Beesource Beekeeping Forums banner

Petition: Direct the EPA to ban the use of Neonicotinoid pesticides

46K views 128 replies 29 participants last post by  gmcharlie 
#1 ·
Direct the EPA to ban the use of Neonicotinoid pesticides, until proven that it does not negatively impact honeybees.

Numerous recent studies link the CCD (Colony Collapse Disorder) of honeybees to the use of certain Neonicotinoid pesticides (e.g. imidacloprid, clothianidin, thiamethoxam).

Population of honeybee colonies has been dropping at an alarming rate since 2006. EPA keeps on ignoring the fact that there are effects from these pesticides on bee health. If honeybee health were of any concern to the EPA, the use of these pesticides would have been banned years ago. Countries such as France, England, Italy, Germany and Slovenia have banned at least some form of Neonicotinoids (e.g. for seed treatments).

EPA has agreed that there are "known acute toxicity of these compounds to pollinators" but has not even placed the use of these toxic pesticides on hold.

Please sign at the link bellow:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pe...does-not-negatively-impact-honeybees/zK6mgtc3

It needs 150 signatures to be searchable on the white house website.
 
See less See more
#62 ·
I see the comment about bes do not collect nectar or pollen from corn often. This immediately casues me to suspect that the person has not given the issue much thought. I understand that nectar and pollen woudl be the two things that a person with average knowledge of bees woudl think bees get from plants. But not a beekeeper that I would expect has spend some time gaining far beyond common knowledge. if they did not I do not think they have put much effort into their beekeeping or their opinion about bees. Pollen is hardly the only thing bees forage for. and I do not see anyone that has ever claimed it is. Nectar is also not the only thing bees forage for. Again I do not recall anyone has claimed that either. Pollen and honey together are also not the only thing bees forage for although many times comments indicate this is what is believed. Bees forage for all sorts of plant resins juices and other plant products just in the making of propolis alone. Bees also harvest things such as honey dew from aphids that do feed on the plants. Do you ever see a bee in a corn field? If you do have you ever figured out what it is doing there. I have no question that bees commonly come in contact with corn, I have bees that will land on me. I do to think I resemble anything that is foragable. That the only way bees could pick up what is in these plants is by foraging nectar or pollen is very short sighted. Bees are in the corn. the corn has been poisoned. close enough for me to consider contamination assured.
 
#65 ·
There is nothing in this 8 year old French study that quantifies how much, if any, corn pollen is actually gathered by honeybees. It only states what "can" be collected. Again, the European decision was based on the very real, concern that planter dust can kill bees particularly when there is direct seeding over flowering plants. My understanding is this has been remedied but I have no data or opinion on that. It's erroneous to leave people with the impression that bees forage on neonic laced corn pollen, because they don't.
 
#71 ·
There is nothing in this 8 year old French study that quantifies how much, if any, corn pollen is actually gathered by honeybees. It only states what "can" be collected. Again, the European decision was based on the very real, concern that planter dust can kill bees particularly when there is direct seeding over flowering plants. My understanding is this has been remedied but I have no data or opinion on that. It's erroneous to leave people with the impression that bees forage on neonic laced corn pollen, because they don't.
You are completely mistaken on this statement. 'Planter Dust' was not the issue at all in the European ban, since bans had already been imposed in France, Germany and Italy on use of neonic treated seeds for maize - as long ago as 2000 in France and 2009 in Germany and Italy.

The European Food Safety Agency report, which advised a ban for two years on imidacloprid, thiamethoxam and clothianidin, was centred on the sub-lethal, chronic poisoning that derived from bees gathering pollen and nectar from 'bee attractive' crops, including: corn, oilseed rape/ canola, sunflowers and spring sown cereals.

Planter-exhaust dust was not the issue, in fact it is barely mentioned in the Commission's legal case. The widespread use of systemic neonicotinoids which spread through the entire plant internally, to produce pollen and nectar that is lethal to bees is the issue
 
#69 ·
Herb: I wonder too. As you know, years ago when bees produced tremendous amounts of pollen there were usually lots of other stuff for bees to work, even in the cornfield itself. Ahb for the good old days of old fashioned farming. :)
 
#77 ·
It seems to me that mos think the ony way bees woudl get pollen from corn is that intentionally foraged on the corn. this is not true. that is like saying you get dust in your house only if you want it. Corn is a wind pollinated plant. it does not even really have a flower it has tassles that are exposed to the wind specifically so the wind can blow the pollen around. The pines in the mountains around our valley are the same. you can actually see clouds of yellow pollen above the trees on a windy day. that cloud can and will travel well over 25 miles and cover everything in town with a thick layer of dust. You can wash off your car or a patio and see the piles of pollen getting washed away. There is nothing a bee could touch and not collect pine pollen.
 
#78 ·
You are quite correct Daniel, corn is wind pollinated, but it takes a relatively tiny amount of pollen (and a really short time frame )to do the job required. The excess pollen production that used to result in the clouds of pollen that was obvious in corn years ago has been bred out of the plant in a quest for yield (less pollen more grain). In short there are no longer clouds of pollen being released from the tassels as you see coming off of many of the trees. The assumption that bees would bypass a pollen laden tassel to gather pollen corn pollen that has free fallen somewhere isn't based on anything other than speculation. Bees don't much care for field corn pollen, it's rarely found in bee hives and I'm not sure I have ever observed them actually cleaning any kind of pollen t off of vehicles or anything else besides the plants that emit the stuff. Why would they? As a parallel it seems like the only time I have ever gotten them to rob on dry pollen substitute is when there is nothing else available.
 
#79 ·
From my observations, bees are creatures of design and their design is to get their pollen from flowering sources, not off the ground. I have seen many times where a gathered ball of pollen has fallen off the bee at the entrance to a hive. It will sit there until it gets blown or knocked off. The bees will ignore it.
 
#80 ·
Good point Barry. It always amazes me to see all this pollen around the entrances as well. It makes you wonder why they can have such a strong instinct to do all the work of gathering it and then just ignore the fruits of their labors when it falls just inches from its destination. Must just be the general excitement of the gathering process......or something.
 
#85 ·
I am interested in the exact nature of the conflict of interest accused in the previous posts. just exactly what is known about borderbeeman and his interests that causes a conflict of interest? As far as I can tell there is only one interest and that is providing evidence that Nics are responsible for bee deaths. his opponents than attempt to inflate or distort this fact by saying it is this or that. in fact it is none of those things. it is nothing more than evidence submitted. those that oppose consistently cannot address those evidences but choose to attack the messenger. They want to distort the issue with comments such as "That is nto proof that nics cause CCD" when the information was never submitted as proof of anything. it was submitted as evidence that it might be. I find such distortions intentionally deceitful and those that use them liars. So you may want to tend to your credibility with as much insight as you tend to others.

I do not agree with every word that comes out of the mouth of those that oppose nics. But I do not agree with one of the words coming form the other point of view. I have not heard an intelligent credible defense of the accusations toward Bayer yet. It is unreasonable to assume a pesticide will harm bees? No. Should it be required that Bayer proves that their do not? Yes. Have they? No. they have nice little dance they do around the fire but nothing else.
 
#86 ·
They want to distort the issue with comments such as "That is nto proof that nics cause CCD" when the information was never submitted as proof of anything. it was submitted as evidence that it might be.
Except that is not what is being claimed by border.
96% of the studies fell into category one: i.e. they concluded neonics ARE responsible for CCD/ mass bee deaths
...not much wiggle room there to claim that they "might be", when the claim is that they "ARE".

deknow
 
#87 ·
Science proceeds by publication in peer-reviewed journals; in other words, a scientist must have his theory criticised and taken apart and put back together again by his peers - his fellow scientists. Only if it 'stacks up' after that criticism is it accepted for publication.
However, it is almost impossible to get a scientist to ever say : "this causes this - and I have 100% proof"

It does happen but it is far more common that after a couple of years of work, a scientist will say:

well we studied CCD and we found that neonics kill bees in the lab at doses of 3parts per billion;
neonics are present in pollen and nectar of canola and corn at 3ppb to 5ppb
and we see the bees bringing back large amounts of canola and corn pollen
and we see hives collapse when exposed to these crops

but you will never get them to say neonics cause CCD - because there is always another 'factor' to look at.

The Science Debate is in fact a deliberate diversionary tactic on the part of pesticide manufacturers.
They know that you can ALWAYS get a scientist to pick holes in another study. The process never ends.

The French beekeepers knew within a week that neonic treated sunflowers killed a million bee colonies; they were there; they saw it happen; it had never happened before; and they found imidacloprid in the sunflower nectar, in the pollen, in the dead bees, in the bee-bread, in the nurse bees, in the larvae. It was everywhere.

So they took a science-based decision and banned the neonics in France. CCD stopped.

They had varroa and viruses in France for 30 years before CCD arrived in1994. They still have varroa and viruses, but since they banned neoncs, they have no CCD.

Go figure.

How is your deductive reasoning working today?
 
#88 ·
Should I tend to read bibles, and 96% are Christian and 4% are korans, guess which one??

Asigning a value to a document and claiming you read more of one than the other is ludicrous. Science is not a popularity contest. its facts....... and the facts in this case are simple... all the testing i have seen that "prove neonics are bad" involve acute doses, captive bees and single source feedings. same as if you lock me in a liquor store........ all the once that show normal field testing and realistic exposures show nothing.... and MILLIONS of real world hives here in the midwest in both countries show the same.... an occasional drink will not kill me.... steady diet of nothing else will

As for Ford and Boeing.... the ruling bodies on those companines have done NOTHING but regulate.. both of them are innovators........ and when you study closely tobacco (and yes it was a scam on the us... in the 50s and 60s the surgeon general supported it... so claiming some "supior knowledge" of a ruling body is the definition of insanity

And the coupe de gra?? the comete its called "Bug life"?????? Like asking PETA to rate roast beef sandwiches.........!
 
#90 ·
#94 ·
No, silencing people is usually if not always the worst way to go about things. Borderbeeman may or may not be wrong about neonicotinoids being the primary cause of bee-dying - I take particular exception to his seeming cavalier dismissal of varroa mites as a serious threat to bees - but if he really does think those chemicals are killing bees, I certainly can't criticize him for campaigning zealously against them. Were I convinced that was the problem, I hope I would react the same way.

He has to be helped to understand that there's room for discussion about this; that the issue is far from settled. And he has to understand that the other people here care about bees too, and aren't "the enemy". He will come to understand neither if he's just kicked out.
 
#95 ·
I don't know whether you have noticed - but THIS part of the Forum is called:

CCD and Pesticides Discussion.

What did you expect to find here?

A discussion about the ancient origins of Neolithic Hioney Hunters in the Namib Desert?
How about the origins of the name 'Beowulf' - the first great hero to ever have his name written down in English, in the 6the Century - it means Bee Wolf in Olde English.

I came here to share with you a European and global perspective on the emerging science and ne regulatory actions on the issue of neonicotinoids and bee deaths; they were recently BANNED in 27 countries - did you notice?

Glad you have no bee problems in the corn belt. Strange that my bee farmer friend from the Mid West just lost 2,100 out of 3,200 hives this Spring, which he attributes to his bee stocking up on corn pollen in an area just like yours.
 
#100 ·
I assumed you'd avoid answering the question on the "chemtrail theory" you champion as well. I'm showing that another theory you strongly support with "supporting scientific data" as also all flash and no bang. It shows a pattern where you can't consider you're wrong there either.

Which Dog defense did I use that time? I've got B and I. If I can get N, G, and O, I get my overtime pay!
 
#98 ·
Less harmful is certainly still harmful; but it seems to me the battle needs to be taken to nosema.

The biggest problem with focusing solely on neonicotinoids is that it's basically misleading. There doesn't appear to be anything special about "neonics" compared to other pesticides. Whether neonicotinoids stay or go, the larger group of "pesticides" will continue to kill bees because, well, that's what pesticides do; so we need to be doing more to raise awareness of pesticides in general. What's going to happen when neonicotinoids are put on long-term moratorium because of our efforts, and bee deaths don't plummet significantly (beyond typical deviations) because everyone simply replaces them with other pesticides that kill just as easily? What's going to happen is our Bayer(etc) friends are going to say "see, obviously there was nothing wrong with neonicotinoids", and seriously, how could anybody argue? Consequently, we'll have a whole 'nuther mountain to climb whenever we as the bee industry make claims about any other substance; we'll lack credibility.

Challenging agrichem companies directly by pushing for regulation might not be the best or only way to go. Perhaps we should try to appeal more to farmers themselves, and get them to use less pesticide overall, no matter what precisely it is that they use. They recognize the value of bees and will be more receptive because they aren't on the defensive.
 
#103 ·
I believe it was in January that they placed a temporary ban on them pending investigation. Those investigations resulted in a two year ban, also pending further investigation as well as a study of the results during the non use of them. So from a short term ban to a two year ban in less than 4 months. The current direction of this issue is not good for the pesticide.

I find it strange that people will argue for the benefit of others at their own expense. Sure keep your higher yields. I have a strong back and can shoulder the losses for you. As the community as a whole claims how difficult it is to make a profit keeping bees. Maybe it is time for less crop and more bee?
 
#106 ·
He was an outspoken advocate of fgmo. Run off? Kind of brings to mind images of tar feathers and pitchforks dosent it? Let's just say some folks enjoy the give and take of debates more than others.
 
#108 ·
Err, in this case, it is borderbeeman who is the victim of good old fashioned American manners....having been accused of promoting conspiracy theories. There is plenty to criticise here, but this isn't it.

Deknow
 
#109 ·
I am really glad that borderbeeman is posting links and sincerely hope that he keeps doing so. I don't think he has profit in mind when it comes to bees, but is sounding warning bells that all is not well and showing us many connections between neonics and bee loss.

From my own personal experience, I don't want to have my bees next to any farmer field as I am likely to lose a much larger percentage of them than I do for my town bees.

Then indirectly, I read on some of these posts that I and others must be a bad beekeeper for not keeping my country bees alive. For those that are seeing success in the middle of the cornfields, I am now wondering if location to other sources of pollen just might be the reason for their success. I don't have much access to Goldenrod as others do as the farmers around here are grabbing all available acreage to plant their crops as they are in a boom cycle.

So Borderbeeman, keep posting those links and I'll be my own judge to the validity of them.
 
#110 · (Edited)
http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/wa-LSOFTDONATIONS.exe?A2=ind1305&L=BEE-L&D=1&O=D&P=161176
"There are **** few scientists who have stated that actual field studies found that neonics are causing problems for bees."

Why is it extremely unlikely that the neonics are causing problems for bees? Answer: Lack of exposure due to the extremely tiny doses that are used to treat seeds and the fact that the seeds are buried in the soil.

Example: A 2.5 gallon container of Bayer's Poncho/VOTiVO seed treatment, contains 40.3% clothianidin

Only 2.7 fluid ounces of PONCHO is used to treat the 80,000 kernels that are found in one ~ 50 pound bag of corn seed that will plant 2.2 acres of land in corn.

So that means a 12 fluid ounce soda pop sized can of PONCHO is enough to treat a whopping 9.8 acres of corn = the size of SEVEN foot ball fields!

And means 3 quarts of PONCHO is enough to treat 74 acres of land in corn = the acreage of turf typically found in a 18 hole golf course!

And means a 5 gallons of PONCHO is enough to treat nearly a whole square mile of land in corn!
 
This post has been deleted
#111 ·
Then it must be okay if someone urinates in your coffee if it is only a little bit. One problem I have heard is that the clothianidin finds it's way from the ground coating a seed to the pollen of the eventual plant. from there it is blown in the wind to anything and everything. I don't think there would be a problem if it stayed in the ground. Not for bees anyway.
 
#114 ·
One problem I have heard is that the clothianidin finds it's way from the ground coating a seed to the pollen of the eventual plant. from there it is blown in the wind to anything and everything.
With what consequences to bee health?

The chemicals that come out of car exhaust are lethal to both bees and humans at high enough concentration.
But at highly diluted concentrations both bees and humans do fine in places like this:
 
#112 ·
BlueDiamond,

I don't think I understand your message, other than it is just a tiny bit of poison and it shouldn't kill them. -- Well, it is enough to kill the intended pests and I have seen my bees in the corn gathering pollen and they arrive back to my hives with that very pollen and they store that pollen and then feed it to my bees. My understanding are that neonoids do stay in the ground -- What is the lifespan of these pesticides --- Isn't it true that weeds that come up after the harvest now have the poison in them as well. Does the poison compound in the soil when the second and third planting occurs. I know Farmers are trying to get second crops into the ground within a single growing season. So how much poison is in the corn/soybean plant when my bees make their visit.

Again, there is a major difference between my town bees and my country bees in hive survivability. And one of the differences that I can think of is the variance of food availability and then seeing huge amounts of fields each with each corn/soybean plant having their microdosage of the pesticide neonoid.
 
#115 ·
BlueDiamond,


Again, there is a major difference between my town bees and my country bees in hive survivability. And one of the differences that I can think of is the variance of food availability and then seeing huge amounts of fields each with each corn/soybean plant having their microdosage of the pesticide neonoid.
How many town hives are there?

How many country hives are there?
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top