Last edited by cerezha; 05-15-2013 at 04:51 PM.
Of the 30% National Winterloss as reported, how much of these losses have to do w/ neonicetinoids? I doubt that there is any data on that. Is there?
Nothing personal? Of course not. I didn't take it that way and neither should you.
I have deep respect to people like yourself, Mr. Palmer and other 1398, who is working very hard in commercial operation. My point was that it is not right to make a conclusion that all bees are OK between neonics fields based on 0.006-0.07% sample. If you ask the question, you need to know the answer. May be you could answer for Mr. Palmer? Why his bees are doing well? For instance, when Michael Bush is commenting on beesource, he always post a references to the book, so people could learn.
OK, this is getting circuitous.
From what I can tell by reading some of Michael Palmer, his bees do well because of good beekeeping. That's all.
The fact they are surrounded by neonics does not seem to affect them. Mike may or may not have some theories as to why, but really, he probably doesn't know, other than that the effect of neonics on his bees is not the sky falling down scenario that some claim it ought to be.
The reason this has got circuitous Cerezha, is you are constantly trying to work the argument around to the position that Mike has to explain why his bees are unaffected by neonics. But to repeat what has already been said, it is up to people who claim his bees should be affected by the neonics, to explain why their claims are being shown to be untrue in this case.
No reason Mike has to explain anything, least of all respond to comments with a "tone".
. . . it is up to people who claim his bees should be affected by the neonics, to explain why their claims are being shown to be untrue in this case.
Yes, that is indeed the point!
(4th year, Zone 5b, 10/12 hives survived W'14)
To explain it a bit different Cerezha, it would be like me claiming that your bees are affected by unseen microwaves. When you say your bees are fine, I then counter by saying, OK, well explain why they are not affected by microwaves then.
Why should you?
If I made the claim, I would have to explain how it affects your bees, not demand you do.
I purposely do not touch neonics because we have a history of the hot "discussions" going nowhere. If Mr. Plamer's bees are doing 300% better than average (winterloss 10% vs 30%) it may be beneficial to 1399 other commercial operations to learn from Mr. Palmer's expertise - if everyone will have 10% loses, we could just forget neonics! I am trying to see a positive side in this story. Since, loses in average around 30%, to me it means that not so many people learned from Mr. Plamer's how to do a better beekeeping. But, yes, I agree - 10% loss is indication of good beekeeping practice and we all need to learn from Mr. Palmer. I personally, feel bad that did not manage to read any of Mr. Palmer's books or publications. My excuse is that I am a hobbyist and experiment with my bees in my own way. Right now, I am solving the problem, how my formerly nice bees in their anger managed to penetrate PM vented suit many times? My theory is that they regressed so much that their butts are small enough to get trough first mesh layer... or may be I unintentionally selected them to penetrate vented suit?
I would not presume to speak for Michael Palmer. He is the one to do that.
Some things I do know are that Michael doesn't migrate and he raises his own queens and has done so over a long period of time.
you gotta get out into other Forums Sergey. I think this is pretty common knowledge written by Michael himself. Not that I know a lot about other beekeepers on beesource myself I guess.
Being a good beekeeper for perhaps 40 years helps too. Though I guess there are others who have been losing bees who have as many years experience as Michael.
But this is how the system works - company must provide the evidence that chemical is safe, not reverse... unfortunately, US system does not work well to protect citizens - it issues regularly temporary permits before evidence that the chemical is safe has been provided... than these temporary permits extended to infinity...