on their website or somewhere in their publications.


----------



## JBJ (Jan 27, 2005)

http://www.panna.org/sites/default/files/Memo_Nov2010_Clothianidin.pdf

Here is a memo from the EPA that seems extremely relevant to the conversation. It has 101 pages so it is a bit of a read but it seems essential as the material is being used in more crops and increased acreage and the EPA's own scientists definitely have some deep concerns that seem to have not been taken into consideration.


----------



## Adam Foster Collins (Nov 4, 2009)

I think most of us have a bias somewhere, which causes us to enter a debate on one side. The tough thing is to override our own bias in order to remain open to really learning the answer. Openness begins with the admission that you don't actually know the answer already.

I don't know the answer to the question of Clothianidin and its effect on bees.

I like Mike Palmer's stance (post #12), which allows for that. It's an active stance; a constructive one that positions him in a way that allows him to be part of a constructive solution, rather than just steam and hot air based on partial knowledge and speculation.

Please let us know what you discover, Mike - if you're given that opportunity.

Cheers,

Adam


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

That's why I started the Thread, to get some perspective and wise counsel.

I like Mike. I wanna be like Mike.


----------



## valleyman (Nov 24, 2009)

Adam Foster Collins said:


> I think most of us have a bias somewhere, which causes us to enter a debate on one side. Please let us know what you discover, Mike - if you're given that opportunity.
> 
> I am not taking but one side on this issue. That is on the side of the bees and their survival.
> As I stated earlier anyone that doesn't think that clothianidin doesn't kill bees isn't reading the agreed upon facts with an open mind. Maybe my bias lies in the fact that I do not trust the politically controlled EPA. And definetly don't trust the profit driven Bayer Corp. or any other Corp. that is for profit or is politically manipulated.
> ...


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

greengecko said:


> ... Originally pyrethrum WAS made by grinding dried chrysanthemum flowers into a powder. Today, pyrethrum is extracted with solvents and combined with a chemical synergist called piperonyl butoxide producing greater toxicity...
> ... Natural pyrethrum breaks down in as little as 12 hours, pyrethroids are long-lasting, sometimes remaining effective for more than 30 days...



http://www.livingwithbugs.com/permethrin_pyrethrum.html
I am glad I was able to convince you to read the web sight above where you were able to click and paste the body of your reply. I used the same web sight to check the truth of my statements because I did not want to use a source that was in any way supportive of pesticides. This shows at least that I am able to think for myself, something I hope everyone else will start doing. 

Of course pyrethrum was originally made from dried chrysanthemum flowers, (Neapolitan Bonaparte used it to delouse his army), and the active ingredient in Clothianidin was originally extracted from tobacco. Solvents are used to extract soy bean oil, almond oil, sesame seed oil, peanut oil, cotton seed oil etc, and for all I know some olive oils as well. Then there is coffee which may or may not have the caffeine removed using solvents, or the recent thread on this forum about soy flower de-fatted with the help of solvents. 

Powerful solvents are not a great big bugger-bear to me. I used the most pervasive solvent known to science this morning to extract the gluten from my dried and ground oat meal and the caffeine and other flavors from my dried and ground coffee beans. Yep, good old h2o is the most prevalent and widely used solvent on Earth and likely makes up 80+ percent of my body weight.  You might say ..."I'm full of it"... water that is. 

Both of the chemicals discussed here have a common fault, they are unstable in sunlight, (so BTW is the flavor of dried, roasted, and ground coffee) requiring frequent and repeated applications, to effect control. This is why pyrethrum is still used in household pesticides, most peoples kitchens have a roof overhead, blocking out the pyrethrum destroying Sunlight, and roaches only crawl at night. So Bayer stabilized the pesticide in the presence of Sunlight and put it on the seed coat to forgo the necessity of broadcasting pesticides wholesale, or burning anymore scarce hydro-carbon based fossil fuel to make repeated trips across the fields, a good thing in my estimation.


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

valleyman said:


> ... Scrapfe, how many times have you ever seen bees working dead chrysanthemums...[?]...


I will freely admit that I never noted a honeybee working any dead flower much less dead chrysanthemums but I have seen millions? working a living close family member of mums, asters and I assume everyone else here has as well.

The really distressing thing is I may have to call in a hazmat team to cart away my Maw-Maw's family Bible, the old girl pressed the chrysanthemum my Paw-Paw gave her on their wedding day almost 100 years ago between the pages of her Bible and now I am worried...


----------



## Adam Foster Collins (Nov 4, 2009)

valleyman said:


> ...Maybe my bias lies in the fact that I do not trust the politically controlled EPA. And definitely don't trust the profit driven Bayer Corp. or any other Corp. that is for profit or is politically manipulated.
> 
> DO YOU?


No, I don't. 

But that is my bias - and my knee-jerk reaction to this type of discussion is to jump to the conclusion that anything made by a big corporation is suspect, and any chemical product is bad. If I'm not careful, I can get to raving and finger-pointing, and when I really think about it, I don't really know what's what. Everything I "know" has come from someone else's account - and that leaves what I have to talk about pretty far-removed from first hand knowledge and experience.

That's why I said what I said about Mike's post. I like to see a person who is "on the side of the bees and their survival", yet trying to keep an open mind and doing what he can to set a course of action to finding out the truth.



Adam


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

Adam Foster Collins said:


> ... I like to see a person who is "on the side of the bees... doing what he can to... find... out the truth.


This is what I am talking about, this is a good first step.:applause:


----------



## valleyman (Nov 24, 2009)

Scrapfe said:


> The really distressing thing is I may have to call in a hazmat team to cart away my Maw-Maw's family Bible, the old girl pressed the chrysanthemum my Paw-Paw gave her on their wedding day almost 100 years ago between the pages of her Bible and now I am worried...


Could have been what killed them.


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

valleyman said:


> Could have been what killed them.


Took it 96 years though.


----------



## greengecko (Dec 16, 2008)

Scrapfe said:


> Of course pyrethrum was originally made from dried chrysanthemum flowers, (Neapolitan Bonaparte used it to delouse his army), and the active ingredient in Clothianidin was originally extracted from tobacco.





Scrapfe said:


> The really distressing thing is I may have to call in a hazmat team to cart away my Maw-Maw's family Bible, the old girl pressed the chrysanthemum my Paw-Paw gave her on their wedding day almost 100 years ago between the pages of her Bible and now I am worried.



Today's Pyrethrins are not your "Maw-Maw's" dried chrysanthemum, as Clothianidin is not the tobacco extract.


----------



## valleyman (Nov 24, 2009)

Adam Foster Collins,
Does Canada allow clothianiddin to be used, or any other nicitinoid?


----------



## greengecko (Dec 16, 2008)

valleyman said:


> Does Canada allow clothianiddin to be used, or any other nicitinoid?


"On the 14th and 30th of May, 2003 Bayer CropScience AG received notification by the US and Canadian regulatory authorities of the registration of the insecticidal seed teatment product Poncho (active ingredient: clothianidin) in maize and canola."

Source: Bayer CropScience Press Release


"The PMRA concluded that it is highly probable that exposure to clothianidin caused the bee mortality in Ste-Martine. Even though it is not clear how the bees were exposed to clothianidin in this incident, this conclusion is supported by the fact that residues of clothianidin were found in dead bees, clothianidin is known to be highly toxic to bees and that clothianidin was not found in control bees which were collected from a healthy hive in another location."

Source: Evaluation of Pesticide Incident Report 2010-4374


"The PMRA concluded that it is highly probable that exposure to clothianidin caused the bee mortality in St-Dominique. Even though it is not clear how the bees were exposed to clothianidin in this incident, this conclusion is supported by the fact that clothianidin is known to be highly toxic to bees and was the only pesticide found in the dead bees."

Source: Evaluation of Pesticide Incident Report 2010-3391


"The PMRA concluded that it is highly probable that exposure to clothianidin and/or thiamethoxam caused the bee mortality in Coteau-du-Lac. Even though it is not clear how the bees were exposed to clothianidin and thiamethoxam in this incident, this conclusion is supported by the fact that clothianidin and thiamethoxam are known to be highly toxic to bees and these were the only pesticides found in the dead bees. In addition, no pesticide residues were found in control bees which were collected from a healthy hive in another location."

Source: Evaluation of Pesticide Incident Report 2010-3100


"Under the authority of the Pest Control Products Act, Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) has concluded that the addition of a new use on potatoes to the product label of Titan ST Insecticide, containing technical grade clothianidin, is acceptable."

Source: PMRA Proposed Maximum Residue Limit


For a complete list of maximum residue limits (MRLs) regulated see:

Health Canada's List of MRLs Regulated under the PCPA


----------



## lighto (Jul 27, 2010)

Baby corn. Bees Die from dew, that has been excreted from the leafs..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8Nsn4KvjwM&feature=related
hummmmm .


----------



## TWall (May 19, 2010)

lighto said:


> Baby corn. Bees Die from dew, that has been excreted from the leafs..
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8Nsn4KvjwM&feature=related
> hummmmm .


I guess I'll need to make sure my bees don't fly into Italian research greenhouses.

There is no doubt Clothianidin will kill bees if the consume it. The question is how much guttation from corn seedlings treated with clothianidin do bees consume? I don't think it is a significant risk to honeybee colonies at all. Do honeybees seek out guttation from corn as a source of moisture? I doubt it. In most areas in the spring there are going to be lots of water sources available to honeybees. And, I can't imagine why a field of corn seedlings would be attractive to honeybees.

I'm sure if you mixed some water with various residues cars and trucks have leaked onto the pavement and then fed that to honybees they would die too.

Tom


----------



## ChristopherA (Jul 20, 2010)

I would like to point out about the corn.

In our area it is planted in the spring and in summer, usually two crops. During the summer months it can be one of the limit areas to get water in large quantities.

The past few years have been terrible for rain fall, creeks and ponds have dried up, large ones. A lot of water source for a lot of animals and insects come from morning dew.

I want to remind different areas have different times and ways things are planted.


----------



## TWall (May 19, 2010)

ChristopherA said:


> The past few years have been terrible for rain fall, creeks and ponds have dried up, large ones. A lot of water source for a lot of animals and insects come from morning dew.
> 
> I want to remind different areas have different times and ways things are planted.


Morning dew is not what was being fed to the bees in the video and dew from the surface of a corn plant is not very likely to have any clothianidin in it.

Guttation and dew are two completely different things. Guttation is produced by plants when the internal water pressure is high enough to force a droplet of water out of the hydathode, pore, on the leaf. The surface of the leaf will be dry. When dew condenses on plant leaves the entire leaf surface is wet. There may, or may not, be dropletts of water/dew along the leaf margin at places. It is unlikey any clothianidin will leach out of the plant into the dew.

Another factor to consider is the dose makes the poison. There is a limited amout on clothianidin applied to the corn seed. As the corn plant grows the clothianidin gets diluted as the mass of the corn plant increases. The concentration of clothianidin in plant tissues will decrease, especially is some has been lost due to guttation.

The fact that clothianidin is applied to corn seed, clothianidin can kill bees and bees are kept in/near corn fields does mean that clothianidin is killing bees. I don't believe this, clothianidin, is a serious threat to bees. I fear that resources are being wasted trying to ban something that is a minor threat to bees at best that could be utilized on more important issues/threats. Kind of like fiddling while Rome burns.

Tom


----------



## lighto (Jul 27, 2010)

IF,, Pest-icides ,, Do Not kill Bugs (Bee's) , Then WHY ,, are we using them ?
Then SHOW Us Proof , That this does Not Kill Bee's . That We can move on.


----------



## greengecko (Dec 16, 2008)

TWall said:


> Another factor to consider is the dose makes the poison. There is a limited amout on clothianidin applied to the corn seed. As the corn plant grows the clothianidin gets diluted as the mass of the corn plant increases. The concentration of clothianidin in plant tissues will decrease, especially is some has been lost due to guttation.


"The concentration of neonicotinoids in guttation drops can be near those of active ingredients commonly applied in field sprays for pest control, or even higher. When bees consume guttation drops, collected from plants grown from neonicotinoid-coated seeds, they encounter death within few minutes."

Source: Translocation of Neonicotinoid Insecticides from Coated Seeds to Seedling Guttation Drops: A Novel Way of Intoxication for Bees - Girolami et al, 2009


----------



## lighto (Jul 27, 2010)

If the Immune is attacked , How does Aids work? how much time before you go ? The bee's would have a much shorter time, till death. HOW DO YOU TRACE AN AIDS DEATH ???
http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/factsheets/clothianidin.pdf
However, due to evidence of effects on the rat immune 
system and that juvenile rats appear to be more susceptible to these effects, and due to the lack of 
a developmental immunotoxicity study


----------



## TWall (May 19, 2010)

lighto said:


> IF,, Pest-icides ,, Do Not kill Bugs (Bee's) , Then WHY ,, are we using them ?
> Then SHOW Us Proof , That this does Not Kill Bee's . That We can move on.


Can you show proof that bees are ingestion clothianidin? If they don't ingest it, it won't kill them.

Tom


----------



## TWall (May 19, 2010)

greengecko said:


> "The concentration of neonicotinoids in guttation drops can be near those of active ingredients commonly applied in field sprays for pest control, or even higher. When bees consume guttation drops, collected from plants grown from neonicotinoid-coated seeds, they encounter death within few minutes."
> 
> Source: Translocation of Neonicotinoid Insecticides from Coated Seeds to Seedling Guttation Drops: A Novel Way of Intoxication for Bees - Girolami et al, 2009


Interesting study. I just skimmed it. It appears that the oldest plants used/sampled were 3 weeks old. After that the authors mentioned guttation decreases.

They also made a reference to flowers not being open in March so bees would be attracted to corn seedlings. I'm not sure why they made that assumption. 

If seed coatings of neonicotinoids were a major threat to honeybee colonies there would be very few colonies in the midwest. I wonder what percentage of colonies are within two miles of a corn field? I bet you would be hard pressed to find a location in Mclean Co. IL that wasn't within 2 miles of a corn field. Maybe downtown Bloomington. It has been a while since I've been there.

Tom


----------



## lighto (Jul 27, 2010)

TWall said:


> Can you show proof that bees are ingestion clothianidin? If they don't ingest it, it won't kill them.
> 
> Tom


 This about Bee pollinator's , doing what they do Best ... Whats your angle, Do you have a invested interest ? By the way, I am here for the Bee's !


----------



## lighto (Jul 27, 2010)

Bee's feeding on corn pollen and corn stock.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgeXr5_-RVU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcNloaKXJqs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJeEYC7oRW8


----------



## Countryboy (Feb 15, 2009)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgeXr5_-RVU The corn variety is not identified, but it appears to be sweet corn growing in a garden, and not field corn that gets treated with Poncho.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcNloaKXJqs This video is in GERMANY. Who knows what variety of corn is being grown. The video does now show enough to tell if this is a crop field or a garden. However, if you look at the leaf below, you will see aphid damage. It is very possible the bee is collecting honeydew. The video uploader comments that there was no visible damage to the corn, even though anyone watching can clearly see aphid damage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJeEYC7oRW8 This is a video of bees working SILVER QUEEN corn pollen. Silver Queen is NOT the corn that farmers grow to feed livestock. Silver Queen is SWEET CORN. Not only is is sweet corn, which is a small percentage of corn acres in America, it is white sweet corn, which is much rarer than the standard yellow sweet corn. 

Try posting some videos of bees working corn that has been treated with clothianidin, aka Poncho.


----------



## Bud Dingler (Feb 8, 2008)

At the peak of the CCD mania in 06/07 that bogus CCD Map that was circulated was mostly blank in the Corn Belt. 

I call that map bogus cause all it took to have the state lit up for CCD was a beekeeper who lived in that state reporting his bees had CCD while in CA waiting for almonds. 

There are no federal EPA complaints filed by beekeepers claiming lost bees to Clothiandin and previous posters are right that in the midwest most of us have thousands of colonies near corn. Corn gives off no nectar and the pollen is not very nuitricious and really a last resort for honeybees. 

This whole story is hype and BS trumped up for what reason I don't know. It would appear that besides a few isolated reports of seed coatings coming off during planting that there is no evidence of this chemical causing any widespread bee losses. 

Banning neonics won't make one bit of difference to beekeepers across the USA except they may be exposed to worse organophosphate applications.

Mites still kill more colonies and successful beekeepers know that well or they would be out of business.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

CCD only accounts for a fraction of the 30% or more dead colonies reported. What killed the majority? If we could figure that out and eliminate it, CCD wouldn't amount to much. IMO.

Instead of banning clothianidin, maybe we should be lobbying for repeal of crop subsidies, especially on corn. If corn prices and ethanol production isn't enuf incentive to plant corn, I don't know what is. Not that I want to start a war w/in the ag industries.


----------



## lighto (Jul 27, 2010)

I Think this article provides enough proof.. That through time, Everyone will know!
Dr Pettis and his team found that increased disease infection happened even when the levels of the insecticide were so tiny that they could not subsequently be detected in the bees, although the researchers knew that they had been dosed with it.
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/exclusive-bees-facing-a-poisoned-spring-2189267.html


----------



## jonathan (Nov 3, 2009)

lighto said:


> I Think this article provides enough proof..l[/url]


I will be amazed if the 'proof' is provided by a journalist rather than a team of researchers!


The Pettis study was carried out two years ago and has not been accepted for publication which suggests a design flaw.

The problem with this type of lab study looking for sublethal effects of neonicotinoids in combination with nosema or some other pathogen is that it is hard to find a valid control group with similar stress - a stress not caused by pesticide exposure.

Keeping caged bees in a lab inherently stresses the bee so how do you know that any increased effect with nosema is caused by stress due to sublethal exposure to neonicotinoids or general stress leading to reduced resistance to nosema.

As far as I know, there is not a single field study which shows that neonicotinoids are causing current bee problems.


----------



## greengecko (Dec 16, 2008)

Michael Palmer said:


> While neonics scare me, I have to agree with scrapfe. I'm one of those that keep bees in a sea...or desert if you will...of clothianidin treated corn and soy. Many of my apiaries are located on dairy farms.


Maybe not all of the corn and soy in your area is clothianidin treated. There are other methods.

"Nevertheless, seed treatments did not affect forage quality or calculated milk yields so our study indicates that clothianidin seed treatment is not justified when corn follows soybeans [Glycine max L. (Merr)] in the northeastern USA."

Source: Clothianidin Seed Treatments Inconsistently Affect Corn Forage Yield When following Soybean, Agronomy Journal


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

*Re: ?Clothianidin*



greengecko said:


> ... When bees consume guttation drops, collected from plants grown from neonicotinoid-coated seeds, they encounter death within few minutes....


WOW, that there is a pretty powerful statement, partner... but I am glad you’re giving credit now to the sources you quote. Then it should be no problemo for you and me to be outstanding in our field, (corn field that is) and for us to see honeybees dropping at our feet like flies. (Sorry I feel a little punny today.)

Yet do you,(?) or do you not,(?) freely admit that even with all the hype and hysteria over Clothianidin treated corn seeds, no one has ever "observed" in a natural setting a single honeybee death, one case of honeybee dementia, or a single case of honeybee contact dermatitis resulting from honeybees consuming, collecting, or 'beeing' in contact with either rain water, dew, fog, corn pollen, green corn leaf aphid excretions, and corn gluttation droplets on the leaves, silks, whorls, ears, tassels, roots or fodder, of Clothianidin treated maize? As far as my own poor feeble attempts go I haven't, and I can find no verifiable, or repeatable ill effects reported either.

This Clothianidin brew ha-ha is starting to sound more and more like Morgellon's Syndrome. It is true only because the persons who believes it, believes it. Heck, racist believe they are superior to other races but that isn't proof. I’m not about to adopt the though pattern of a racist and neither should anyone else to placate any vocal fringe group, (which BTW, the KKK is). At that rate, we will all soon be believing in the Easter Bunny, that green cheese moon myth thingy, and lynching people again. You know, when one thinks about it long and hard, some of the ban Clothianidin debate sounds like a lynch mob as well.


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

lighto said:


> ... disease infection happened... when ...levels of the insecticide were so tiny that they could not... be detected...


Yep, That sounds like Morgellon's Syndrome to me.


----------



## greengecko (Dec 16, 2008)

The world has entered the uncharted waters of systemic solutions to insect management. The ability to innovate insecticidal toxins far outpaces the ability to understand the consequences.

The ecological impact on bees is just the tip of the systemic pesticide iceberg. Today millions of acres of crops are grown and harvested at a stage when relatively high levels of toxins remain throughout the plant tissues. Residues of systemic pesticides cannot be washed from the surface of our foods. Sadly, the nature of systemic pesticides is that they become the food we eat.

The public is aloofly unaware of the true intensity of pesticide use. They presume that the EPA is taking whatever steps are needed to protect non-target organisms like birds, fish, and bees. But in the real world of pesticide regulation, birds, fish and bees are expendable. The EPA has never denied an application for a new pesticide nor banned a currently registered product purely because of an adverse impact on bees. That is not likely to change.

Not to deflate egos but the postings of this forum have very little impact on its own members, let alone the world. Doubters gonna doubt, believers gonna believe and dreamers gonna dream.

In the words of Yeats,

I WILL arise and go now, and go to Innisfree,
And a small cabin build there, of clay and wattles made:
Nine bean-rows will I have there, a hive for the honey-bee,
And live alone in the bee-loud glade.

And I shall have some peace there, for peace comes dropping slow,
Dropping from the veils of the mourning to where the cricket sings;
There midnight's all a glimmer, and noon a purple glow,
And evening full of the linnet's wings.

I will arise and go now, for always night and day
I hear lake water lapping with low sounds by the shore;
While I stand on the roadway, or on the pavements grey,
I hear it in the deep heart's core.


----------



## borderbeeman (Dec 16, 2010)

*Leaked document shows EPA allowed bee-toxic pesticide despite own scientists’ red flags*
*http://www.grist.org/article/food-2010-12-10-leaked-documents-show-epa-allowed-bee-toxic-pesticide-*

This is what the EPA's own scientists wrote about Clothianidin:

"Now we get to the leaked memo [PDF]. It is dated Nov. 2nd 2010
It relates to Bayer's efforts to expand clothianidin's approved use into cotton and mustard. Authored by two scientists in the EPA's Environmental Fate and Effects Division -- *Ecologist Joseph DeCant* and *Chemist Michael Barrett* -- the memo expresses grave concern about clothianidin's effect on honeybees:
*



"Clothianidin's major risk concern is to nontarget insects (that is, honey bees). Clothianidin is a neonicotinoid insecticide that is both persistent and systemic. Acute toxicity studies to honey bees show that clothianidin is highly toxic on both a contact and an oral basis. Although EFED does not conduct ... *risk assessments on non-target insects, information from standard tests and field studies, as well as incident reports involving other neonicotinoids insecticides (e.g., imidacloprid) suggest the potential for long term toxic risk to honey bees and other beneficial insects."

Click to expand...

*


----------



## valleyman (Nov 24, 2009)

gecco,
you may as well give up, no tree hugger am I but I can see the hand writing on the wall. I seriously doubt if all the detracters here are beekeepers. They sound more like Bayer employees or at very least grain farmers. Bye all!!


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

sqkcrk said:


> ... If ...ethanol production isn't enuf incentive to plant corn, I don't know what is...


You do realize, do you not, that corn ethanol is a federally mandated ingredient in gasoline, (10% I think) put there because of ethanol’s oxygen content to reduce or eliminate the amount of global cooling pollutants expelled from the exhaust of cars and thus present in acid rain? Also do you know that while honeys from other parts of the world find ready markets here, Brazilian ethanol if imported into the United States is heavily taxed. 

Yet we still over incentive our corn growers into planting more and more corn at the expense of the food budget of Americans from sea to shinning sea. 

Until every crop from alfalfa to zucchini pays its own way, trying to ban clothianidin is stupid, we don't even know if we need it or not at this time.


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

Bud Dingler said:


> At the peak of the CCD mania ... that ...CCD Map... was ...blank in the Corn Belt... all it took to have [your] state lit up for CCD was a beekeeper ...in that state reporting his bees had CCD while in CA waiting for almonds...


Yep, sounds like Morgellon's Syndrome to me.



Bud Dingler said:


> ... Banning neonics won't make one bit of difference to beekeepers... except they may be exposed to worse organophosphate applications...


What I been trying to say.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Scrapfe said:


> You do realize, do you not, that corn ethanol is a federally mandated ingredient in gasoline, (10% I think) put there because of ethanol’s oxygen content to reduce or eliminate the amount of global cooling pollutants expelled from the exhaust of cars and thus present in acid rain?


I couldn't have said it the way you did, but somewhere in my brain I knew that. Now there is talk about 15% ethanol.

I beliewve that I saw 85% ethanol/15% gasoline in SC. Can engines really run on that stuff?


----------



## HVH (Feb 20, 2008)

I have a little different take on this subject. A bunch of tree huggers from around the world have blown much of this topic way out of proportion based on hyperbole while the subject is really not getting nearly enough attention by the non-tree hugger crowd. We really do need to know more about the sublethal and residual effects of neonics without all the screaming in the background. Like so many other subjects - we will have to wait and see. I am completely withholding judgement because there is a lack of critical data. If I had to make a guess, however, I would lean toward neonics playing some part in the decline of honeybee health along with many other species. The fact that so many other species seem to be on the decline suggests to me that not all can be attributed to pathogenic etiologies because species barriers are not that easily broken. Non pathogenic etiologies could include pesticides, monocultural practices, urban sprawl, etc. but just about everything that can be listed has been with us long before the decline. So what is new that is not a pathogen?


----------



## Scrapfe (Jul 25, 2008)

lighto said:


> IF,, Pest-icides... Do Not kill... (Bee's)... Then SHOW Us Proof... [they do not kill bees]...


Mr. Palmer keeps millions of honeybees, many of them on dairy farms as by his own statement. I can tell you and Mr. Palmer as well that dairy farmers spray or drench their cows, and the cows living quarters with powerful insecticides intended to kill various biting flies, face flies, horn flies, lice, fleas, and ticks etc. that pester dairy cows or spread diseases like pinkeye. I can also assure you both that if a honeybee flew through the pesticide stream or fog as it was 'beeing' applied to the cow or to her living quarters, that that bee would drop to the ground like the proverbial fly these pesticides are intended to control. 

Happily, honeybees do not collect pollen or nectar from the bodies or persons of cows and thus do not come into contact with these insecticides, just like honeybees do not shower or bathe in soapy water like you and I do. Soap and water mixed and then agitated into a frothy lather will kill bees faster than most chemical insecticides when sprayed no the bee. In fact, soap and water seems to bee the insecticide of choice when dealing with Africanized honeybee colonies. 

May I ask now many reading this post spray or treat their dogs and cats for fleas? If you do so, you are employing an insecticide. I don't know... but I suspect... that Hartz Flea & Tick Dip will kill every honeybee hiding in Rover's and Fluffy's coat. Besides, I can't prove negatives, only positives. If someone here will supply the bees, I can scientifically prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that a 2X4 will kill bees. But neither you nor I can prove a 2X4 will not.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Scrapfe said:


> Happily, honeybees do not collect pollen or nectar from the bodies or persons of cows and thus do not come into contact with these insecticides


Have you ever seen honey bees gather manure from the gutter in a dairy barn? Fly-Tox and bees don't mix.


----------



## dcross (Jan 20, 2003)

Michael Palmer said:


> Have you ever seen honey bees gather manure from the gutter in a dairy barn? Fly-Tox and bees don't mix.


And in the ground feed for a day or two in spring.

The feds do not mandate ethanol in gas, or my local Cenex is thumbing it's nose at em.


----------

