# Large pesticide bee-kill in minnesota



## borderbeeman

Steve Ellis serves as Secretary of the *National HoneyBee Advisory Board and* is a large scale bee-farmer
He placed 1,312 of his hives Minnesota in his normal bee-yard territory. A nearby farm planted corn a few days later and the dust - presumably clothianidin (used on 90%+ of American corn as seed treatment) blew around and contaminated willows and other plants the bees were foraging on. The kill started on May 7th and Steve is still waiting results of tests. He is certain it was the neonics in the corn planted dust.

I asked him how many of the 1,312 hives were affected and he said 'all of them'. 

Doesn't yet know ho many of the contaminated hives will collapse completely but he says it is already a 'massive depopulation' event. He wrote:



> "1,312 hives were on that location, all were affected. Impossible to estimate % of population of each hive killed as yet. Suffice to say it was a severe depopulation event."



From: Steve Ellis 
Date: 15 May 2013 22:57:29 GMT+01:00


Dear All,

Below is a video link to a short You Tube piece which my newly hired bee keeper in training-photographer spliced together, showing the bee injury associated with corn planting of neo nics.

*http://youtu.be/xxXXaILuK5s*

The Minnesota Dept of Agriculture, Bayer, Bee Informed Partnership, and Penn State are all currently working on getting samples analyzed for chemical residues.

Picture is worth a thousand words. James did a nice job of filming and editing. Voice is mine.

Steve Ellis

National Honey bee Advisory Board website is here:

http://www.nhbab.com/members.html


NHBAB Board Members for 2012

Bret Adee, Co-Chair Dave Hackenberg

Bruce, SD Lewisberg, PA


*Steve Ellis, Secretary* Jim Frazier, Scientific Advisor

Barrett, MN Penn State University PA

AHPA MEMBERS ABF MEMBERS


Jeff Anderson Jim Doan

Eagle Bend, MN Hamlin, NY


Rick Smith David Mendes 

Yuma, AZ N. Fort Mylers, FL


Randy Verhoek Tim Tucker

Bismarck ND Niotaze, KS

You can email any member of the NHBAB via a form on that web page.


----------



## LSPender

Just posting to keep this up, hope we get follow up info on results of testing


----------



## barberberryfarm

That is just sad. Hopefully your work along with others will finally help resolve this neonics issue.


----------



## BigDawg

Even if test results aren't "conclusive," I would really hope that the US will follow the EU and place a temporary ban on these substances until more research can be done. Given Steve's credentials and the video documentation of the incident, this is a game-changer IMHO......


----------



## BlueDiamond

BigDawg said:


> Given Steve's credentials and the video documentation of the incident, this is a game-changer IMHO......


Steve made a big deal about an alledged planter dust kill 12 months ago: http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nightly-news/47379683#47379683 There was a follow up investigation back then, so why havn't we been told about the results? Is it because neonics were not detected in the dying bees?

And if Steve sincerely believes planter dust killed his bees last year, why did he put them in harms way again this year? Why didn't he talk to his corn farmer neighbors to find out when they would be planting this year so he could move his bees away from the fields? Why didn't Steve shoot video and even a photo of his neighbors planting this past season to document alot of dust was being kicked up? Normally there is not much dust kicked up unless the soil is dry and the wind is blowing rather strongly. Why is Steve the only beekeeper in that region of Minnesota alledging planter dust kills?


----------



## BigDawg

http://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/research/2012/120111KrupkeBees.html

"Analyses of bees found dead in and around hives from several apiaries over two years in Indiana showed the presence of neonicotinoid insecticides, which are commonly used to coat corn and soybean seeds before planting. The research showed that those insecticides were present at high concentrations in waste talc that is exhausted from farm machinery during planting.

The insecticides clothianidin and thiamethoxam were also consistently found at low levels in soil - up to two years after treated seed was planted - on nearby dandelion flowers and in corn pollen gathered by the bees, according to the findings released in the journal PLoS One this month.

"We know that these insecticides are highly toxic to bees; we found them in each sample of dead and dying bees," said Christian Krupke, associate professor of entomology and a co-author of the findings."


----------



## BigDawg

http://www.extension.org/pages/65034/neonicotinoid-seed-treatments-and-honey-bee-health

"In the spring of 2010 we became aware of it when we saw dead bees in front of most of the Purdue bee hives during the week that corn was being planted nearby. Conditions were hot (85°F), dry and windy and clouds of dust were kicked up by the planters – a common sight throughout the Midwest in early spring. We tested bees that were dying in front of hives near agricultural fields and also healthy hives. The dead bees had clothianidin and several other seed treatment chemicals in or on their bodies. Most of the bees that were dying were actually the nurse bees that may have consumed pollen that was being collected from dandelions and other flowering plants in the area. We saw the characteristic color of dandelion pollen on most of the foragers. Pollen collected by returning foragers and pollen sampled from the cells of those hives had about 10 times the level of clothianidin and thiamethoxam as compared to that detected in the dead bees."


----------



## BlueDiamond

BigDawg said:


> http://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/research/2012/120111KrupkeBees.html


Purdue did not test Steve Ellis's bees. But someone did and so Steve already knows the results. Why is Steve not openly and eagerly sharing those results?


----------



## BigDawg

You've stated in several threads now that neonicotinoids applied to seed can't be killing bees because the concentration isn't high enough. Above are two studies that clearly demonstrate your assertion is wrong.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

Such pictures make me real sick, because it is so unnecessary. It has been long known but still pictures like these coming in from all over the World. 

It has been known since 1999, so for *14 years* now, that the dust of neonic seed treated corn contaminates the nearby environment. In 1999 first poisonings were observed nearby corn fields in Italy. 

The university of Udine, Italy, published their first study in 2003, studying the topic from year 2000 on. Manufacturer involved. Title: Risk of environmental contamination by the active ingredient imidacloprid used for corn seed dressing. 

I cite: 
“corn sowing must be considered a potentially dangerous operation in terms of general environmental pollution. It is possible that the spread of the active ingredient in the environment during sowing operations could cause serious damage in bee colonies”

Next publication in 2006: Presence of imidacloprid on vegetation near corn fields sown with Gaucho® dressed seeds 
Citation: “The investigation showed that Gaucho dressed corn seeds during sowing operations can release imidacloprid into the environment, and therefore bees and wild pollinator insects could be exposed to the insecticide molecule. Plants could accumulate the active ingredient released during different sowing operations in the same area and become polluted for a time depending on the length of the sowing period. The same problem could be extended to other pesticides, at present or in the future, used in seed dressing”.

We all know the symptoms very well.





































All the combs are toxic waste. You need to throw away all the pollen/bee bread combs or the colonies will continue to shrink. Feed clean pollen patties. At a certain stage of poisoning you need to throw away all the combs and do shake downs.









Especially watch the corn flowering. Bees collect the pollen and you get a second hit. Bees don't recover well from this and die until or during winter in great numbers.



















Guttation water is a problem, too. Bees go for the dew drops in the morning and get poisoned. See: http://www.mieliditalia.it/download/moriaapi.wmv
Try to provide a fresh and attractive water source.

Best is to move the bees off this site and generally avoid any corn or other neonic treated farmland if possible.


----------



## jonathan

There is abundant evidence that planter dust during seed drilling can be a problem for bees.
The issue here is control and following best practice as it is only a problem under certain conditions with certain types of planter.

There is little or no evidence that guttation droplets are a problem.
Girolami fed guttation droplets with high levels of neonicotinoid to bees in the lab and not surprisingly they died - but it is not even certain that guttation water is used by bees in the field other than on rare occasions.


----------



## BlueDiamond

Planter dust is a once a year potential bee exposure problem during dry and windy conditions
and is largely mitigable: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4VKaaq70Yc Smart beekeepers will follow that mitigation advice. Of course, if one is a lawsuit settlement money seeking beekeeper then they won't follow that planter dust avoidance advice. 

Bees do not normally collect pollen from field corn so there is no significant neonic exposure there. And bees do not normally drink guttation water droplets so there is no significant exposure there either. Therefore banning neonic seed treatments will not help the health of midwestern bees in any significant way. Banning could potentially have a net detrimental effect if farmers are forced to clear more land where wildflowers currently grow in order to expand crop acreages to make up for the yield loss caused by the banning of neonics.


----------



## gmcharlie

Glad to see someone point out the obvious also.....

No one in the world says neonic are not pesticides, Don't make things up. And yes planter dust can be a issue.. but any RESPOSIBLE bee owner knows this. Looking at steves video, I was alarmed that ANYONE let alone a "professional" would put a full yard like that next to unplanted ground without knowing what is going on. 
This looked to me to be another example on a large scale of Piss poor beekeeping.

If I dump sevin dust in my hives bees will die...
Any pollinator here spends their lives looking out for the spraying of pesticides.... in apples. melons. nuts and obviously corn planting also.
WE as beekeepers can not REASONABLY expect the world to stop everything that harms our bees. what we need to do is be judicious. I would no more put my bees in unplanted corn, than let my dog drink antifreeze, or my kids into the poisens under the sink.....

Neonic seed coatings eliminate the need for at least 2 chemical sprayings for insects... I will take that trade EVERY day of the year.


----------



## camero7

> Neonic seed coatings eliminate the need for at least 2 chemical sprayings for insects... I will take that trade EVERY day of the year.


:thumbsup:


----------



## WCMN

It's not only Steve with problems.
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2013/05/16/minn-farmer-blames-pesticides-for-big-bee-die-off/


Randy


----------



## melliferal

When I re-start next year, I wouldn't dream of placing any colonies adjacent to corn field - or any single-crop field, let alone completely surrounded by them on all sides; I just really don't understand why a beekeeper would purposefully do that. Even if the specific pesticides a farmer uses on Crop X aren't a problem for whatever reason, surely nothing but corn (or whichever) pollen has still gotta be a pretty lousy diet for a bee; and what are they supposed to eat when the crop is done?

The news article says this place was the guy's "normal bee yard territory". That's a little vague really, but if it's meant that it's his normal bee yard period, did he have a significant kill last year at this time? If he did, why on Earth is he still keeping bees there? If not, has he tried to find out whether the corn farmers are using something new this year that killed his bees where last year's chemicals did not? Does he have any kind of rapport with them?


----------



## cerezha

melliferal said:


> ...The news article says this place was the guy's "normal bee yard territory". That's a little vague really, but if it's meant that it's his normal bee yard period, did he have a significant kill last year at this time? If he did, why on Earth is he still keeping bees there? ...


 Your logic is corrupted! If I have land and I devote this land to keep bees - this is my rights! If somebody grow corn next to my property - it is fine as long as dust or other elements from THAT territory pollute MY territory. Do you understand? You suggest nonsense - if I have bees in Santa Monica, you suggest that if somebody emits pollution which landed on my property, than - I have to move away from my property? This is crazy! Bees as well as birds and aircraft have right to fly anywhere as long as they do not create a nuisance. At the same time, it is not OK to purposely emit pollution, which contaminates my property. One business should not affect another.


----------



## gmcharlie

cerezha said:


> Your logic is corrupted! If I have land and I devote this land to keep bees - this is my rights! If somebody grow corn next to my property - it is fine as long as dust or other elements from THAT territory pollute MY territory. Do you understand? You suggest nonsense - if I have bees in Santa Monica, you suggest that if somebody emits pollution which landed on my property, than - I have to move away from my property? This is crazy! Bees as well as birds and aircraft have right to fly anywhere as long as they do not create nuisance. At the same time, it is not OK to purposely emit pollution, which contaminates my property. One business should not affect another.


By the same logic if you fart, the neighbors should be able to sue and shut you down......
Working within normal good neighbor policies should be a standard........ in the mean time, I suggest some of us hold our breath so as not to offend the neighbors....


----------



## cerezha

gmcharlie said:


> By the same logic if you fart, the neighbors should be able to sue and shut you down...


 This why we have the law! If it is proven, that my bee creates a nuisance to the neighbor - than yes, my exact bee(s), who caused the problem should be punished, it is fair. But on the same note, if neighbor decided to do a massive renovation on his site and dust from his activity contaminates my precious book-collection (for instance) I will sue him for my property damage. Mitigation of the dust is a responsibility of the "creator". I do not know, I guess, many people who supported contaminated dust are living on another planet (different from mine), because, in our city, developer must obtain a permit not only from the city but also from neighbors to do the job, which involves heavy equipment, excessive dust, noise etc. They actually have to present the plan, how they mitigate the issues, which needs to be approved by the City. In Russia (not US ), one guy paid a few million $$ compensation to the owner of rare religious books - for the dust. Apparently, dust from renovation affected the books


----------



## melliferal

cerezha said:


> Your logic is corrupted! If I have land and I devote this land to keep bees - this is my rights! If somebody grow corn next to my property - it is fine as long as dust or other elements from THAT territory pollute MY territory. Do you understand? You suggest nonsense - if I have bees in Santa Monica, you suggest that if somebody emits pollution which landed on my property, than - I have to move away from my property? This is crazy!


Well no, you don't "have" to. Neither does that guy; he's free to stay there every year and let his bees die and then complain.

But it's not a simple property dispute. If the bees leave your property and get poisoned on someone else's land, you can't straight out call that a violation of your rights. It's not your fault; but he also didn't ask your bees to come forage from his corn, and telling him what he can't do with his corn on his own property is just as crazy.

It's complicated. And it will take many years to "resolve", and the resolution might not be in your bees' favor - and in the mean time your bees will keep getting killed. No matter who is "right", the bees will still die. So yes, I would move. I would rather have living bees than be right with a bunch of dead bees. You pick your battles.


----------



## BlueDiamond

WCMN said:


> It's not only Steve with problems.
> http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2013/05/16/minn-farmer-blames-pesticides-for-big-bee-die-off/


Steve Ellis and Rand Honl - out of hundreds of beekeepers in southern Minnesota. Testing of sick and dying bees in Minnesota was conducted last Spring. Why no follow up reports about the test results? Why aren't the beekeepers who think neonics are to blame for last years kills eager and willing to tell us about the results of last year's testing? Could it be because the testing detected beekeeper applied chemicals?


----------



## WLC

While you can't prove cause and effect in Honeybee field trials, you can most certainly prove translocation. Steve and Randi need to look to some of the Italian dust trap experimental designs.

They may not be able to prove that the dust killed their bees. However, they can prove that the pesticide went off target.

That's a BIG no-no.


----------



## gmcharlie

cerezha said:


> This why we have the law! If it is proven, that my bee creates a nuisance to the neighbor - than yes, my exact bee(s), who caused the problem should be punished, it is fair. But on the same note, if neighbor decided to do a massive renovation on his site and dust from his activity contaminates my precious book-collection (for instance) I will sue him for my property damage. Mitigation of the dust is a responsibility of the "creator". I do not know, I guess, many people who supported contaminated dust are living on another planet (different from mine), because, in our city, developer must obtain a permit not only from the city but also from neighbors to do the job, which involves heavy equipment, excessive dust, noise etc. They actually have to present the plan, how they mitigate the issues, which needs to be approved by the City. In Russia (not US ), one guy paid a few million $$ compensation to the owner of rare religious books - for the dust. Apparently, dust from renovation affected the books


In the USA we have zoning laws.... and that would be AG zoned which means farming and its dust and by products are normal...... planting dust next to a cornfield is as normal as can bee........and a normal sane responsible person would recognized that


----------



## BlueDiamond

WLC said:


> While you can't prove cause and effect in Honeybee field trials, you can most certainly prove translocation. Steve and Randi need to look to some of the Italian dust trap experimental designsThey may not be able to prove that the dust killed their bees. However, they can prove that the pesticide went off target. That's a BIG no-no.


None of that is relevant to my question about why the results of last year's pesticide residue testing of Steve Ellis's and others dying bees in Minnesota has not made public? Makes one wonder if the results proved embarrassing in some ways?


----------



## WLC

Coumaphos and fluvalinate? The entire US beeswax supply is contaminated with it.
We both know that there haven't been any successful Honeybee pesticide poisoning suits here because you can't control for environmental factors (cause and effect) in Honeybee field trials.

They bring back anything and everything into the hive from anywhere, and then there's the contamination by treatments as well as a host of pest, parasites and pathogens.

So, while I might not be answering your question, I am giving Steve a heads up on how to prove off-target, environmental pesticide contamination from abraded seed dust.

The Italians developed the experimental design.

As we all know, it was very effective. :applause:


----------



## cerezha

melliferal said:


> ... If the bees leave your property and get poisoned on someone else's land, you can't straight out call that a violation of your rights. ...


 I agree with this, but I was talking about the dust of chemicals, which comes to MY property and contaminates my property, bees whatever. I find it disturbing that people feel it is OK to generate a chemical dust, which is landing on other properties. It is not even about bees - it is a public health issue - that somebody could generate chemical dust and other people should breath it.


----------



## WLC

Use dust traps on your property. Forget about trying to prove that it's poisoning your bees.

Prove that poisoned dust is contaminating your property due to a product defect.

That's actionable.


----------



## cerezha

BlueDiamond said:


> ... Makes one wonder if the results proved embarrassing in some ways?


 If person is biased (in any direction) the "results" are unimportant because the person already made a decision. There are numerous examples of such behavior at beesource when people disregard scientific data just because they do not feel, it is "proper" data. As a scientist, I stopped my attempt to provide opinion based on "data" (or reason) because people (sorry, nothing personal) are so ignorant and biased... It is just wasting my resources 

If data show poisoning - there are plenty of people at beesource who "knows better" that it was bad data (or some other reason to disregard), they needed the FACT! People, who really interested, will find information. People, who ignorant - will continue to be. All facts are already published and accumulation of data against chemicals on bees will continue (independently from YOUR opinion)


----------



## cerezha

gmcharlie said:


> ... farming and its dust and by products are normal...... planting dust next to a cornfield is as normal as can bee........and a normal sane responsible person would recognized that


 Chemical dust from regulated chemical? Apparently, you are not exactly right: in March 2013, the US EPA was sued by a coalition of beekeepers ... to sow the seeds which apparently blew clothianidin-laden dust off the seeds ... I got it from Wiki, but you could find more on the Internet.


----------



## Barry

Where are we going with this discussion? Do you plan to go file a lawsuit against your framer neighbor? I can't control any farmer who farms around me. I can control where my bees are. As beekeepers, the message here is, take care where you keep your bees. If that doesn't do it for you, go sue someone.


----------



## melliferal

cerezha said:


> I agree with this, but I was talking about the dust of chemicals, which comes to MY property and contaminates my property, bees whatever. I find it disturbing that people feel it is OK to generate a chemical dust, which is landing on other properties. It is not even about bees - it is a public health issue - that somebody could generate chemical dust and other people should breath it.


Okay this makes sense and do know I agree with you. But let's play chess for a moment and think like we're the corn farmer, and someone just accused us of being at fault for this problem. What will our defense be?

I think I would insist that you prove it was actually my dust which landed on your property that killed your bees, and not in fact something else entirely that they foraged from some other place and brought back to your hives. 

In the US, just these two arguments - yours, and the corn farmer's that I just suggested - would be made through lawyers over the course of around two months. It's your turn to answer: another month. Then if neither of us can agree, you go to court - another month just for the initial hearing. My lawyer uses very standard legal mechanisms to extend the proceedings, and asks for a legal order allowing me to continue to use my chemicals until you've actually completely won the entire case. Your lawyer argues against that request, and in a month another hearing will be made in order for us to make our cases as to why that temporary order should be allowed or not. And it goes on and on.

I'm not saying you should just completely give up; if you've got the resources, keep the land and fight! But in the meantime - I'd put the bees somewhere safe!


----------



## WLC

You forgot that Steve can sue everyone involved, including the seed drill manufacturer.


----------



## melliferal

When lawsuits happen, any good lawyer that's earning what you're paying him would include pretty much everyone even theoretically connected in some way with the problem as a defendant in the lawsuit. That would include yeah the chemical manufacturer, the chemical dealer, the individual chemical salesperson by name, the manufacturer of the equipment designed to handle and dispense the chemical or chemically-treated seeds, the dealer of that equipment, the farmer, the owner of the land (if it's not one of the above), and probably the USDA and/or relevant state DA that approved the chemical. The expectation is that some or even most of these defendants will be able to remove themselves from the suit in one way or another, but you put them all in there at the beginning anyway just in case they can't or don't manage to do so.


----------



## WLC

Tut, tut, tut. Let's not forget who the plaintiff is.

Steve isn't just any beekeeper.


----------



## Barry

He is should he find himself in a courtroom.


----------



## WLC

He won't be alone.


----------



## Barry

Nor would the other side. Have you ever had to go before a judge and be cross examined and fight for something you felt was right? I have, and I can tell you, NO ONE gets everything they want or think is right.


----------



## WLC

Yes. But, I usually let counsel handle the details.

The farmer is the one who is going to take the fall because his co defendants will demonstrate his negligence.

He is the one who will be alone and just a farmer.

However, Steve needs to get his evidence in order first. If uses dust traps, etc. . He can win. If he goes for the bee kills, he'll lose.


----------



## WCMN

So your saying that if farmer "John" plants his crop on his side of the fence line and his neighbor "Pete" plants his crop on his side of the fence line. Then "Pete" does some aerial spraying and has drift and kills "John's" Crop 
it's "John's" fault because he should of never planted his crop on his own land knowing that "Pete" might spray.
I am not saying that I know if the bees crossed the property line and went to the neighbors but there is not much forage in a just planted corn field.

Randy


----------



## Barry

WLC said:


> However, Steve needs to get his evidence in order first. If uses dust traps, etc. . He can win. If he goes for the bee kills, he'll lose.


Give him a call and talk it over with him. Get back and let us know how it went.


----------



## WLC

Nope. Dust traps are the key.

You need to show that the farmer used the product improperly. He was negligent when he caused the coat to abrade from the seed. 

You can't win in the aerial spraying case because the co defendants won't abandon the farmer.

The evidence isn't as solid. You can't prove the kill there either. You would need something like the dust traps to prove translocation. But, it's not a product defect due to negligence. You're supposed to spray it.


----------



## WLC

Barry:

His counsel will have already told him about the U.S. case law. No beekeeper has ever won a pesticide kill case of that type.

Without the dust traps, he has no case.

It's just the way it is.


----------



## melliferal

WCMN said:


> I am not saying that I know if the bees crossed the property line and went to the neighbors but there is not much forage in a just planted corn field.
> 
> Randy


A good point. An _important_ point; but not good enough all by itself.


----------



## cerezha

Barry said:


> ...As beekeepers, the message here is, take care where you keep your bees..


 I could not move my bees, I have no other place to go


----------



## BlueDiamond

cerezha said:


> in March 2013, the US EPA was sued by a coalition of beekeepers


Sued by only 4 beekeepers, one of which was Steve Ellis:
http://www.agprofessional.com/news/Groups-sue-EPA-over-honey-bee-deaths-199438361.html?page=2


----------



## cerezha

BlueDiamond said:


> Sued by only 4 beekeepers, one of which was Steve Ellis...


 I do not think, it is "only". From cited above:
The plaintiffs also include beekeeper Ellis of Old Mill Honey Co; Jim Doan of Doan Family Farms; Tom Theobald of Niwot Honey Farm; and Bill Rhodes of Bill Rhodes Honey. The plaintiffs also include the groups Beyond Pesticides, the Center for Food Safety, the Pesticide Action Network North America, the Sierra Club and the Center for Environmental Health.

Anybody familiar with these names?


----------



## BayHighlandBees

Sergey,
you can sue anyone for anything in America. Trial Lawyers don't target the guilty, they just go for feasible targets with most money (regardless if they were the culprits or not)



cerezha said:


> Chemical dust from regulated chemical? Apparently, you are not exactly right: in March 2013, the US EPA was sued by a coalition of beekeepers ... to sow the seeds which apparently blew clothianidin-laden dust off the seeds ... I got it from Wiki, but you could find more on the Internet.


----------



## Coffee_Bee

Sure; interesting to hear about Mr Ellis- appears to be the only beekeeper in the State with that pesticide problem, not forthcoming with definitive data, putting their bees in crops not beneficial (in harms way). In NY we have 1 of the 4 EPA plaintiffs, similar situation. How about mite problems, government subsidies, too?
Do these beekeepers have a lot of "baggage"?

I'd caution anyone not to get too emotionally invested with these guys' problems.

'You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time but you cannot fool all the people all the time'


----------



## BayHighlandBees

what you have here is a failure to communicate. Just because there is a fence between the property doesn't mean you can't go over and talk to the farmer. It's a lot easier than a lawsuit.


----------



## WLC

I don't know if that's going to be helpful after the bee kill.

Steve's choices seem to be to move the hives when that farmer is planting, or fight against environmental contamination by modern agriculture.

What would I do? I'd move em if I was in that situation.

However, that doesn't preclude me from contacting the europeans and asking for help and advisement as well as 'dust traps'.

Steve is well within his rights to make an issue of this. However, I'm not convinced that he has the evidence that he needs.

Finally, I hope that Steve isn't deliberately putting his bees in harm's way for the sake of environmental politics. That would be unethical.

Remember how I felt about the beekeepers who kept their bees in an EU quarantine zone, and then went on a 'hunger strike' to protest their losses?

Here's a link to an EFSA study. You'll have to scroll down to p. 38 to see that dust exposure was found to be an acute risk in many cases:

http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/doc/3066.pdf


----------



## gmcharlie

melliferal said:


> Okay this makes sense and do know I agree with you. But let's play chess for a moment and think like we're the corn farmer, and someone just accused us of being at fault for this problem. What will our defense be?
> 
> !


The defense will be simple. NO MORE BEES ALLOWED ON THE PROERTY.. Hunting has already suffered from this lawsuit mentality. DANG fewq of the pro beeks own land. they/we rely on the grace of others, and some want to screw that up.


----------



## D Coates

WLC said:


> I hope that Steve isn't deliberately putting his bees in harm's way for the sake of environmental politics. That would be unethical.


He seems to keep popping up claiming the same issue (without supporting documentation). Why would you place bees around corn fields that are being planted? There's no forage there. I believe putting his bees in harm's way to then cry foul is exactly what he's doing. This appears to be pure politics.


----------



## Beeslave

There is plenty of forage other then just corn fields. Dandelion bloom is a great flow provider. Those bloom in fields that are adjacent to the corn fields. Those of you stating "the beekeeper is dumb for putting his bees next to cornfields" wouldn't be making that comment if you were the ones being affected. It's easy to ridicule someone who's shoes you haven't walked in. The problem is the chem's don't stay where the manufacturer claim they do. Many beekeepers are stationary in "ag areas". It's not as simple as just "be smart and move away". 

Some here are saying "why are others not coming forward with bee kills?" It's because they don't see it happening at such an obvious kill as this one. The hive is damaged from the get-go but the signs are not obvious to begin with. Most times with "corn treatment hive issues" it starts with more then normal dead/dying bees at the entrance. To most it appears minor.....but as time passes you will see sick brood that is discolored(not a bright pearly white). That generation is weakened and those sick bees raise the next sick generation. The queen is fed the same contaminated food. That causes damage to her. Not all hives in a yard will have the same effects. Is it because of genetic disposition....is it because of their higher populations at the time of contact that they are able to over come the damage....maybe it's because that particular hive was foraging 1/2 mile in the other direction.

We know the treatment dust kills bees. It's obvious there is a flaw allowing it to happen just as it is obvious some of you who keep blaming the beekeeper don't have to deal with the problem.


----------



## melliferal

BayHighlandBees said:


> what you have here is a failure to communicate. Just because there is a fence between the property doesn't mean you can't go over and talk to the farmer. It's a lot easier than a lawsuit.


That's kind of what I tried to allude in one of my earlier posts. It's my _understanding_ that most farmers, if you talk to them about your bees and when the best and worst times to be using chemicals when they're around, the farmers are generally sympathetic. I understand that corn farmers, not dependent on bees for pollination, might not be as sympathetic as some - but you never know until you try. Did Mr. Ellis try?

Every time I watch the video, my reaction is exactly the same - why on Earth did he put bees in that spot? It appears to be surrounded, engulfed, bordered, besieged from every direction by nothing but cornfields. What in the world did he intend for all those colonies to eat? Just from that handful of lone trees they show in the video? I'll check again, but I didn't see no dandelion forage on the video, or any other forage of any kind really. Buncha dead grass.

Yeah, I know that the problem is that chemicals don't stay exactly where they are applied. That is a huge problem. I totally, 100% realize that. But, it's not exactly a secret; it's something I've already known for a long, long time which is precisely why I'd never put bees in a plot where they're completely surrounded by chemical use. I do deal with the problem - proactively, by keeping my bees out of obvious harm's way. I don't know how long Mr. Ellis has been keeping bees, but it HAS to have been long enough to fully realize the dangers associated with that location. Did he just not care? 

And yeah, I know that some beekeepers don't have an option as to where their bees go; as a hobbyist, all my hives were pretty much stationary. But that's not the situation being presented in that video - those bees are quad palletized. Is Ellis not a commercial beek? Regardless if he is or isn't, those particular bees are deliberately set up for mobility. Moving them IS an option for him.

I don't know the guy at all, I'm not read in the pertinent legal history, and so I don't feel comfortable opining as to whether or not Mr. Ellis premeditated this kill - some of you are better equipped for that particular show. But...seriously dude, it is well within your power to save those remaining bees.


----------



## camero7

As long as the air planter is properly configured and there is moisture in the ground there is little danger. Still doing ok after 3 years of planting next to my hives with treated seed. Didn't see any dead bees in any of the years. It was a little dry this year and I was a little nervous, but no problems.


----------



## BayHighlandBees

I believe the European problem was that the neonic dust blew directly into the hive. Is he alleging that in this case the neonic dust blew on flowers w pollen which the bees gathered and brought back to the hive killing the newborns and nurse bees?


----------



## Jonathan Hofer

melliferal said:


> It appears to be surrounded, engulfed, bordered, besieged from every direction by nothing but cornfields. What in the world did he intend for all those colonies to eat? Just from that handful of lone trees they show in the video? I'll check again, but I didn't see no dandelion forage on the video, or any other forage of any kind really. Buncha dead grass.


I cannot see how it appears to be surrounded by cornfields. There is one field, and until planted with corn, it is not a "cornfield". Beekeeper was there before the corn was planted, and therefore, there is a big chance he/she could not have known that corn will be sown into that field. Anything could be planted there. From what it appears, there is a field, but there is also much surrounding countryside with willows and various other tree species. There also seems to be a large amount of the area that is uncultivated. Very clearly from the video, it is not YET time for dandelion bloom. 

This could perhaps be an excellent location for bees. The rolling hills could be covered in clover, and dandelions when the time is right.

Faulting the beekeeper for choosing the location is a wrong move. In my opinion, the location seems very 'bee-able".


----------



## BigDawg

Yes, how silly of those people to put fuel in their Pinto's gas tank knowing that they might blow up.......


----------



## gmcharlie

Jonathan Hofer said:


> From what it appears, there is a field, but there is also much surrounding countryside with willows and various other tree species. There also seems to be a large amount of the area that is uncultivated. Very clearly from the video, it is not YET time for dandelion bloom.


Hate to point it out, but in 99 out of 100 cases the corn would also not be planted until after the Dandilion Blooms. I am not in MI so I wasn't going to point it out.

Your way off on it be BEE ABLE for that number of hives. not even close..... The video shows less than 3 acres of your "rolling hills of clover" 
As for not knowing what was to be sown, that is EXACTLY his fault.... only an total fool would put 100k worth of hives out on someone elses ground and not check....... I keep hives on over 50 farms, and I know whats going on around them......Its my investment and my RESPONSIBILITY..... yesterday one of my landowners planted 200 acres of corn with an air seeder, 400 yards from my hives. Not only did i know and we discussed it, but the same guy actually plowed AROUND a swarm clustered on a weed on one of his farms. 
15 minutes of this clowns time could have saved him the issues......
And yet we want to ban a chemical that is helping us eliminate bug spraying in large quanties? what a bunch of fools are we....


----------



## Barry

Beeslave said:


> We know the treatment dust kills bees. It's obvious there is a flaw allowing it to happen


It's not so obvious, that's the real problem in this discussion.


----------



## melliferal

Jonathan Hofer said:


> I cannot see how it appears to be surrounded by cornfields. There is one field, and until planted with corn, it is not a "cornfield". Beekeeper was there before the corn was planted, and therefore, there is a big chance he/she could not have known that corn will be sown into that field. Anything could be planted there.


Ordinarily I would agree, but the article said it was one of this guy's normal yearly bee-yards. If he was there every year, he had to know it was corn. I find it exceedingly unlikely that he was factually unaware there would be corn in those fields. The fact that, as someone else already pointed out, he's already been a part of a lawsuit filed over *this exact issue* apparently, also makes it very, very difficult to believe. How many times does someone have to be caught out in a storm before they learn to recognize the signs of an impending storm and take proactive measures so they don't get caught out again?

Besides, even if he just honest-to-goodness SOMEHOW really genuinely had no idea it was going to be a cornfield, it's very obviously a _farm field_ of some kind. Wouldn't you want to ask, make yourself informed? Heck, introduce yourself as a fellow neighboring agriculturalist and all that? Not in the least bit interested in what might end up in that field, considering that according to his own earlier lawsuit, happenings in a farm field killed a bunch of his bees historically?


----------



## Jonathan Hofer

gmcharlie said:


> Hate to point it out, but in 99 out of 100 cases the corn would also not be planted until after the Dandilion Blooms. I am not in MI so I wasn't going to point it out.


And the rest of the post.

For one, this year has been different weather-wise. We have people planting corn up here, and have been for over a week, and dandelions are not yet blooming or even getting close to full bloom. The willows and maples are blooming, as well as elm trees and other trees. Until that time, there was NO forage for our bees. Were we unwise to put them into what every year is a very good location based on no dandelions at the present time?

I did not say that the yard was ok for that number of hives. My post specifically said that it could be an excellent location for bees. The number of hives is totally besides the point and does not serve this discussion. IF the chemical killed one hive, it would/could also kill many more. 

I do disagree that there are only 3 acres of uncultivated land. Look to the background of the video. There is much uncultivated land in that location. (Maybe we're watching a different video).

Blaming him for not knowing what was being seeded???? We have bees in agricultural areas. Assuming bees forage up to 3 miles radius = 18 000 acres. It would be absurd for me to even try to find out what is being put into each of these acres. Possibly talking to 30 or more different owners. If bees fly 4 miles, that's 32 000 acres. If you have 50 locations, on a 3 mile radius, your bees cover 900 000 acres. Are you telling me you know what goes into each of those acres? And what would you do if you found out someone or many people were going to use something that kills your bees? What would you do if for generations your family has owned the parcels of land your bees are on? 

Bottom line - if the chemical killed the bees, then it needs to be investigated. I did not enter this discussion with the intent to ban or not ban a chemical. I DO find it quite appalling that I as a beekeeper should be blamed if I've kept bees on a good location for many years and then they die because of chemical spraying. It could easily happen to me too. The 18 000 acres around me? Why don't people spill mercury on their land and then blame me when it gets into my well-water?

My last post in response to the above.


----------



## Jonathan Hofer

melliferal said:


> Ordinarily I would agree, but the article said it was one of this guy's normal yearly bee-yards. If he was there every year, he had to know it was corn. I find it exceedingly unlikely that he was factually unaware there would be corn in those fields.


 And the rest of the post.

How was he to know it was corn to be put into these fields? Or is there only one crop being sown in MI?

I don't see the "fact" as you stated. From my point of view, I feel that this discussion has turned into an attack on Mr. Ellis (whom I do not know, have never seen or met). If the chemical killed the bees, the the discussion can proceed from there. Blaming the beekeeper for not knowing what was being seeded in the 18 000 of normal forage acres around the bee-yard is hard for me to swallow (and I don't). 



Last post in this thread.


----------



## gmcharlie

Hardly accurate Yes bees roam that far, but planter dust does not..... Never seen bees to fly 4 miles if the forage is good.
Those are clearly feed lot beekeeping at its finest. do a bit of math from the yeilds and you will see that the possible yeilds from those acres woould not build honey for 1000 hives...

Yes you guys may be planting before dandilons.. probably because planter dust got to the farmer!......

Don't leave the discussion because you think you have said it all the discussion is the point,


----------



## WLC

If I were a betting man...

I doubt that Steve had the forethought to trap or collect conataminated dust. It could be as simple as petri dishes. or as complex as pollen measuring devices.

It's part of the problem with folks tht think that sending dead bees and hive products out for testing will prove the issue.

It won't do the trick here in the US.


----------



## cerezha

gmcharlie said:


> ... Never seen bees to fly 4 miles if the forage is good....


 Do you actually track the bees? How you know? I was under impression that it is common knowledge that bees do forage *within* 3-4-5 miles radius from the beehive. Are you intended to diminish this knowledge? With proper meteorological conditions I believe that dust may travel a few miles distance. We commonly have the dust from Mohave Desert in LA. It is more than few miles. I also saw the dust from agriculture in the Central Valley - it covers the horizon... If airplane used - a few miles easy, you even would not see it as a dust - particles are so small and thus, stay in the air ... and travel


----------



## WLC

Let me run this up the flagpole, and see if anyone salutes...

All the majors involved create a fund and replace any honeybees, and equipment, lost here in the US during a season.

That's a mere 30 billion.


----------



## DRUR

BigDawg said:


> Yes, how silly of those people to put fuel in their Pinto's gas tank knowing that they might blow up.......


Once again you don't understand the issue. It's not putting the gas in the fuel tank, its stopping your pinto where someone might ram you from the back. You see it wasn't the pinto's problem, it was the guy that hit you from behind. I mean, how could any corporation expect that exploding gas tanks from a rearend collision would be a problem.

Oh, that's right if I remember correctly Ford did, but they figured that the profits from the sell of their defective product would offset the death of a few burning children.

Oh, that's right, the Bayers, Monsantos, Syngenta etc, figures they can hold off the small guy with big money. Hmm, wasn't their a similar case with big tobacco until one guy came forward and ratted out the liars?

We need to just poison this world and make as much money as we can, then buy a trip to another planet and let everyone else here die, because I mean, it is the survival of the fittest and if some poor beek chooses that profession that doesn pay much that's his tough luck right?


----------



## hpm08161947

cerezha said:


> Do you actually track the bees? How you know? I was under impression that it is common knowledge that bees do forage *within* 3-4-5 miles radius from the beehive. Are you intended to diminish this knowledge? l


Bees only travel about 2 miles. It is not too hard to tell when you have been placing yards for a few years. A.Put 2 yards a mile apart and watch your honey yeild. B.Place two yards 4 miles apart and watch your honey yeild.C. Place two yards 6 miles apart and watch you honey yield. B and C will be pretty similar. A will be seriously reduced.

Of course there are other factors involved, but do it often enough and you will get the picture.... 2 miles.


----------



## melliferal

Jonathan Hofer said:


> And the rest of the post.
> 
> How was he to know it was corn to be put into these fields? Or is there only one crop being sown in MI?


Answered in the same post:



> Besides, even if he just honest-to-goodness SOMEHOW really genuinely had no idea it was going to be a cornfield, it's very obviously a farm field of some kind. Wouldn't you want to ask, make yourself informed? Heck, introduce yourself as a fellow neighboring agriculturalist and all that? Not in the least bit interested in what might end up in that field, considering that according to his own earlier lawsuit, happenings in a farm field killed a bunch of his bees historically?


He has 1) previously experienced heavy kills
2) in vicinity to farm fields, and
3) was so convinced it was the farm chemicals that he joined a lawsuit on those grounds.

Now despite that history, he's 1) leaving a large number of bees
2) in vicinity to farm fields. 

No matter whether he knew there'd be corn there or not, he knew they were farm fields. His bees have had previous bad experience with farm fields; so, he's once again leaving bees near farm fields because *why?*

WHY didn't he know there would be corn planted? Why wouldn't he ask the farmers, or do something else to try and get that information? Did he take any reasonable, practical actions to protect his bees or did he figure righteous audacity was sufficient? I mean, I'm not saying he's wrong that the farm chemicals killed his bees; what I'm saying is, he's SUED for it before, so how could he not anticipate that kind of event?


----------



## WLC

That's over 1500 hives that he put in harms way.

Are you saying that it's a 'political' bee kill?


----------



## melliferal

Here's an analogy: you set up a dozen hives in a brand new outyard, that's located adjacent to a road that runs between the local high school and the local family residential area. In mid-summer, you arrive for an inspection to find every single hive destroyed - toppled, obvious traces of fire and consumer pesticide spraying, and profanity spray-painted all over everything. You call the police; they duly take your report but are unable to identify the perpetrators with any certainty, so nobody gets charged, arrested, fined, or punished in any way.

Next year, you have an opportunity to set up a new outyard, 1 block away from that previous location, along the same road.

Do you:

1) Put your hives there, and act SHOCKED when the new yard is similarly vandalized in mid-summer, or

2) Say "screw that jazz" and set them up on the other side of town, away from routes frequently traversed by high school students?


----------



## melliferal

WLC said:


> That's over 1500 hives that he put in harms way.
> 
> Are you saying that it's a 'political' bee kill?


Somebody else suggested that; I don't know the guy. This just seemed SO preventable to me that I'm kind of amazed.


----------



## BigDawg

melliferal said:


> WHY didn't he know there would be corn planted? Why wouldn't he ask the farmers, or do something else to try and get that information? Did he take any reasonable, practical actions to protect his bees or did he figure righteous audacity was sufficient? I mean, I'm not saying he's wrong that the farm chemicals killed his bees; what I'm saying is, he's SUED for it before, so how could he not anticipate that kind of event?


Better question: Why didn't the farmer planting the pesticide-coated corn seed--the very type of seed that had allegedly killed many bees the year before--why didn't he wait to plant when it wasn't a windy day so as to minimize planter dust and make sure the poison stayed on his property?

As other have mentioned, it seems pretty incredulous to think that someone would intentionally risk over a 1/4 million dollars worth of hives just to make a political point against neonicotinoids......


----------



## melliferal

BigDawg said:


> Better question: Why didn't the farmer planting the pesticide-coated corn seed--the very type of seed that had allegedly killed many bees the year before--why didn't he wait to plant when it wasn't a windy day so as to minimize planter dust and make sure the poison stayed on his property?


That one's easy: his supplier has told him that the planter dust isn't a serious threat, and no court has yet ruled otherwise. He either personally was never made aware of the lawsuit, or has decided that since the lawsuit was unsuccessful, the plaintiffs' claims are without any merit, including their claims about the toxicity of the planter dust.



BigDawg said:


> As other have mentioned, it seems pretty incredulous to think that someone would intentionally risk over a 1/4 million dollars worth of hives just to make a political point against neonicotinoids......


Well granted, but the alternative is just - I dunno, sheer apathy? I'm sorry but I _cannot buy_ the kind of plain ignorance on the part of an otherwise-knowledgeable and successful commercial beek that people here are suggesting in apology.


----------



## BigDawg

DRUR said:


> Once again you don't understand the issue. It's not putting the gas in the fuel tank, its stopping your pinto where someone might ram you from the back.


Like at a traffic light? Or a stop sign? The point is that the product design was/is flawed......not the victims.


----------



## melliferal

Quick question: what was the final disposition of the lawsuit Mr. Ellis was part of?


----------



## DRUR

BigDawg said:


> The point is that the product design was/is flawed.


Point well taken



BigDawg said:


> not the victims.


 :shhhh: don't tell anyone, but it's a politically corrupty system, from top to bottom. Rich get richer, and the less rich simply don't matter, they are just victims. 

Let me give you an example. Found out a few months back that all commercially sold legumes seeds are treated with a fungicide [I was told all commercially sold seeds are]. So I pay the seed company to buy seed to plant legumes to add nitrogen to my soil. I treat my seeds with rhizaboum bacteria that I pay extra for in order to cause the legumes to take nitrogen from the air, and deposit it into root nodules which puts nitrogen in the soil. I mean I pay extra for the innoculant since chemical fertilizers kill the natural bacteria in the soil. And the fungicide that the commercially purchased legume seeds are coated with kill the rhizoboum bacteria. *Now does that make any sense?* 

I was told by the idiot at the seed company don't worry about it just buy chemical nitrogen to put nitrogen in the soil. 

It's all about the money guys and the love of money is the root of evil. And the chemical companies give the Universities, grant money, so those Univiersities dare not come up with any contrary studies lest the universities lose their grant money. And if these large corporations do go to court, they will spend money to find out that potential jurors [like gmcharlie, blue diamond, camero7 etc] are sympathetic to their cause. They will arrange voir dire questions to have non sympathetic jurors [BigDawg etc] dismissed [they have spent big bucks to discover this], I mean the judge owns stock in the corporation [not directly of course but indirectly through his pension plan] so the judge is sympathetic to their cause. And those bringing the suit don't have anywhere near enough money to buy the system and be successfull. Remember the tobacco lawsuits that only became successful when there was an insider that got tired of their crap.

But then, these plaintiff beekeepers are buying their miticides from these same chemical companies, so really, what do the commercial beeks have to complain about?

Danny

Danny Unger


----------



## cerezha

melliferal said:


> ...Next year, you have an opportunity to set up a new outyard, 1 block away from that previous location, along the same road....


 I would place my beeyard in the original place and install video cameras to catch vandals. Than, I will work hard to put them into the jail. Also, I will purchase AK-47 (if legal) and made sure that everybody saw me patrolling my beeyard properly equipped. I am intended to protect my property and my integrity.


----------



## cerezha

Barry said:


> It's not so obvious, that's the real problem in this discussion.


 Not true - most parties actually agree that dust form of the chemical is acute to the bees. Solution for that was - do not create the dust


----------



## BlueDiamond

BigDawg said:


> Better question: Why didn't the farmer planting the pesticide-coated corn seed--the very type of seed that had allegedly killed many bees the year before--why didn't he wait to plant when it wasn't a windy day so as to minimize planter dust and make sure the poison stayed on his property?


Back in the spring of 2012 Bayer and Minnesota State officials, tested Steve Ellis's bees that were alledgedly made sick by planter dust as is explained in this May 2012 newsstory: http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nightly-news/47379683#51944695 

But to this day Steve Ellis has not come forward to tell the world what the results of those tests were. So the farmers in Steve Ellis's neighborhood would have no reason to believe their planting operations would likely create a problem for anyones bees. According to zabasearch.com there is a Steve Ellis at 20501 County Road 5, Barrett, MN 56311 which is near Elbow Lake, MN which is the location where the newsstory was filmed. If you type that address into google earth you'll see it is a typical midwestern corn belt landscape.


----------



## melliferal

cerezha said:


> I would place my beeyard in the original place and install video cameras to catch vandals. Than, I will work hard to put them into the jail. Also, I will purchase AK-47 (if legal) and made sure that everybody saw me patrolling my beeyard properly equipped. I am intended to protect my property and my integrity.


I hear you bro, but there's a problem with that. Yes, if the vandals come back, they will definitely be caught on camera, vandalizing your hives. Assuming they're not masked or concealed well enough to confound the police (unlikely, kids as a rule are not that smart), you'll be able to have them arrested. But - they'll be arrested for _vandalizing your apiary_, which means that they just killed all your bees - again! So they've been caught, but there was a price.

Now you and I - well I, I don't really know how many colonies you live to keep - for argument's sake let's say I put ten hives in that apiary, and I lost all ten to the vandals. I can absorb the cost of ten new hives without too much hardship, so I can still call the colonies' sacrifice a victory in the end.

But let's try to fit that shoe on the foot we're discussing in this thread. Another person recently suggested that, all things being equal, it did not seem very likely Mr. Ellis would set up his colonies as bait to be sacrificed in order to catch the "vandals" - in this case, the farmers and their toxic chemicals - because his sacrifice would be something like a quarter of a million dollars in bees and furniture. That's huge, and I must say I agree it's very unlikely anybody would be willing to just "absorb" that kind of hit solely make a point about planter dust unless they were truly obsessed fanatics.


----------



## melliferal

BlueDiamond said:


> If you type that address into google earth you'll see it is a typical midwestern corn belt landscape.


Okay, but maybe it's not for the best to post what could be the guy's home address here. I realize you got it from a publicly-accessible website; but for the principle of the thing.


----------



## Beeslave

BlueDiamond said:


> If you type that address into google earth you'll see it is a typical midwestern corn belt landscape.


 Exactly.....typical of anywhere in the Midwest. So do you think ALL BEEKEEPERS should stay out of all of the MIDWEST until the "dust has settled" and any possible pollen and nectar sources that may have been contaminated by a product not intended for use on those sources is "dried up"?

My area in west central WI typically has dandelion bloom starting at the end of maple and willow bloom. Our dandelion bloom normally runs the whole month of May. During dandelion bloom we also have apple, cherry, oak, yellow rocket, plum, poplar, tartarian honeysuckle and other miscellaneous trees. Corn planting typically starts late April and can continue into early June.


----------



## BigDawg

"Some of the problems associated with planting can likely be solved with some effort to change planting practices. The neonics are effective pesticides that are relatively non-toxic for many life forms (most notably humans), but (of course) are highly toxic to insects. Like all pesticides, they should be used judiciously – where there is a demonstrated need. This is a principle of pest management that has largely gone by the wayside in some large acreage cropping systems. *The bee story is one indication that perhaps it is time to re-evaluate whether it is necessary to use up to 1.25 milligrams of neonicotinoids on virtually every single corn kernel that is planted in the country. Planting corn is the largest use of arable land in the US, and each corn seed theoretically has enough pesticide to kill well over 100,000 bees.*

http://www.extension.org/pages/65034/neonicotinoid-seed-treatments-and-honey-bee-health


----------



## cerezha

melliferal said:


> ...they'll be arrested for _vandalizing your apiary_, which means that they just killed all your bees - again! So they've been caught, but there was a price....


 It seems to me this is exactly what settlers did - Indians burned down their homes and they returned back and rebuild! Return and rebuild! I think, this is true part of Americans! I am not American (well, I am living here for 20 years ), but I would do the same again and again until truth prevail (always!). If somebody dusted my house (property, cat, bees etc) with chemical dust - I would bring this person into the house and force to clean the house... not really viable in US, but in Russia, it would be very acceptable - moreover, people will help to exercise the rightness. Nobody will tell me that I have to relocate because of dust. If Americans will follow your instructions - they should go back to Europe...


----------



## BigDawg

BlueDiamond said:


> So the farmers in Steve Ellis's neighborhood would have no reason to believe their planting operations would likely create a problem for anyones bees.


This is simply not true. The problem with planter dust from neonicotinoids has been well known for at least 10 years.....

http://ento.psu.edu/publications/are-neonicotinoids-killing-bees


----------



## BlueDiamond

BigDawg said:


> This is simply not true. The problem with planter dust from neonicotinoids has been well known for at least 10 years.....
> http://ento.psu.edu/publications/are-neonicotinoids-killing-bees


The math is simple: There are 1000's of corn farmers in southern Minnesota and 100's of beekeepers. Since 2006 only a few of those beekeepers (one of whom is Steve Ellis) in that whole area have alledged bee kills due to planter dust and even those incidents have not been verified by Minnesota officials or Bayer. Therefore the corn farmers have no reason to believe planter dust poses a significant risk worthy of concern.


----------



## BigDawg

BlueDiamond said:


> The math is simple: There are 1000's of corn farmers in southern Minnesota and 100's of beekeepers. Since 2006 only a few of those beekeepers (one of whom is Steve Ellis) in that whole area have alledged bee kills due to planter dust and even those incidents have not been verified by Minnesota officials or Bayer. Therefore the corn farmers have no reason to believe planter dust poses a significant risk worthy of concern.


Ok, for the sake of argument, let's say that the farmers didn't know (I think that's hogwash, but ok). 

You know who did know? Bayer and Monsanto. After a 30 second google search I found reports dating back to 2003 that documented large hive kills from neonicotinoid planter dust, and I'm sure if I dug further I could find reports from the mid to late 90's as well, much less Bayer and Monsanto's own research.

So, if Bayer and Monsanto are aware of the problem (which they have been for at least 10-15 years, and they are not putting warning labels on their products and/or product application directions that spell out the known risk to pollinators from planter dust, then they are negligent and should be held accountable.

Put another way: If Beekeeper Bob's bees swarm, and go over to Farmer Joe's pasture and sting and kill his $50,000 show horse, Beekeeper Bob is responsible and must pay damages to Farmer Joe. But if Farmer Joe plants insecticide-coated seed on a windy day, and the planter dust carries over to Beekeeper Bob's apiary and kills $300,000 in bees, well, that's Beekeeper Bob's fault for keeping bees in corn country.....


----------



## BlueDiamond

BigDawg said:


> So, if Bayer and Monsanto are aware of the problem (which they have been for at least 10-15 years, and they are not putting warning labels on their products and/or product application directions that spell out the known risk to pollinators from planter dust, then they are negligent and should be held accountable.


This thread is about an alledged "Large pesticide bee-kill in Minnesota" and so far no one has verified whether planter dust is even responsible. Steve Ellis, the person who has been inferring that planter dust might be responsible also made that inferrence a year ago and yet for some undisclosed reason he has not come forward to tell us what Bayers pesticide residue testing revealed about his sick bees. And because a year ago Steve Ellis considered planter dust to be a potential big threat, it makes no sense that this year he would knowingly place 1000+ hives next to a field that would soon be planted. He lives in an area where all the fields get planted with neonic treated corn or soybean seeds.


----------



## Beeslave

Approximately 200 incidents reported in Ontario in spring of 2012 during corn planting season

http://www.farmwest.com/node/1283


----------



## BlueDiamond

Beeslave said:


> Approximately 200 incidents reported in Ontario in spring of 2012 during corn planting season
> http://www.farmwest.com/node/1283


What about the number of incidents in 2006-2011? And 2013? Not hardly any, apparently, perhaps because soil conditions were not as dry as compared with 2012.


----------



## gmcharlie

cerezha said:


> Do you actually track the bees? How you know? I was under impression that it is common knowledge that bees do forage *within* 3-4-5 miles radius from the beehive. Are you intended to diminish this knowledge? With proper meteorological conditions I believe that dust may travel a few miles distance. We commonly have the dust from Mohave Desert in LA. It is more than few miles. I also saw the dust from agriculture in the Central Valley - it covers the horizon... If airplane used - a few miles easy, you even would not see it as a dust - particles are so small and thus, stay in the air ... and travel


Well if we do some simple math and logic we know 4 miles is a bit of a stretch. and under those conditions we would not have any buildup as all the forage gathered would be consumed in travel. Normal travel range is around a mile on the high side, with most of the effective forage occuring within a mile wide circle. not saying that they won't go farther, but here in the midwest and in effective honey operations we would not use 4 miles. and in fact if you look at CA pollination info you will find what they show to be correct spacings for hives, its not 4 miles.. a 3-4-5 mile radius, well within that large of area we would fine TONS of poisens other than planter dust!

Our planter dust normaly doesn't travel anywhere near like dust in the desert. 1/2 mile or so on a bad day, less than 1/4 is typical when the moisture levels are good. (which is worse for the bees) worst case on full tillage, bad wind dry air would be around a mile I would guess.


----------



## Beeslave

Kill in 2010 & 2011 discussed

http://www.ontariofarmer.com/sitepa...ght in bee die-off is back on seed treatments


----------



## zhiv9

BlueDiamond said:


> What about the number of incidents in 2006-2011? And 2013? Not hardly any, apparently, perhaps because soil conditions were not as dry as compared with 2012.


Have a look at the change in winter mortality after 2006 on page 3 of thie 2011 Ontario Apiarists report:
http://www.ontariobee.com/sites/ont...io-Provincial-Apiarist-Annual-Report-2011.pdf

This isn't causation, but there certainly appears to be correlation.

Last year the PMRA (our pesticide regulator) and provincial bee inspectors responded together to each of the 200 incidents last season. The inspectors were there to see if there were other factors. Samples were taken. The provincial apiarist spoke at our beekeeping meeting a couple of weeks ago. 70% of the samples taken tested positive for clothianidin. The incidents were in variety of weather conditions and from the photos I have seen, pretty much looked like the Ellis video. An official report from the PMRA on last years results is still pending. For this season we have a list of "best practices":

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/cps-spc/pubs...nator-protection-pollinisateurs/index-eng.php

This is while they re-evaluate the use of these pesticides in Canada.

There are already many reports of similar pesticide kills this season, though no test results yet to follow up.

While in some areas of Ontario it is possible to move your bees away from corn fields, in other areas it would be very difficult. The apiarist said that in one county, 70% of beekeepers had been effected.

I will try to remember to follow up with the PMRA report when released. 200 incidents is a decent sample size and the conclusions will the interesting.

Our provincial beekeeping association originally supported "best practices" for planting and better communication, but after last year they are now pushing for a ban during re-evaluation and compensation for losses related to neonicotinoid poisoning.

http://www.ontariobee.com/issues-and-advocacy/ongoing-issues-and-actions/spring-2012-bee-poisonings


----------



## camero7

> Have a look at the change in winter mortality after 2006 on page 3 of thie 2011 Ontario Apiarists report:


And what year did varroa and tracheal mites become well established up there?


----------



## zhiv9

camero7 said:


> And what year did varroa and tracheal mites become well established up there?


It has been here since the mid 90s. That is what makes the correlation interesting, there isn't anything else that lines up.


----------



## Jon B

I try and keep most of my bees away from corn fields. I quit using several of my locations when the nearby farmer planted corn.


----------



## cerezha

gmcharlie said:


> ....Our planter dust normaly doesn't travel anywhere near like dust in the desert. 1/2 mile or so on a bad day, less than 1/4 is typical when the moisture levels are good. (which is worse for the bees) worst case on full tillage, bad wind dry air would be around a mile I would guess.


 1 mile radius is still 2000 acres - arguments presented above are still viable. Also, since we are talking about pollution of MY property (as an example) by somebody else, I guess it would be wise to establish a buffer zone to insure that his chemical dust will not enter MY property in ANY situation. The bottom line is that it is not possible for a single beekeeper to check all these 2000 acres (and farmers) for potential risks to his bees. It is a responsibility of the state (whichever) agency to establish the policies to prevent one business to contaminate another. It looks like Ontario is well ahead of us.


----------



## cerezha

Beeslave said:


> Approximately 200 incidents reported in Ontario in spring of 2012 during corn planting season
> 
> http://www.farmwest.com/node/1283


It is interesting, because many people here at beesource used Ontario (and Australia) as an example that neonicotinoids have no effect on beekeeping in that areas. I am wondering what those people will tell us if Canada will ban neonicotinoids? Would be fun to revisit this thread in couple of months, years (?)


----------



## gmcharlie

Your right Cereza Its not practical to check that big an area, nor is it required... Claiming it is is more extremism.... Air seeded the 240 across the road yesterday... no dead bees today. we checked wind direction before we started. common sense is all thats required.....

There are literealy MILLIONS of beehives in very close proximity to corn here in the midwest........ common sense... 

Just a thought, I am wondering if the overloading of the area with hives is more of a contributing factor? making the bees pick up things they normally would not... IE anything that resembled pollen... I know that in EARLY spring and late fall when the yard is overloaded and no forage, the bees will consume the chickens corn... but as long as other things are good and the yards not overloaded they don't touch it......
Maybe were looking at the a compounding event....


----------



## WCMN

> Blue Diamond
> 
> "But to this day Steve Ellis has not come forward to tell the world what the results of those tests were. So the farmers in Steve Ellis's neighborhood would have no reason to believe their planting operations would likely create a problem for anyones bees. According to zabasearch.com there is a Steve Ellis at 20501 County Road 5, Barrett, MN 56311 which is near Elbow Lake, MN which is the location where the newsstory was filmed. If you type that address into google earth you'll see it is a typical midwestern corn belt landscape.


Have you ever called and ask him the results. He shared them at a local beekeepers meeting, did not seem like any big secret as you keep implying. 
Please don't ask what he said as this would be second hand information if I were to repeat it.


Randy


----------



## BigDawg

Interesting interview with Steve Ellis:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/theorg...noid-view-beekeepers-response-to-epa-decision


----------



## BlueDiamond

WCMN said:


> Have you ever called and ask him the results. He shared them at a local beekeepers meeting


Do the farmers in Steve's area go to local beekeepers meetings? No. So like I said before they would have no reason to believe their planting operations would likely create a problem for anyones bees. Thus at this point I am left to conclude Steve made no serious effort to communicate his planter dust concerns with the local farmers nor made a serious effort to keep his hives away from their corn fields at planting time this year.


----------



## cerezha

gmcharlie said:


> ... Just a thought, I am wondering if the overloading of the area with hives is more of a contributing factor? ...


 Could be, but I do not think, it is fair to tell beekeepers to leave the area, just because it is all corn now. I am glad, that your bees are doing OK after planting, but it is not OK to tell people that chemical dust is safe and farmers should continue spreading the chemicals.


----------



## melliferal

WCMN said:


> Have you ever called and ask him the results. He shared them at a local beekeepers meeting, did not seem like any big secret as you keep implying.
> Please don't ask what he said as this would be second hand information if I were to repeat it.


Curious myself. Does that beekeeper association maybe have a newsletter that mentioned the talk?

I mean, it's not particularly useful that he shared the numbers at a local meeting but nobody will be able to repeat them for us; he may as well not have told anybody at all. If you can't tell us, is there someone who can, or are the results maybe published to the web somewhere? No matter what the numbers are, I'm sure a lot of cornbelt beeks can only benefit from the information.


----------



## BlueDiamond

BigDawg said:


> Interesting interview with Steve Ellis:
> 
> http://www.blogtalkradio.com/theorg...noid-view-beekeepers-response-to-epa-decision


Yes interesting - he said he lost around 5-20% of his bees (not whole colonies) during spring planting last year and that he was one of only 8 beekeepers that petitioned the EPA to ban clothianidin last year. In his interview he made no mention of any efforts to work with farmers in his area to avoid planter dust. Thus he comes across as someone that may be more interested in lawsuit settlement money than in avoiding planter dust.


----------



## BigDawg

BlueDiamond said:


> Yes interesting - he said he lost around 5-20% of his bees (not whole colonies) during spring planting last year and that he was one of only 8 beekeepers that petitioned the EPA to ban clothianidin last year. In his interview he made no mention of any efforts to work with farmers in his area to avoid planter dust. Thus he comes across as someone that may be more interested in lawsuit settlement money than in avoiding planter dust.


Lol, somehow I figured you'd put as negative a spin as possible on it.....do you really dislike him, or do you work for Monsanto?? 

Did you catch the part where he said that the test results from last year's bee kills DID show exposure to clothianidin? You keep making all these negative assumptions about what he did or didn't do--but do you KNOW that he didn't talk to local farmers about the problem? Of course you don't....you're just speculating, just like you were doing when you kept insisting that the only reason he wasn't releasing the lab results from the bee kill was because they didn't show clothianidin exposure--again, pure speculation on your part which he clarified in the interview. Seems to me you have an axe to grind maybe.....


----------



## cerezha

BlueDiamond said:


> .. may be more interested in lawsuit settlement money than in avoiding planter dust.


 Make sense because he, perhaps, wanted compensation for the damage. 5% from 1000 hives = 50 x $100 = $5000 lost bees; honey, 50lb/hive = 2500 x $5 = $12500 for lost honey.


----------



## BlueDiamond

BigDawg said:


> Did you catch the part where he said that the test results from last year's bee kills DID show exposure to clothianidin?


Dose makes the poison and Steve has not come forward to tell reporters the amounts of clothianidin found vs amounts of beekeeper applied pesticides.


----------



## WLC

You're forgetting that it could be a variety of pesticide formulations acting together synergistically to produce the bee kill.

Who knows what Steve is able to test for, and what will be missed?

Besides, hives routinely test at 100% for DWV, and double digit %ages for other pathogens.

That's why dust traps are the only sure way to prove off-target contamination.
The dust is easy to test for a specific pesticide formulation.

Testing hives is a dead end.

There's easily up to 100mg of a pesticide ****tail in the wax foundation of a hive alone.

That's because the beeswax supply itself is contaminated with pesticides.


----------



## zhiv9

WLC said:


> You're forgetting that it could be a variety of pesticide formulations acting together synergistically to produce the bee kill.
> 
> Who knows what Steve is able to test for, and what will be missed?
> 
> Besides, hives routinely test at 100% for DWV, and double digit %ages for other pathogens.
> 
> That's why dust traps are the only sure way to prove off-target contamination.
> The dust is easy to test for a specific pesticide formulation.
> 
> Testing hives is a dead end.
> 
> There's easily up to 100mg of a pesticide ****tail in the wax foundation of a hive alone.
> 
> That's because the beeswax supply itself is contaminated with pesticides.


When do you put out the dust traps? Do you leave them out all of the time? If so, how do you know that the dust was from that days corn planting. After the pesticide kill, it is too late to put the traps out.

When they are investigating the incidents here, they are testing the dead foragers in front of the hive, not the wax in the hive. Most of the exposed foragers die before reaching the hive, but some make it back. You can tell that they weren't on their way out of the hive because many are carrying a full load of pollen.


----------



## gmcharlie

Cererza And Big Dog..... Both of you Are totaly unawilling to even discuss, your on The side of Ban everthing and Steve Ellis is our Savior....
What you fail to realize is that the options are worse for bees than the seed coatings.. 
And for some silly reason you guys think that the worlds AG must stop because you have all the answers and your bees are the only thing that matters.....
My bees and MILLIONS of others are doing fine, right here in the middle of it.... You guys don't even live close...

But I digress.. I am wrestling a pig in the mud, and forgot the Pig likes it.....time to move on to helping some others with there bees....


----------



## WCMN

> BlueDiamond]Do the farmers in Steve's area go to local beekeepers meetings? No. So like I said before they would have no reason to believe their planting operations would likely create a problem for anyones bees.


Like I said, have you called him and asked for the results?
Do you not think the local newspapers and other local media did not cover this.
Is this law suit with the four named beekeepers and other groups named seeking compensation for there losses?




Randy


----------



## hpm08161947

gmcharlie said:


> But I digress.. I am wrestling a pig in the mud, and forgot the Pig likes it.....time to move on to helping some others with there bees....


So true....



> My bees and MILLIONS of others are doing fine, right here in the middle of it.... You guys don't even live close...


The West coast is full of very smart people..... I just do not understand why they are huddled around the edges of two tectonic plates....


----------



## BigDawg

gmcharlie said:


> Cererza And Big Dog..... Both of you Are totaly unawilling to even discuss, your on The side of Ban everthing and Steve Ellis is our Savior....


Charlie, you're making a lot of assumptions here...I'm totally willing to discuss the issue, and, I don't see Steve Ellis as a savior--I see him as someone who is trying to draw attention to the fact that some of these newer, systemic pesticides may be causing serious harm to honeybees. The fact of the matter is that looking back on other pesticide/herbicides that have ultimately been banned, it was for the most part because private citizens like Steve spoke out and forced the hand of the EPA. Do you think Bayer and Monsanto are going to come out and say "Gee, after looking at it more, we realize that these products are really harmful to pollinators and so we're going to pull them from the market"? Of course not! They've already made over a billion dollars from the sale of them and they are going to fight--kicking and screaming--to protect those profits no matter what the cost to the public. To think otherwise is foolish.

I think it's simply shameful that so many ex-Monsanto executives are currently holding high positions within the FDA, EPA, etc. Clearly, they are pro GMO, pro Monsanto, and yet they are supposedly making objective decisions about whether to approve or ban Monsanto products? Give me a break.

In a NYT article, Monsanto executive Phil Angell is quoted as saying: “Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food," said Phil Angell, Monsanto's director of corporate communications. "Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA's job.” How interesting then that so many ex Monsanto employees and lobbyists currently work for the EPA--the very agency that is supposed to be protecting the public health.



> What you fail to realize is that the options are worse for bees than the seed coatings.


Maybe, maybe not. Maybe we need to think about only using systemic pesticides when there is a demonstrated need as opposed to a matter of common practice. Maybe we need to look at the dosage level of the seed coatings so that ONE KERNEL of treated corn doesn't need enough poison to kill 100,000 bees. Maybe Monsanto/Bayer need to do a better job explaining the risks of these pesticides to the end users. I've looked at the application directions for Monsanto's neonic seed coatings--they don't even mention potential harm to pollinators. I'd call that criminal neglect. End users of these products need to know the proper way to use them so as to at least make an effort to minimize harm to pollinators.....


----------



## BigDawg

BlueDiamond said:


> Dose makes the poison and Steve has not come forward to tell reporters the amounts of clothianidin found vs amounts of beekeeper applied pesticides.


How many beekeepers do you know that treat their hives with clothianidin?


----------



## BlueDiamond

gmcharlie said:


> What you fail to realize is that the options are worse for bees than the seed coatings..


City folks don't understand that. They have trouble comprehending issues of scale.


----------



## BigDawg

BlueDiamond said:


> City folks don't understand that. They have trouble comprehending issues of scale.


Yes, and the clothianidin coating on ONE KERNEL OF CORN SEED is enough poison to kill 100,000 bees....

http://www.extension.org/pages/65034/neonicotinoid-seed-treatments-and-honey-bee-health


----------



## hpm08161947

http://www.extension.org/pages/65034...ney-bee-health
Quoting from the above article:


> However, when we see kills that are synchronized with each other and with corn planting over a wide area, and the pesticide is found in dead bees near agricultural fields, the weight of the evidence points in just one direction.


Given the spottiness of these kills, it makes me wonder if we are experiencing planter failure... some type of maintenance issue. Most planters seem to work just fine, while some may well be spewing out the seed coating.... Well that is one hypothesis....


----------



## zhiv9

hpm08161947 said:


> http://www.extension.org/pages/65034...ney-bee-health
> Quoting from the above article:
> 
> 
> Given the spottiness of these kills, it makes me wonder if we are experiencing planter failure... some type of maintenance issue. Most planters seem to work just fine, while some may well be spewing out the seed coating.... Well that is one hypothesis....


230 incidents here in Ontario last spring, all near corn plantings just isn't that spotty.


----------



## hpm08161947

zhiv9 said:


> 230 incidents here in Ontario last spring, all near corn plantings just isn't that spotty.


Well.. then perhaps in the preparation of the seed coating.... something that causes the coating not to adhere properly. Maybe a big batch of it got sent to Ontario..... still another hypothesis.

There is surely some reason that we do not see the same bee kills that you do in Ontario. Surely we plant far more corn that the province on Ontario....


----------



## BigDawg

I think that's a very good possibility. What I find amazing and maddening is that the planting instructions for these products do NOT mention the potential harm to pollinators--ever though large bee kills from planter dust are a known problem and have been for at least 10 years. Given the warnings that come with most products these days (read a chainsaw manual lately? lol) I find it incredible that the FDA/EPA doesn't require labeling on these systemic neonic products that clearly explain the dangers to beneficial insects like honeybees....



hpm08161947 said:


> http://www.extension.org/pages/65034...ney-bee-health
> Quoting from the above article:
> 
> 
> Given the spottiness of these kills, it makes me wonder if we are experiencing planter failure... some type of maintenance issue. Most planters seem to work just fine, while some may well be spewing out the seed coating.... Well that is one hypothesis....


----------



## BlueDiamond

BigDawg said:


> What I find amazing and maddening is that the planting instructions for these products do NOT mention the potential harm to pollinators


7 times as much corn grown is grown in Iowa than in Ontario and yet we never heard of planter dust kills in Iowa. So that shows how exceedingly rare the kills are, hence banning neonic seed treatments or putting warning messages on the labels will have a negligible beneficial impact on state or regional colony survival statistics.


----------



## zhiv9

hpm08161947 said:


> Well.. then perhaps in the preparation of the seed coating.... something that causes the coating not to adhere properly. Maybe a big batch of it got sent to Ontario..... still another hypothesis.
> 
> There is surely some reason that we do not see the same bee kills that you do in Ontario. Surely we plant far more corn that the province on Ontario....


One big difference here is that there is a good process for reporting and investigating the pesticide kills. If you have a pesticide kill, who do you call to report? Who comes to take samples/inspect? How long does it take for that to happen? Is this common for all states or does it vary by state?

I think there are a lot of unreported incidents. Many beekeepers rely on farmers to provide beeyards and don't want to rock the boat. Many beekeepers are farmers and have to way the benefits of coated seed vs damage to their own bees. Many others aren't even aware of that it is or could possibly be an issue and to keep an eye out for it. The number of reports here have increased with awareness and swift response by regulators and inspectors.

There is some thought that its the talc or graphite that is often added to the seed to improve flow in seeders that is rubbing the coating off corn. The shape of corn seed itself is also part of the problem. Its irregular shape makes it hard to keep the coatings stuck to it.


----------



## zhiv9

BlueDiamond said:


> 7 times as much corn grown is grown in Iowa than in Ontario and yet we never heard of planter dust kills in Iowa. So that shows how exceedingly rare the kills are, hence banning neonic seed treatments or putting warning messages on the labels will have a negligible beneficial impact on colony survival statistics.


How many beekeepers are there in Iowa?

How does a beekeeper in Iowa report a pesticide kill?

How is the pesticide kill investigated?

Maybe they aren't rare, there just isn't a reporting structure or a reasonable method of beekeepers to report incidents or have testing done?


----------



## WLC

You're forgetting that you can also get fungicide, etc., into the seed coat.
The seed coats come in different pesticide formulations.

So, who knows what differences there could have been.


----------



## soupcan

I've got a gent up in Iowa that farms & also keeps bees along with packing honey.
He had a large bee kill last spring from the planter dust deal!


----------



## BigDawg

BlueDiamond said:


> 7 times as much corn grown is grown in Iowa than in Ontario and yet we never heard of planter dust kills in Iowa. So that shows how exceedingly rare the kills are, hence banning neonic seed treatments or putting warning messages on the labels will have a negligible beneficial impact on state or regional colony survival statistics.


How can you possibly state authoritatively that there have been no planter dust kills in Iowa? Do you have access to either the EPA or State databases? Are you a member of the any Iowan beekeeper associations?

Saying if it's not a problem in Iowa (which you can't back up with any verifiable data) is like saying that there haven't been any dog deaths from glycol in Iowa, therefore glycol is not dangerous to dogs. 

There's no doubt that how the seeds are planted have an impact. In the EU, they use machinery that contains about 99% of the planter dust, while in the U.S. many farmers are unaware that it's even a problem:


"A recently published review of the
risks posed by planting treated seeds in the E.U. estimates that
measures taken there may reduce the dust generated during
planting by 99% [33]. In North America, different planting
equipment is used and there are currently no guidelines for
disposal of waste talc, nor are there devices for filtering exhaust
material from the vacuum planting systems. Producers may be
largely unaware that this material is highly toxic to pollinators.
However, given the unprecedented levels of maize production
across the United States, coupled with the increasing adoption of
neonicotinoid seed treatments in other annual crops covering a
wide area, including soybeans (31.3 million ha), wheat (24.7
million ha), and cotton (4.4 million ha, all figures 2010 planting)
[9], it is clear that this material presents a risk that is worthy of
further investigation and possibly corrective action."

http://www.panna.org/sites/default/files/Krupke_journal.pone_.0029268.pdf

A big part of the problem is that while corn crops used to do very well with IPM practices, with the advent of GMO's, now all of the sudden corn farmers "need" to buy a whole host of products (like fungicides) that they never used to bother with. Over the past 15 years, there has been a 10-fold increase in the amount of pesticides applied to corn--not coincidentally Monstanto sells 95% of those pesticides......

"Over the last 15 years, U.S. corn cultivation has gone from a crop requiring little-to-no insecticides and negligible amounts of fungicides, to a crop where the average acre is grown from seeds treated or genetically engineered to express three different insecticides (as well as a fungicide or two) before being sprayed prophylactically with RoundUp (an herbicide) and a new class of fungicides that farmers didn't know they "needed" before the mid-2000s. ... and in the space of a decade, U.S. corn acreage undergoes a ten-fold increase in average insecticide use. By 2007, the average acre of corn has more than three systemic insecticides -- both Bt traits and a neonicotinoid. Compare this to the early 1990s, when only an estimated 30-35 percent of all corn acreage were treated with insecticides at all."

http://www.fooddemocracynow.org/blog/2012/may/17/bee_kills_in_the_corn_belt_what_ge_got/

So, while there's been a ten-fold increase in the amount of pesticides applied to corn, there has only been about a 10% increase in corn yields over the same period. Great news for Monsanto--bad news for farmers, beekeepers, and the environment......


----------



## cerezha

gmcharlie said:


> Cererza And Big Dog..... Both of you Are totaly unawilling to even discuss, your on The side of Ban everthing and Steve Ellis is our Savior....


I have no idea who Steve Ellis is but I respect his rights to enjoy beekeeping in peace. As for discussion - I do not see any way to discuss something with you because you are just ignorant - we had already probably 10 discussion regarding neonics at beesource. If you would do some homework and check those discussions, you would not need to repeat silly arguments, which were already discussed in previous threads. In order to discuss, you need to have some knowledge first - go and read wikipedia at least. Sorry, nothing personal but your ignorance is just overwhelming!


----------



## gmcharlie

Wikipieda?? as the athortative source??? only someonr in Santa monica would consider the internet a better source than those that live in the middle of it..... I will let the readers of the post consider the merits... between Iowa and IL we ARE the BIGGEST places where these are used....... 

the statement that in the last 15 years we use 10 times as much chems is just total nonsense.... 
First hand Knowledge is what I have... Not of Ontario but of the midwest... and Corn...... 5000 acres or so... and a lot of bees.... which work together just fine with normal precautions..

If you like, come on out... get out of your shell and come see healthy hives and air planters... and maybe you too can update wikipidia with some real facts.......


----------



## Beeslave

BlueDiamond said:


> 7 times as much corn grown is grown in Iowa than in Ontario and yet we never heard of planter dust kills in Iowa. So that shows how exceedingly rare the kills are
> 
> 
> 
> There is a short time slot to visually see the damage done and be able to find the cause. If you visit your bee yard within a week of the "dust kill" you will see the fresh dead bees. After that all you see is old brown dead bees at the entrance....kinda like what you see from bees trying to rob other colonies.
> 
> After that the effects in the hive are subtle. Unless you know what to be looking for it just appears as the hive has an "issue".
> 
> This is killing bees period! It's not as noticable as a heavy pesticide kill but over the course of the season the end result is loss of income for the beekeeper and loss of his personal property caused by the actions of others.
Click to expand...


----------



## Beeslave

http://www.extension.iastate.edu/CropNews/2012/0406hodgson.htm

"Bees are susceptible to many broad spectrum insecticides, but how are they getting exposed to a chemistry largely used for seed treatments? Christian Krupke, a field crops entomologist at Purdue University, and several others took a closer look at how honey bees might be interacting with neonicotinoids. They published a recent article reporting several potential exposure routes. Here is a summary of their findings:

Bees, pollen and nectar were collected from an apiary during the corn planting season in Indiana. All dead and dying bees had traces of clothiandin, and stored pollen had high neonicotinoid levels.


Soil samples collected from fields not planted with a seed treatment for two years still contained detectable levels of clothiandin.


Dandelions collected from around field edges before planting had detectable levels of neonicotinoids (Fig. 2).
Talc used as an additive for planting treated seed had extremely high levels of neonicotinoids. Planter exhaust expelling tainted talc could be coming in contact with bees or plants they forage.


Corn pollen collected by honey bees later in the season was screened; half of the corn pollen samples analyzed had neonicotinoids."


----------



## Beeslave

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0029268

Abstract

Populations of honey bees and other pollinators have declined worldwide in recent years. A variety of stressors have been implicated as potential causes, including agricultural pesticides. Neonicotinoid insecticides, which are widely used and highly toxic to honey bees, have been found in previous analyses of honey bee pollen and comb material. However, the routes of exposure have remained largely undefined. We used LC/MS-MS to analyze samples of honey bees, pollen stored in the hive and several potential exposure routes associated with plantings of neonicotinoid treated maize. Our results demonstrate that bees are exposed to these compounds and several other agricultural pesticides in several ways throughout the foraging period. During spring, extremely high levels of clothianidin and thiamethoxam were found in planter exhaust material produced during the planting of treated maize seed. We also found neonicotinoids in the soil of each field we sampled, including unplanted fields. Plants visited by foraging bees (dandelions) growing near these fields were found to contain neonicotinoids as well. This indicates deposition of neonicotinoids on the flowers, uptake by the root system, or both. Dead bees collected near hive entrances during the spring sampling period were found to contain clothianidin as well, although whether exposure was oral (consuming pollen) or by contact (soil/planter dust) is unclear. We also detected the insecticide clothianidin in pollen collected by bees and stored in the hive. When maize plants in our field reached anthesis, maize pollen from treated seed was found to contain clothianidin and other pesticides; and honey bees in our study readily collected maize pollen. These findings clarify some of the mechanisms by which honey bees may be exposed to agricultural pesticides throughout the growing season. These results have implications for a wide range of large-scale annual cropping systems that utilize neonicotinoid seed treatments.


----------



## BigDawg

You know something really interesting? In the two years that BlueDiamond has been a member here, the ONLY posts he's made have been about pesticides. Over 100 posts, and every single one of them have been about pesticides.

No posts about "how my hives over-wintered," no posts about Langs vs TBHs, no posts about splits or queen rearing.....Nope. Only post about pesticides.

And here's the shocker--all of the posts are pro-pesticide and anti-pesticide regulation. Every.Single.One.

It's a well-known fact that some industries pay people to be "internet/social media shills" that go into forums and Facebook etc and pretend to be everyday citizens in order to spread pro-industry propaganda and to undermine any industry critics.

So, one does have to wonder about BlueDiamond's posting history....


----------



## Beeslave

He did make a comment on how using vinegar instead of roundup could damage your sprayer and possibly have an effect on the bees.lol


----------



## cerezha

BigDawg said:


> ....So, one does have to wonder about BlueDiamond's posting history....


Interesting. Hey, BlueDiamond, are you from Monsanto or Bayer? There is no shame to disclose that you are supporting by the company. There is no shame also to have money from the big guys. Somebody told on beesource that even famous Randy Oliver had some money from the Bayer. Also Beeologics with all famous bee-people are now on Monsanto payroll


----------



## BlueDiamond

Ironically, the unavailability of a pesticide (miticide) during part of last summer contributed to bee loses according to Randy Oliver: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTJBvu6OlHo


----------



## cerezha

BlueDiamond said:


> Ironically, the unavailability of a pesticide (miticide) during part of last summer contributed to bee loses according to Randy Oliver: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTJBvu6OlHo


 Did you noticed that this is a Bayer creation. And Mr. Oliver with them


----------



## jonathan

Cereza. You lose credibility when you start all this personal stuff and insinuation. Are you saying that beekeepers like Randy Oliver or any other beekeeper organization should not engage with Bayer. If you read his website he is completely upfront about his work and contacts with Bayer.
Better stick to the arguments rather than the conspiracy.
We need people like Randy Oliver who are open minded and scratching around for the truth.

Same logic applies to BigDawg.
This 'logic' of you don't agree with me so you must work for Bayer or Monsanto is so so tired.
Coherent argument, facts and references please.


----------



## WLC

Randy didn't say anything in the Bayer video that I don't agree with...

However, he's collaborated with Monsanto/Beeologics as well, and he does need to say as much when he writes about the european neonic ban, for example.

It's one of those conflict of interest things.

I don't disagree with what Randy says or does (except for the Beeolgics field trials). He just needs to list potential conflicts more conspicuously.

For instance, it's OK to say that neonics aren't the cause of CCD.

But, you need to acknowledge the neonic contaminated talc issue as well.


----------



## BigDawg

jonathan said:


> Cereza. You lose credibility when you start all this personal stuff and insinuation. Are you saying that beekeepers like Randy Oliver or any other beekeeper organization should not engage with Bayer. If you read his website he is completely upfront about his work and contacts with Bayer.
> Better stick to the arguments rather than the conspiracy.
> We need people like Randy Oliver who are open minded and scratching around for the truth.
> 
> Same logic applies to BigDawg.
> This 'logic' of you don't agree with me so you must work for Bayer or Monsanto is so so tired.
> Coherent argument, facts and references please.


The "logic" speaks for itself--look at BlueDiamond's posting history. In two years of being a member here, he ONLY posts about pesticide issues, and he ONLY posts comments that are supportive of pesticide use/companies. He has NOT denied that he is a paid shill.......


----------



## BigDawg

WLC said:


> Randy didn't say anything in the Bayer video that I don't agree with...
> 
> However, he's collaborated with Monsanto/Beeologics as well, and he does need to say as much when he writes about the european neonic ban, for example.
> 
> It's one of those conflict of interest things.
> 
> I don't disagree with what Randy says or does (except for the Beeolgics field trials). He just needs to list potential conflicts more conspicuously.
> 
> For instance, it's OK to say that neonics aren't the cause of CCD.
> 
> But, you need to acknowledge the neonic contaminated talc issue as well.


Perhaps it's ok to say that neonics aren't THE cause of CCD, but they most certainly are a contributing factor.....


----------



## WLC

While you can't prove a pesticide bee kill in a court of law.

You can prove that neonic contaminated talc is an environmental pollutant.

So, let's not get deflected by peripheral issues.

We ALL know about the dust problem.

Did Ellis get a dust sample or not?

Otherwise, he's probably out $200k.


----------



## hpm08161947

BigDawg said:


> Perhaps it's ok to say that neonics aren't THE cause of CCD, but they most certainly are a contributing factor.....


What makes you think that is true? Could they not just be separate entities?


----------



## WCMN

WLC


> While you can't prove a pesticide bee kill in a court of law.


I am not sure that is true.

http://www.animallaw.info/cases/causmn693nw2d181.htm


Randy


----------



## D Coates

BigDawg said:


> The "logic" speaks for itself--look at BlueDiamond's posting history. In two years of being a member here, he ONLY posts about pesticide issues, and he ONLY posts comments that are supportive of pesticide use/companies. He has NOT denied that he is a paid shill.......


He's not denied he's the Queen of England either... Wait, OH MY GOSH... we've got royalty on Bee Source!

Come on, accusing others of being a paid shill and the evidence is... they post about pesticides and he's not denied it. Set down your coffee, turn off your computer, and go watch the landing board of one of your beehives. Take a deep breath and hopefully the world won't look so bad.


----------



## gmcharlie

Beeslave said:


> http://www.extension.iastate.edu/CropNews/2012/0406hodgson.htm
> 
> 
> Bees, pollen and nectar were collected from an apiary during the corn planting season in Indiana. All dead and dying bees had traces of clothiandin, and stored pollen had high neonicotinoid levels.
> "


What would be more information and actually relevant is what was the levels compared to healthy hives in the same area?
Saying they contained the chemical is worthless unless we know if it was the cause.
All the colonies contained pollen and honey and wax also.... to actualy solve a problem you need real data. saying they contained the Chem tells us nothing. they also contained water, carbon and a hundred other things.... includeing probably mites and nosema spores... but unless you know what the differences between good and bad and what was the lethal facter you know nothing and the information is worthless....

real data would contain this ......inflamatory articles are the problem...

AS they say its easier to fool someone than to make them realize they have been fooled. 
Articles like this pased off as science are the reason we have so many of our issues today.


Its also very intersting to realize that the linked article does not say anything about it being the real problem, only that exposure is inevitable and possibly an issue and recomends SEVERAL things to minimize exposure.... 

I assume that you being in WI and haveing corn around you also, you have stories to tell of dead hives from planter dust??


----------



## Beeslave

Yes I do and I have. I've spoken with a state bee inspector and a chain of people with the EPA.


----------



## Beeslave

Quote"real data would contain this ......inflamatory articles are the problem"

That article was a summary written by the scientists that did the study. Pull your head out of the sand. If you would spend as much time researching for available facts as you did here constantly saying the neonics are not a problem without showing your own facts your ignorance could maybe be lessened.

Read this article Gmcharlie

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0029268

Pay attention to all aspects of the article. Pay attention to the data graphs of the different areas of contamination. Take notice the dead bees sampled contained clothianidin and the healthy bees didn't. Take note of the contamination found in Dandelion's blooming in fields that hadn't been treated for 2 years. 

TAKE NOTE OF THE FACTS!!!!!


----------



## WLC

WCMN said:


> WLC
> 
> I am not sure that is true.
> 
> http://www.animallaw.info/cases/causmn693nw2d181.htm
> 
> 
> Randy


It looks like they affirmed some, and reversed the rest, then kicked it all back to district.


----------



## D Coates

Has this study been replicated with the same results? 

Screaming "TAKE NOTE OF THE FACTS." and calling others ignorant does not help your cause. In the US it's innocent until proven guilty, the burden is on you to prove guilt not the other way around.


----------



## Beeslave

Many studies in different states and countries have found the same conclusions. Instead of asking someone to do the home work for you, use your computer and do some research.

Saying the treatments used on seeds are not causing off target contamination is like saying varroa mites aren't a problem....just because a hive dies with a high varroa count doesn't mean that's what killed it......just because varroa carry viruses that may harm bees doesn't mean the varroa are responsible for infecting the bees.

If you get a flat tire because a nail punctured it is it the nails fault? Maybe it's the tires fault for not being strong enough or it's the roads fault for allowing the nail to remain on it?<----Sarcasm


----------



## jonathan

WLC said:


> I don't disagree with what Randy says or does (except for the Beeolgics field trials). He just needs to list potential conflicts more conspicuously.
> 
> For instance, it's OK to say that neonics aren't the cause of CCD.
> 
> But, you need to acknowledge the neonic contaminated talc issue as well.


Randy Oliver has highlighted the talc issue over and over again, on Bee-L and on his website and in the articles he writes.


----------



## jonathan

BigDawg said:


> Perhaps it's ok to say that neonics aren't THE cause of CCD, but they most certainly are a contributing factor.....



Evidence?
The studies I am aware of which have looked for a link found none.

What study are you referring to?


----------



## cerezha

jonathan said:


> Evidence?
> The studies I am aware of which have looked for a link found none.
> 
> What study are you referring to?


 Johnathan, we are circling here:


Beeslave said:


> Many studies in different states and countries have found the same conclusions. Instead of asking someone to do the home work for you, use your computer and do some research.


 For ignorant people I do recommend Wikipedia


----------



## Daniel Y

BlueDiamond said:


> Steve made a big deal about an alledged planter dust kill 12 months ago: http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nightly-news/47379683#47379683 There was a follow up investigation back then, so why havn't we been told about the results? Is it because neonics were not detected in the dying bees?
> 
> And if Steve sincerely believes planter dust killed his bees last year, why did he put them in harms way again this year? Why didn't he talk to his corn farmer neighbors to find out when they would be planting this year so he could move his bees away from the fields? Why didn't Steve shoot video and even a photo of his neighbors planting this past season to document alot of dust was being kicked up? Normally there is not much dust kicked up unless the soil is dry and the wind is blowing rather strongly. Why is Steve the only beekeeper in that region of Minnesota alledging planter dust kills?


Why should Steve had to do anything. Why didn't the farmer inform Steve of his intent to plant? Why didn't the farmer take due care in preventing the insecticide coating his seed from being spread. Why doesn't the farmer move his field of corn?


----------



## Daniel Y

BigDawg said:


> The "logic" speaks for itself--look at BlueDiamond's posting history. In two years of being a member here, he ONLY posts about pesticide issues, and he ONLY posts comments that are supportive of pesticide use/companies. He has NOT denied that he is a paid shill.......


You also have not denied you are a paid shill either.


----------



## WLC

jonathan said:


> Randy Oliver has highlighted the talc issue over and over again, on Bee-L and on his website and in the articles he writes.


Randy didn't mention the contaminated talc issue when criticizing the European Union's recent pesticide ban in an article. He also never revealed any potential conflict of interest.

We know that the main reason for the ban was environmental contamination from neonic contaminated talc. Although he dismissed the ban as being unscientific based on Honeybee kills, he knew full well that the neonic talc is an environmental contamiminant.

Those of us with actual degrees in Science have a name for this: JUNK SCIENCE.

I's hallmarks are undisclosed conflicts of interest, and incomplete information.

Let's stick with the peer reviewed scientific literature.


----------



## camero7

Some of us with degrees find Randy very helpful and his reports are far from junk science. It's refreshing to have a real beekeeper do some research and apply it to real world situations.


----------



## WLC

I suppose you could look up the Junk Science Wiki.

A reporter picked up on Randy's article on why the EU neonic ban was unscientific, and used it as part of his own critique of the EU ban.

He had no idea that Randy had done field trials for Monsanto, or that there was a Bayer connection. Potential conflicts weren't mentioned by Randy.

The EU ban was, in fact, based on real science, by real scientists, publishing in peer reviewed journals, internationally. No conflicts declared.

Environmental contamination by neonic contaminated dust is a very, very, serious issue.

Pardon me if I don't take Randy seriously. 

It's unscientific to say that the EU ban was unscientific in a shill piece. :lpf:

From "What happened to the bees this spring 2013" by Randy.

>The neonicotinoids have been “linked” to increased colony mortality<...>In actuality, such a “link” is merely an urban legend,and has never been demonstrated or confirmed in any study<


----------



## camero7

It always amuses me that some like to criticize from afar when the person they criticize is readily available to confront. If I believe someone is misleading or putting out junk science I certainly would confront them directly, not shoot from a safe haven.


----------



## gmcharlie

I have read the articles, unfortunatly where we disagree is in reality.... and the ability of some herre to think 
I do not deny or argue that Planter dust, neonics or clothidin are problems and lethal for bees. so is Sevin, gasoline, permethian, and a million other things.. includeng some nectars.
THe reality as presented in the article is that all but .2%of the corn in the USA is and has been coated. and yet MILLIONS of hives and thousands of Beekeepers manage. The options are worse.... and a BAN on one of the most helpful chems to beekeepers is totaly foolish. Education, and understanding. Instead several here want to BAN them, which will bring back spraying which is 10 times worse.

Lets here your stories...... You say you have some.... quit hideing behind quotes from others articles and tell us whats going on in WI... cause here in IL we have figured out how to raise corn and honey.


----------



## WLC

camero:

Do you suggest that I spend my days chasing down every Monsanto, Bayer, etc. shill that publishes junk science pieces concerning neonics and Honeybees?

Not gonna happen.

There are plenty of peer reviewed publications on neonics and honeybees.

That's what we need to remember. That's what I prefer to read.

As for Steve Ellis, I don't doubt that he has a genuine neonic contamination/bee kill problem.

Unfortunately, he might not have the evidence he needs to get a clear win in court.


----------



## camero7

> Do you suggest that I spend my days chasing down every Monsanto, Bayer, etc. shill that publishes junk science pieces concerning neonics and Honeybees?


You're the one calling him out. Excuses, excuses.


----------



## WLC

camero:

The trick is to find unbiased sources when dealing with alleged neonic bee kills.

We don't doubt that insecticides, like neonics, can kill bees.

We don't doubt that neonic contaminated talc is a real problem.

The doubt comes from the biased sources that we are relying on to sort out this particular bee kill.

Steve Ellis is obviously biased because we all know about his work to ban neonics.

We need to treat his claims as such, biased.

Randy has a bias as well, so we shouldn't use him as a source for this issue anyway.

We need to rely on other, unbiased, sources to sort this out.

Do you follow?


----------



## BigDawg

WLC,

I agree whole-heartedly with you about the perils of biased sources. However, in the comparison of Steve Ellis to Randy Olive, I would only add this:

While Steve may be working hard to ban neonics, IMHO it is because he really believes that they pose a serious risk to his and other's bees. Least I can tell, he is not making a single penny from his activism--in fact he is spending a lot of his own money to make trips to D.C. to visit with the EPA, etc. much less the losses to his own colonies from neonic poisoning.

Randy Oliver on the other hand, is being paid by Bayer and/or Monsanto, so, one has to question whether the statements he releases about neonics are the result of his own beliefs and research, or, are the result of him being told/pushed/nudged to say those things by the people who are paying him. It goes without saying that Bayer/Monsanto would not put Steve Ellis on their payroll, so one needs to ask questions about the "experts" that they do pay.

Lastly, given the huge sums of money being poured into University research from corporate interests via grants, endowments, etc., one has to very carefully examine research papers on the subject as well.


----------



## WLC

BigDwag:

The only unbiased source I can think of would be industry certified dust traps.

They either contain a measurable amount of neonic contaminated dust, or they don't.


----------



## WLC

I don't know if Randy is receiving consideration of any kind from Bayer or Monsanto.

I felt that this statement was enough: "Myth;The neonicotinoids have been “linked” to increased colony mortality. Fact; In actuality, such a “link” is merely an urban legend, and has never been demonstrated or confirmed in any study".

Unbelievable.

While there may be some issues related to bias in scientific publications, I think that the Europeans did a good job of sorting out the neonic dust problem. Translocation is a winning experimental design in Honeybee field trials.


----------



## btmurph

BigDawg said:


> Randy Oliver on the other hand, is being paid by Bayer and/or Monsanto


Wasn't he hired as an independent by Bayer specifically because he has legitimacy in the beekeeping community and if anything would show bias towards beekeepers rather than a chemical company?


----------



## WLC

Perhaps Randy was hired because of his experience running field trials for Beeologics/Monsanto.

As for legitimacy...

This statement is completely untrue:

"Myth;The neonicotinoids have been “linked” to increased colony mortality. Fact; In actuality, such a “link” is merely an urban legend, and has never been demonstrated or confirmed in any study".

I think that Randy just pulled a Jerry Bromenshank or maybe a Jerry Hayes.

Splattt!!!


----------



## TWall

WLC said:


> Perhaps Randy was hired because of his experience running field trials for Beeologics/Monsanto.
> 
> As for legitimacy...
> 
> This statement is an outright lie:
> 
> "Myth;The neonicotinoids have been “linked” to increased colony mortality. Fact; In actuality, such a “link” is merely an urban legend, and has never been demonstrated or confirmed in any study".
> 
> I think that Randy just pulled a Jerry Bromenshank or maybe a Jerry Hayes.
> 
> Splattt!!!


So, you have been a stickler on a number of issues due to your scientific background. Which I think is just fine. But, when it comes to the details of who and why a corporation may or may not have paid someone the details are not something for you to waste your time on? Kind of a double standard don't you think?

Tom


----------



## WLC

I don't know if Randy was paid by Bayer, or how much.

You can enlighten me if you know the figures.

Regarldess, Randy is a peripheral issue.

Here's something to look at:

http://pub.jki.bund.de/index.php/JKA/article/download/142/127

http://www.moraybeedinosaurs.co.uk/neonicotinoid/tapparo_ea_2012.pdf


----------



## BlueDiamond

BigDawg said:


> Least I can tell, he [Steve Ellis] is not making a single penny from his activism


Steve Ellis, 3 other beekeepers and some environmental groups sued the EPA. What dollar amount are they seeking in their lawsuit? I've never known environmental groups to sue without asking for a 6 or 7 figure damage award.


----------



## Beeslave

My personal experience with these problems consists of immediate visual problems as shown in the video Steve had on Youtube. It's not always in the same area as previous years. All my colonies get run the same. They go to CA and sit in 2 different groves. They get mixed around when moved there and then brought back here to WI. When they get back here they get moved out to holding yards of normally 200-300 colonies where I do my spring management. I keep records of all colony movement in WI of where they where first placed all the way up to bringing them to the loading yard in fall to be shipped back to CA. Consistently anytime I notice the kill at planting time those hives always have a higher queen mortality rate versus yards that didn't have the visible kill.

After spring management is done the hives get moved out to honey production yards with 32 hives each. Last year a neighbor no-till planted a field late and it was full of clover bloom. Before that was done my bees could be seen flying heavily to that field. I had 100 colonies at that location at that time. Immediately over the course of the next few days I was seeing the kill at the hives. Those hives were later moved out to their honey production yards. I try to visit my yards during honey production every 10-14 days until late July when I start pulling honey and extracting. During the 10-14 day visits I make sure each colony is queen right and productive. After honey pulling starts I slack off on the indepth inspections. Last year at the end of the season my yards had 0-3 queenless duds....except for the 3 yards made from those hives that were exposed to the clover that was no-till planted over. Those yards has 5,7,and 9 duds at the end of the season. 

I am not the only beekeeper in this part of WI that sees this happen. Last year even one of the State Bee inspectors had the same thing happen......pesticide kill at planting and problems at the yard all the way up to this spring with that yard having the highest deadout rate after winter.


----------



## Spark

BlueDiamond said:


> Steve Ellis, 3 other beekeepers and some environmental groups sued the EPA. What dollar amount are they seeking in their lawsuit? I've never known environmental groups to sue without asking for a 6 or 7 figure damage award.


Can you provide a source or actual information that says they are suing for money because I haven't seen one. Is there an agenda behind your accusation?


----------



## BigDawg

Spark said:


> Can you provide a source or actual information that says they are suing for money because I haven't seen one. Is there an agenda behind your accusation?


It's pretty obvious BlueDiamond is a pesticide industry shill.


----------



## Spark

I already know that BigDawg and as you'll see he won't reply to my question either.


----------



## BlueDiamond

Spark said:


> Can you provide a source or actual information that says they are suing for money because I haven't seen one.


I was asking about the dollar amount because I don't know what it is. Do you know for sure the dollar amount is zero? And who will pay the legal fees of the beekeepers and environmental groups that are suing? An article came out today about how environmental groups often get their legal fees paid by the taxpayer when they sue the EPA:
http://washingtonexaminer.com/epas-back-room-sue-and-settle-deals-require-reform/article/2530505

Excerpt: "U.S. Chamber of Commerce notes in a comprehensive new report on the process, "several environmental advocacy groups have made the Sue and Settle process a significant part of their legal strategy." It's also a significant funding tool for them because in most of the cases (65 percent, or 49 of the 71 cases involving the EPA) the suing group's legal fees are paid by taxpayers."


----------



## cerezha

camero7 said:


> It always amuses me that some like to criticize from afar when the person they criticize is readily available to confront. If I believe someone is misleading or putting out junk science I certainly would confront them directly, not shoot from a safe haven.


 I tried to find any scientific paper from Mr. Oliver.... wait a minute, Mr. Did he has a degree? I have no idea. But the point is that I was not able to find anything scientific from Randy Oliver. He is busy criticizing others work. Could you provide any references to Randy Oliver scientific publication in pier-revived journal? I would really appreciate it!


----------



## WLC

Sergey:

He has an MS in Fisheries Biology. He's a blogger. He writes articles for 'The American Bee Journal". He does speaking engagements. He's a beekeeper.

Oh, it looks like he's doing Honeybee field trials. He's done Beeologics/Monsanto RNAi, and now something else is going on with Bayer.

I don't dislike the vast majority of what he writes since he's informative.

However, I do read critically, and frankly, he's way out on a limb with neonics because of the statement that I've pointed out earlier.

You can't say that there are no studies linking neonics to colony health, when they are relatively easy to find.

It's not all about 'Science' by the way. Don't forget 'Veterinary Medecine' in Europe.

It was an agency Veterinarian that made the neonic beekill determination in Italy, and that led to the neonic maize ban.

Italian beekeepers subsequently reported that their colony losses had dropped to very low levels since the ban.

So, it looks like a Veterinarian made the right call.


----------



## cerezha

WLC said:


> ...He doesn't have a degree in Science. He's a blogger. He writes articles for 'The American Bee Journal". He does speaking engagements. ...


 I think, he has some education in marine biology or something related to the life in water. I apologize for my ignorance - in scientific papers, people usually indicate the degree they have. Since,I could not find a scientific papers, I could not figure out his degree. 
We had hot discussion on this exact subject (neonics) in another (many) thread at beesource . It resulted that I spent approximately 10 hours reading everything Mr. Oliver wrote on his WEB-site. It was sad reading, because, he obviously has an agenda and his criticism was just unsupported by any data. He just ridicules respected scientists. Apparently, by doing so (ridiculing the science) he gains support at beesource. By the way - at that time, he did not disclose that he has support from the Bayer, which obviously unethical in research community - all funding must be disclosed in each scientific paper. Mr. Oliver did not feel it was necessary to do at that time. Now, he is performing for Bayer propaganda video, again not disclosing that he has money from Bayer - in my circle, it is not acceptable. If I would do something like that - I would be fired from the university immediately. What is disturbing to me is that people on beesourse feel, Mr. Oliver's practice is acceptable


----------



## jonathan

WLC said:


> Sergey:
> 
> He doesn't have a degree in Science. He's a blogger. He writes articles for 'The American Bee Journal". He does speaking engagements. He's a beekeeper.


It's actually a degree and a Masters as well!



> I got my Master's Degree working with macroinvertebrates in surface waters,
> so I find this study to be of great interest. As I've mentioned in my
> articles, I am greatly concerned about the effects of pesticide pollution
> upon aquatic ecosystems.
> 
> So the question is whether the neonics are causing problems. Allow me to
> state clearly that I would fully expect high concentrations of neonics or
> any pesticide in surface waters to cause species decline--especially of the
> best indicator groups--stoneflies, mayflies, and caddisflies.


http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/...3E77A91BA3657D9&[email protected]&P=122164

Instead of guessing and speculating about Randy Oliver and his qualifications, why don't you read what he thinks in his own words.
The stuff on pesticides starts about page 13.


----------



## WLC

My bad.

So he's got an MS in Fisheries Biology.


----------



## cerezha

Jonathan, please, read my post above carefully - I spent 10 hours reading Mr. Oliver writings.... I really do not understand, how Masters in "macroinvertebrates in surface waters" could help to understand the mechanism of neonics action in the bee? Are you telling me that ANY "masters" is enough to understand the bee-biochemistry and thereafter advocate for use of chemicals?


----------



## WLC

My MA is in Biology, for instance.

Regardless, he's out on a limb with regards to neonics.

They have linked neonics to colony health/losses.


----------



## cerezha

Randy Oliver ... He holds a B.S. in Biological Sciences from U.C. Irvine and a M.S. in Fisheries Biology from Humboldt State University ===> from Internet, nothing more 

Humboldt State University offers outstanding undergraduate and graduate (MS) programs in Fisheries Biology and we hope that our web pages will provide you with a good idea of what our programs offer. Here are just a few of the many reasons to consider HSU for your Fisheries Biology education....The Pacific Ocean, Humboldt Bay, coastal lagoons, major coastal rivers, commercial fishing fleets, commercial aquaculture, and spectacular redwood forests are all just minutes away.

I hope he had fun: "On-campus salmonid fish hatchery"

source: http://www.humboldt.edu/fisheries/


----------



## jonathan

No one is in any doubt that neonicotinoids can kill bees.
The issue is whether this happens under field conditions and if it does, how frequent an event is that.
Other than the planter dust problem, which is clearly a serious issue to address, the evidence for problems under field conditions is scant to say the least.

You should read Bee-L if you want to get a better idea about what Randy Oliver thinks and how he describes his relationship with Bayer. That is where he posts and he deals with speculation there on a regular basis.

But agreeing with some earlier comments, the best place to inform yourself about neonicotinoids is in the peer reviewed research.
Anyone making claims on a thread like this should back the claim up with a reference.


----------



## Daniel Y

The main defense I see Randy offers is that thousands of colonies thrive amidst corn. Thousands of colonies thrive amidst Varroa also. but nobody claims Varroa is not a problem among bees. It is pretty much a case of lets find out what is wrong by talking about the hives that have no problem. I am not nearly as concerned about the hives that thrive as I am about those that do not. He makes a case that seed treated with Nics do not harm bees. then makes the statement that planting dust clearly does harm bees. He then again makes the case that improper application of pesticides also harms bees. Again I am not so much interested in the results of harmless application is. I am interested in what actual application causes.

Again I am seeing room for distraction, redirection of the issue, muddying of the waters or whatever you want to call lit. make a case based upon one set of circumstances even though those circumstances rarely or ever are the actual case. Nics can't possible be a problems for bees becasue bees already have so many other problems to be blamed for their ills.

He claims that CCD first appeared in 2004/2005. although I have seen myself comments that date the first cases to 1996. Not only that but incidence of CCD parallel the increased use of nics as well. Randy himself calls attention to the increase of colony loses with drought and poor forage. This alone could explain why bees near corn still thrive. they are not forced to forage on poor food sources. when they are they die. and it is corn treated with nics that kill them. That sort of explanation and thousand of others just like it could explain why there is a variation in bee loses and their proximity to nic treated crops.

I do agree that many lost colonies are blamed on CCD when in fact they failed for a long list of other reasons. I also believe insecticides kill bees, I don't care how little you use or how it is applied. And I am not interested in the insecticide that kills fewer bees. I want no bee kills.


----------



## WLC

These studies show how neonics/planter dust affects honeybee colonies.

http://pub.jki.bund.de/index.php/JKA/article/download/142/127

http://www.moraybeedinosaurs.co.uk/neonicotinoid/tapparo_ea_2012.pdf

I don't think that we need to go to a 'second source' to understand the evidence for neonic dust related bee kills.

It's not unusual for a blogger to have seemingly inconsistent views on an issue. I do the same thing all the time.

My apologies to Randy. He does have an MS in Fisheries Biology.

Which, of course, makes him highly qualified for beekeeping and understanding neonic bee kills. 

(How a beekeeper chose that degree is a mystery to me.)


----------



## cerezha

jonathan said:


> ...Anyone making claims on a thread like this should back the claim up with a reference.


 Where your references? What YOU exactly read? Not interpretation, but real stuff?


----------



## hpm08161947

WLC said:


> My apologies to Randy. He does have an MS in Fisheries Biology.
> 
> Which, of course, makes him highly qualified for beekeeping and understanding neonic bee kills.
> 
> (How a beekeeper chose that degree is a mystery to me.)


Francis Crick had a degree in Physics..... J. D. Watson had a degree in Ornithology. Sometimes it is more the method we learn in science than the material.


----------



## WLC

hpm:

They're bad examples. They basically stole Rosalind Franklin's research. You know, the famous xray-crytallogram?

Here's the issue: there most certainly is research showing that neonics are linked to bee kills; unfortunately, someone (who will remain nameless...OK it's Randy) keeps muddying the waters by saying it isn't so.

It's bad information.

Here's what he should have said, "You can't prove cause and effect in Honeybee field trials. However, you can prove translocation, and as always, you can show statistical significance for relationship."

So, on the one hand we have Steve Ellis, who has been suing to ban neonics for a while. On the other hand, we have Randy Oliver who is doing something or other for Bayer.


But let's not forget how they do things in europe. All you need is an agency veterinarian to make a medical determination. Or, something like that.


----------



## hpm08161947

WLC said:


> But let's not forget how they do things in europe. All you need is an agency veterinarian to make a medical determination. Or, something like that.


So my son... who is a veterinary student could diagnose a bee kill when he graduates? At least in Europe. 

Come to think of it... he is very good at loading a bee truck with a bobcat.


----------



## WLC

Why don't we have veterinarians diagnosing Honeybee health related issues here in the US?

You call a vet for other livestock. But, not for Honeybees. All you get is a bee inspector. 

It would be amazing if county and state agencies started using veterinarians to deal with bee kills, and the like, here un the U.S. .

A medical determination carries alot more weight than, say, a PhD's findings.

If a vet says your bees were poisoned, then they were poisoned. If a PhD says the same, then so what?

Besides the differences between scientific and medical findings, there's what occurred in Europe recently.

A Christian-Democrat, Maltese lawyer decided to ban neonic coated seeds for certain crops using the 'precautionary principle'. His committee couldn't reach the required plurality, or whatever it was.

Translation: an agency head just made one the biggest power plays in european history.

So, there's also the political 'power play' as a means of determining if neonics cause bee kills.

That was a new one for the books.

Maybe Steve Ellis is taking the wrong approach by trying to use legal remedies?


----------



## BlueDiamond

jonathan said:


> Other than the planter dust problem, which is clearly a serious issue to address, the evidence for problems under field conditions is scant to say the least.


The planter dust issue has been exaggerated too. It's a minor collateral damage issue seen during dry soil conditions (during droughts which are rare in the US Midwest) and windy weather. That's why only an extremely small percentage of beekeepers have reported planted dust problems most years. Bayer has already developed the technology to reduce dust 50-90% - the technology has been undergoing field trials.


----------



## BlueDiamond

Daniel Y said:


> The main defense I see Randy offers is that thousands of colonies thrive amidst corn. Thousands of colonies thrive amidst Varroa also. but nobody claims Varroa is not a problem among bees


Control varroa really well and optimize bee nutrition and thousands of colonies will thrive amidst neonic seed treated corn and soybean crop monocultures and winter losses will be only 10-20%.


----------



## WLC

Bluediamond:

It could be genetics as well. Glutathione-S-Transferase is an enzyme that reportedly detoxifies neonics in Honeybees. Perhaps some breeds do a better job at detoxifying than others?


----------



## Beeslave

BlueDiamond said:


> The planter dust issue has been exaggerated too. That's why only an extremely small percentage of beekeepers have reported planted dust problems most years. Bayer has already developed the technology to reduce dust 50-90% - the technology has been undergoing field trials.


They are doing field trials to reduce....therefore the issue isn't solved and they are being allowed to continue creating a problem instead of fixing it then continuing the use.

More beekeepers would be reporting the issue if they knew what the problem was to report.

I have hives that thrive....whole yards that thrive. Then there is always the problem areas. It took me years of observations and going over my records to see the connection. After I figured it out it's much easier for me to pinpoint and report.


----------



## WLC

There's a reported 30% colony loss rate here in the U.S. since 2007.

I doubt that we can say that none of those losses were caused by neonic related toxicity.

When Italy banned neonic corn, beekeepers reported a sharp drop in colony losses.

Perhaps neonics really are causing double digit %age colony losses, but we're unable to make the case for any number of reasons.

Are we sure that neonic dust is the big problem, or is it contaminated pollen?


----------



## Beeslave

I have over the last few years found more then just a few studies that show forage plants that grow in fields that were previously used for crops with neonicitinoids had levels of the chemicals in them. Although those levels in some cases are below the LD50 for adult honeybees I believe over time the cumulative presence in the hives will cause issues. Studies have also found levels above the LD50 which obviously will cause colony mortality.

I would like beekeepers who state they have no issues with having their bees near these treated crop to answer a few questions.

Are the fields planted with corn rotated with other crops that provide bee forage?

Are these fields planted by farmers that have up to date equipment or are they still using old planters?

For sake of discussing and not arguing can those of you who have no issues near corn post what your floral sources are that are near these fields? Also what are your yearly loss percentages? Of those losses do you know for certain what caused them?

My personal problems appear during planting time and Dandelion bloom. When woodland forage like Cherry, Blackberry, Locust and Basswood are being worked I won't see the "pesticide like kill" at the hives. Sometimes in certain yards it will reappear when the hives start working clover and alfalfa in fields adjacent to the corn fields and sometimes those fields were previously corn.


----------



## jonathan

cerezha said:


> Where your references? What YOU exactly read? Not interpretation, but real stuff?


You lost me there!! 
What claim have I made that I did not reference?
I have been reading the (peer reviewed) literature on bees and pesticides for the past 4 or 5 years as I am a beekeeper and I want to understand the risks.
I read the stuff with an open mind.


----------



## WLC

OK jonathan, where have you found these references?

I hope it wasn't from Randy's site alone.

If you allow him to select references for you, you can be sure that they've been filtered.


----------



## jonathan

I generally use google scholar plus I read the references people forward to me, and the ones I come across on the forums, and the references cited in the papers I read.
I have no connection with Randy Oliver but I think he is a good communicator and does not get swayed by hysteria.

Have you checked out who is behind that moraybeedinosaurs site you like to link to?


----------



## WLC

jonathan:

"The issue is whether this happens under field conditions and if it does, how frequent an event is that. Other than the planter dust problem, which is clearly a serious issue to address, the evidence for problems under field conditions is scant to say the least."

I think that the above statement ignores studies like the following:

> 
Hazards of pesticides to bees – 10th International Symposium of the ICP-Bee Protection Group
118 Julius-Kühn-Archiv 423, 2009
Bee poisoning incidents in Germany in spring 2008 caused by abrasion of active
substance from treated seeds during sowing of maize
Pistorius, J.1*, Bischoff, G.2, Heimbach, U.1, Stähler, M.2
Julius Kühn-Institut:
1 Institute for Plant Protection in Field Crops and Grassland,
2 Institute for Ecological Chemistry, Plant Analysis and Stored Products Protection
*Tel.: +49 531 299 4525; Fax: +49 531 299 3008. E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract
In spring 2008 a high number of bee poisoning incidents was recorded during sowing of maize in the Upper Rhine valley and in South Bavaria near Passau. More than 11.500 honey bee colonies from about 700 beekeepers in the Upper Rhine valley showed symptoms of insecticide poisoning. The reason for the poisoning was the abrasion of dust from maize seeds treated with the insecticide Poncho Pro (a.s. clothianidin) during the sowing process and blowing out of this dust containing the active substance into the environment with pneumatic sowing machines, resulting in contamination of nectar and pollen. The poisonings occurred in areas in southern Germany in which an eradication program for the quarantine pest Diabrotica virgifera virgifera was active and where clothianidin was used at a high rate (125 g a.s. /ha) on a large scale. An exceptionally high amount of dust of up to 80 g per 100.000 kernels of maize was detected in some of the maize seed batches. The chemical analysis of dust, plant samples, bee samples, fresh pollen and bee bread confirmed the poisoning by clothianidin originating from treated maize seeds. No correlation with any bee
pathogens was detected.
<

I wouldn't call bee kills on a national scale 'scant evidence'. There's more out there, but why should I bother if you can find them yourself?

There's an interesting dichotomy between the hysterical and the revisionists. It's panic vs denial. 

But, we don't need to keep revisiting that.

OK, I give up. Who is behind the moraybeedinosaurs site (I've never visited) that I pulled links from?


----------



## melliferal

The German study is very, very interesting but I would prefer a couple more studies like it which reach the same conclusions. There's a reason scientists don't like to refer to individual studies as "definitive".

These products are in widespread use in the US and there are several universities and laboratories in this country which have done exceptional research on honey bees. It wouldn't surprise me if a similar study was underway here even now.


----------



## WLC

melliferal:

We can easily find studies that go either way. Studies that show neonic related beekills, and others that show high concentrations of neonics and the bees are fine.

You can pick a side, and find the studies to support your desired conclusions.

That's why I feel that the environmental contamination issue is more meaningful. You don't want pesticides that should remain on seeds showing up in other places.

Translocation (contamination) isn't as subjective as cause and effect (beekills).

The off-target effects are being found consistently, not the bee kills.


----------



## melliferal

I definitely agree with that. Regardless of the bee question, as a principle pesticides really should be staying where they're intended to be used and not being blown/dusted/sprayed all over the back nine besides.


----------



## cerezha

jonathan said:


> ...I want to understand the risks.
> I read the stuff with an open mind.


 Great, just tell us WHAT actually you read? References please.


----------



## WLC

What I've found to be of interest is that there may be evidence for detoxification of neonics in both hives and bees hidden in the studies. Neonic contamination levels don't just vary widely. A few studies show that neonic contamination drops in both bees and bee bread after a short period of time (days).

It's very possible that both the bees and the hive microbes are breaking down the neonics. This likely varies by hive and by apiary.

So, that's a possible explanaition for the inconsistency of the bee kills.

The other possibility is that other pesticide formulations may be interacting with the neonics or detoxification. So, bee kills can appear to occur at widely different contamination levels.

While developing Honeybees with a greater ability to detoxify neonics is challenging, I don't think that finding microbes in hives that can detoxify neonics is as difficult.

I've recently added some Honey to a syrup/milk culture media, and had it ferment rather easily. So, it could be a matter of taking beebread from an apparently neonic resistant hive, inoculating growth media with the beebread, and feeding it to the bees.

It could be a way of spreading neonic resistance via detoxifying microbes.

In other words, I don't feel that beekeepers are completely defenseless if they can harness natural pesticide detoxification.


----------



## BlueDiamond

jonathan said:


> No one is in any doubt that neonicotinoids can kill bees.
> The issue is whether this happens under field conditions and if it does, how frequent an event is that.


The most concentrated area of neonic usage in the USA is the upper Midwestern corn belt. Although there are many beekeeper associations in these corn belt states, when I visit their websites (e.g. http://eastcentraliowabeekeepers.blogspot.com/) I usually don't find any mention about planter dust kills. So I presume kills are rare and nearly always avoidable as GMCharlie has pointed out if the beekeeper bothers to communicate with local farmers at planting time. And new technologies to reduce planter dust up to 90% are coming soon. Thus a ban on neonics in the corn belt states would not reduce annual colony loss statistics in any significant way while it would create a headache for the corn farmers as they would have to go back to the old fashion methods of frequent field scouting and use of foliar and soil sprays to control corn pests.


----------



## camero7

> Thus a ban on neonics in the corn belt states would not reduce annual colony loss statistics in any significant way while it would create a headache for the corn farmers as they would have to go back to the old fashion methods of frequent field scouting and use of foliar and soil sprays to control corn pests.


And none of us want a return to the bee kills from an aerial error. No hives survive from those. I've seen 50-60 hives wiped out in a couple seconds. I don't like any insecticide with bees but the neonics seem much better than the organophosphates.


----------



## WLC

I doubt that there will ever be a U.S. wide ban on neonic seeds like the one in Europe.

We don't 'operate' in the same way.

Although, it may be possible that there will be a few localized bans. But, that's it.

It's far more likely that there will be some kind of a 'fix'.


----------



## camero7

> The other possibility is that other pesticide formulations may be interacting with the neonics or detoxification. So, bee kills can appear to occur at widely different contamination levels.


I am very concerned about the fungicides and their interaction will several pesticides. It seems to me they make some much more lethal. I wish there were more studies on that interaction and bee death.


----------



## hpm08161947

camero7 said:


> I am very concerned about the fungicides and their interaction will several pesticides. It seems to me they make some much more lethal. I wish there were more studies on that interaction and bee death.


Is there any crop in particular that you are thinking about? Perhaps apples... maybe cranberries?

In the southern blueberries, fungicides seem to come at almost any time.... insecticides seem to be much more timed. The possibility of they both being present in concentration is pretty good..... course it may not matter, but I would hope that at least some of these potential interactions have been looked at.


----------



## camero7

I refused to return to an apple orchard this spring because my bees came off them in such terrible shape. Not sure what the cause was but a couple died and the remainder took all summer to recover. My bees came off the blueberries that I pollinated this spring in pretty good shape. Bees were a little ragged coming off cran last year. Just doing a couple small bogs this year. I am shifting away from pollination. Too much work for a small operator who is not mechanized for the return. I do charge much more than most for bees.


----------



## gmcharlie

excellent thinking Camero........ seed coating are much better than the arial spraying...

FYI it may not be fungicides, but herbicides also... I have Salvage yard 1/2 mile away.. I put some bees there and could not keep a queen alive for more than a week..... they sprayed herbicides daily (not on the hives but withing 100 yards).... While my bees in my yard seem to not have any issues...... and I know they forage there also... guessing they are not picking up overspray and grooming...


----------



## camero7

Do you know what the herbicide was?


----------



## drewbs

what i dont understand are beekeepers that still go around pollinating crops that the farmers spray, and that are GMO, and then keep doing the same thing after they have experienced CCD. I think it may be they are just used to what they are doing, but if i were them i would stop and try to change my ways. i dont think a ban will do any good, compared to the bee keepers just stop pollinating mono crop farms.


----------



## hpm08161947

drewbs said:


> what i dont understand are beekeepers that still go around pollinating crops that the farmers spray, and that are GMO, and then keep doing the same thing after they have experienced CCD.


Yeah pretty stupid guys... huh. 



> i dont think a ban will do any good, compared to the bee keepers just stop pollinating mono crop farms.


Planning on simplifying you diet ... huh?


----------



## TWall

drewbs said:


> what i dont understand are beekeepers that still go around pollinating crops that ... are GMO,


Which crops that require pollination are GMO? And, how does that fact that a plant is GMO make it toxic to bees?

Tom


----------



## hpm08161947

TWall said:


> Which crops that require pollination are GMO? And, how does that fact that a plant is GMO make it toxic to bees? )
> 
> Tom


Not Almonds, Not blueberries, not melons, not squash..... can't think of one. Maybe Drewbs knows something we do not....


----------



## WLC

Canola and cotton perhaps? Soybeans?


----------



## hpm08161947

WLC said:


> Canola and cotton perhaps?


Neither require bees for pollination..... but you can make honey off them....


----------



## WLC

http://soybeanreview.com/article/bees-and-soybeans-0

There may be a question or two about how both native and managed pollinators interact with soybeans.

Corn pollen does get taken by Honeybees, even though corn is self pollinating.

Don't be so sure about what the pollinators are doing out there in the field.


----------



## hpm08161947

WLC said:


> http://soybeanreview.com/article/bees-and-soybeans-0
> 
> There may be a question or two about how both native and managed pollinators interact with soybeans.
> 
> Corn pollen does get taken by Honeybees, even though corn is self pollinating.
> 
> Don't be so sure about what the pollinators are doing out there in the field.


Of course, no one pays you to pollinate either of these. I assumed that was what we were talking about. 

Soybeans are an interesting plant... some places in the this country bees seem to really go after SB... making a real honey crop, but mostly bees seem to ignore the plant. Now corn.... it is rare to find a bee in GMO field corn... I don't think you could make a bee pollinate the stuff, but garden corn is quite different.


----------



## WLC

Perhaps Monsanto, et al. are missing a key opportunity to not only increase yields, and support managed pollination by making ALL of their GMO crops attractive to Honeybees while also increasing yields for farmers.

It's a political 'trump card' to boot.

I sometimes think that Monsanto just doesn't think things through.


----------



## hpm08161947

WLC said:


> Perhaps Monsanto, et al. are missing a key opportunity to not only increase yields, and support managed pollination by making ALL of their GMO crops attractive to Honeybees while also increasing yields for farmers.
> 
> )


At the moment it seems to be the first thing they turn off. Perhaps nectar/tasty pollen production is a drain on the productivity of the plant? I doubt it though.


----------



## postman

Nah, though it could bee a drain on their profits! You have to think small, very small. Their, patented DNA is flying all over the place...


----------



## BayHighlandBees

WLC

im confused with your point. "abrasion of active substance from treated seeds during sowing of maize" mentioned in your article = "planter dust problem" (which is exactly what Jonathan said).



WLC said:


> jonathan:
> 
> "The issue is whether this happens under field conditions and if it does, how frequent an event is that. Other than the planter dust problem, which is clearly a serious issue to address, the evidence for problems under field conditions is scant to say the least."
> 
> I think that the above statement ignores studies like the following:
> 
> >
> Hazards of pesticides to bees – 10th International Symposium of the ICP-Bee Protection Group
> 118 Julius-Kühn-Archiv 423, 2009
> Bee poisoning incidents in Germany in spring 2008 caused by abrasion of active
> substance from treated seeds during sowing of maize


----------



## BayHighlandBees

btw, an enlightening article on GMO plants on Randy Oliver's site:

http://scientificbeekeeping.com/sic...llapse-revisited-genetically-modified-plants/


----------



## WLC

My point was that there are field studies, and the evidence isn't 'scant'.


----------

