Eye witness to colony collapse: Bee-farmer loses 2,000 hives in one month

**johnthefarmer** · 03-01-2013, 04:15 PM

[QUOTE=borderbeeman;900277

As to my friend's 'anonymity' - he just has too much to deal with at present. He was waiting for the EPA team to arrive this weekend when I spoke to him, to take samples of dead hives, pollen, bees etc. I did pass on the questions about his treatment of his bees: feeding, varroa treatment etc. He said, "after thirty years as a migratory beekeepr I think I know how to feed bees, treat for varroa and carry out inspections". He said to pass on that he has been 'deeply involved' with some of the bee-research teams over the last six or seven years and his hives have been sampled for pollen residues 'numerous times'.[/QUOTE]

Please let us all know the results of sample analysis. Without any such corroboration of the neonics hypothesis, this sad tale is not going to persuade many people of a clear cause.

Just wondering whether all samples went to one lab only. It's sometimes safer,but obviously more expensive, to involve more than one.

A problem with any results could,of course, be that neonics are already known to work at single figure ppb. and that the delayed effects on colony health,through many factors of debilitation, might result in failing colonies with little residue to be detected.

Nevertheless, I would guess that, in such a dramatic case as this, there should be a detectable level of poison;if only in the comb.

If no such presence were to be shown, this would remain just an unexplained tragedy.

P.S. I'm glad you posted this information ,and I agree that Bayer et al. have been characteristically duplicitious in their selective marketing ploys.

Compare their description of 'Premise+Nature', (Imidacloprid),and its claimed immunity-destoying effects on Termites and their denial of such effects on bees.Followed by their revelation ,under scutiny, that they never tested for any such effects in bees or other pollinators. How poor is that?

**johnthefarmer** · 03-03-2013, 02:32 PM

Originally Posted by johnthefarmer

Please let us all know the results of sample analysis. Without any such corroboration of the neonics hypothesis, this sad tale is not going to persuade many people of a clear cause.

Just wondering whether all samples went to one lab only. It's sometimes safer,but obviously more expensive, to involve more than one.

A problem with any results could,of course, be that neonics are already known to work at single figure ppb. and that the delayed effects on colony health,through many factors of debilitation, might result in failing colonies with little residue to be detected.

Nevertheless, I would guess that, in such a dramatic case as this, there should be a detectable level of poison;if only in the comb.

If no such presence were to be shown, this would remain just an unexplained tragedy.

P.S. I'm glad you posted this information ,and I agree that Bayer et al. have been characteristically duplicitious in their selective marketing ploys.

Compare their description of 'Premise+Nature', (Imidacloprid),and its claimed immunity-destoying effects on Termites and their denial of such effects on bees.Followed by their revelation ,under scutiny, that they never tested for any such effects in bees or other pollinators. How poor is that?

How poor is that?

They produce stuff that buggers up the immune defences of social insects (termites),then don't check whether bees or ants are similarly affected.

I think we're very slowly discovering that they are!

**Kieck** · 03-04-2013, 10:38 AM

They produce stuff that buggers up the immune defences of social insects (termites),then don't check whether bees or ants are similarly affected. -johnthefarmer

Bear in mind that termites are not all that closely related to bees or ants. Eusociality ("true" social organization that includes different specialized castes within the colony) evolved multiple times in insects. Sociality or eusociality does not make them related to one another. In fact, it evolved separately in ants and bees, and at least they are in the same order of insects.

Termites are in a widely separated order from bees or ants. Termites are hemimetabolous (they do not pupate). Bees are holometabolous (they do pupate). Other differences are just as great.

That doesn't mean that neonicotinoids may not have similar effects on different insects, but assuming that it affects them similarly simply because they are eusocial is a fallacy.

**Stromnessbees** · 03-05-2013, 06:48 PM

Originally Posted by Kieck

That doesn't mean that neonicotinoids may not have similar effects on different insects, but assuming that it affects them similarly simply because they are eusocial is a fallacy.

Neonics are neurotoxins, and the nervous system of bees and termites work on the same principles.

If they daze termites enough to stops them from cleaning and grooming it is very likely to stop bees as well, thereby eliminating their number one defense against parasites and pathogens.

At least Bayer could have tested this mode of working on bees when they developed the product.
The claim that they haven't points to a case of criminal negligence at least!

**Kieck** · 03-05-2013, 09:01 PM

Neonics are neurotoxins, and the nervous system of bees and termites work on the same principles. -Stromnessbees

Why doesn't that same apply to aphids, then? Aphids are insects, too, and closer to termites than bees are (although aphids and termites still belong to different orders), and aphids are one of the target insects of systemic neonicotinoids, yet these insecticides do not seem to affect aphid populations as soon as four to six weeks after planting treated seed.