Page 2 of 15 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 295
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Herrick, SD USA
    Posts
    4,625

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    Quote Originally Posted by TWall View Post
    Jim,

    Thanks for posting the link to that report. Interesting results.

    It looks like the one common factor between the vast majority of hives is the presence of varroa.

    When looking at which pesticides were found it was not surprising that the most common were ones that could be used, legally or illegally for mite control. I was surprised to see how common chlorpyrifos was found. It is not one of the insecticides we hear blamed for bee deaths now days. It is an organophosphate with a pretty good residual life. I liked to use it as a flea dip for my dog when I lived in Florida.

    Tom
    Samplings from our hives were included in the survey. We were at about the 50th percentile for varroa yet have not had any high bee loss issues. We do no spring treatments aside from requeening and I am going to guess the majority of participants are doing some sort of spring treatment. One concern that I have is the varroa results may be skewed because it's not possible to do sampling on the same date for everyone. Some may be post and some may be Pre treatment, some earlier, some later. As a big picture I think the results tell a lot but there may be wide variations case by case.
    We also had no chemical residues of any kind show up in our pollen samples (beekeeper applied or otherwise). Our virus numbers were all near mid range.
    "People will generally accept facts as truth only if the facts agree with what they already believe."- Andy Rooney

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    No clothiadin detected?

    That's odd.

    Nevertheless, it's a moot point with the new neonic labels being announced by the EPA.

    They're hazardous to bees.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Herrick, SD USA
    Posts
    4,625

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    Quote Originally Posted by WLC View Post
    No clothiadin detected?

    That's odd.

    Nevertheless, it's a moot point with the new neonic labels being announce by the EPA.

    They're hazardous to bees.
    I don't understand why there is no data negative or otherwise. My individual results (if I remember correctly) showed n.d. For Clothianidin yet the cumulative results don't list it. I wondered myself and I have no explanation.
    "People will generally accept facts as truth only if the facts agree with what they already believe."- Andy Rooney

  4. #24
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Northfield,MN
    Posts
    109

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    if you look closer at the study jim posted you will see the very high amounts of Diflubenzuron and the scary one is Thiacloprid.(neonic)

    Another high one that is supposed to be safe is Imidacloprid(systemic neonic)

    the table at the bottom should be studied closely and see that the range is much different then the average. one cannot know where the bees were sampled and that is why the data range is important.

    I personally have been part of this study for two years and am awaiting this years results.


    Imidacloprid is one of the most toxic insecticides to bees. and some samples were over 200 parts per billion.
    so not only is it the worst it is available for months. the old boom sprayers can be avoided, just think of the corn now, it is the boom sprayer, spraying daily for months.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    In a broader context, including all of the other contributing factors to honeybee losses, we all have our own personal beliefs.

    For instance, my own background would predispose me to believe that the spillover of a virus, like DWV, into other native pollinators is a major threat.

    But, when it comes to neonics, it's the consensus, and more to the point, the label, that matters.

    I wouldn't get too attached to a product that needs fixing or replacing.

    There's no benefit.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Brasher Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    28,287

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    Quote Originally Posted by jeffnmo View Post
    thanks Sqk, that was my point for asking Mnbees. Once bees swarm and set up a hive in the wild they are refered to as feral.
    Jeff,
    I haven't finished reading Randy Oliver's article in this month's ABJ titled "Refelections on the Honey Bee Health Summit" yet, but Randy has a better answer than I gave you. As usual there is more too it than my simplemind can think up on its own. On the 4th page, middle column, third paragraph it reads:
    "Concurrently, there is also a rebounding population of "wild type" feral and survivor colonies in many areas. These bees tend to be locally adapted, resilient, and have apparently worked out how to deal with the varroa/virus complex."

    If you don't have a copy of this magazine get one. If you have a copy, read this article if you don't read anything else this month. I'm going to try to read it twice.

    WLC, you too. U and Solomon. You can subscribe to the online version of ABJ.

    Sidenote: Interestingly Kim Flottum thinks varroavirus should be one word and Randy Oliver sees varroa/virus as almost insperable in modern beekeeping.
    Mark Berninghausen
    The answers are the end. The questions are the journey. Journey on.



  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    jackson county, alabama, usa
    Posts
    4,941

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    here's the 2013 project plan from the aphis website:

    http://www.aphis.usda.gov/plant_heal...rojectPlan.pdf

    another good read.

    from this publication:

    "Current theories about the cause(s) of CCD and increased colony mortality generally include Varroa mite parasitism; new or emerging diseases, especially mortality by a new Nosema species (e.g., Nosema ceranae), a newly evolved and more virulent strains of Varroa mite vectored bee viruses; sublethal pesticide exposures (through exposure to pesticides applied for crop pest control or for in-hive insect or mite control); and poor nutrition (due to reduced forage lands caused by increased corn mono-cropping and changes in agricultural practices). These factors, alone or in combination, are thought to suppress bees’ immune systems, making them susceptible to a host of pathogens, which in turn causes increased mortality."

    (bold emphasis on 'theories' and 'are thought' added)

    these experts are stating very clearly that they know what they don't know, and imho they are on the right track to sorting it out.
    journaling the growth of a treatment free apiary started in 2010. 20+/- hives

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Brasher Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    28,287

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    squarepeg,
    what part of the 30% loss of 2012 was due to CCD? What part to pesticide poisoning?
    Mark Berninghausen
    The answers are the end. The questions are the journey. Journey on.



  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    jackson county, alabama, usa
    Posts
    4,941

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    i don't know mark. and i don't think anyone really does at this point.

    seems like i have read that the incidence of bona fide ccd has been declining over these past few years, but i can't remember where i read it.
    journaling the growth of a treatment free apiary started in 2010. 20+/- hives

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Brasher Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    28,287

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    What I have heard reported from the Apiary Inspectors of America is that of the 30% dieoff, 5% was due to CCD or CCD related factors. The other 25% was due to starvation, diseases, viruses, and other factors. Most of these things can be addressed through management. CCD gets the attention because it is sexy.

    Who is going before Congress asking for moneys to study the other things killing our bees?

    Pesticides don't come into play because virtually no one reported any pesticide exposure mortality to the proper authorities. No reports, no problems.
    Mark Berninghausen
    The answers are the end. The questions are the journey. Journey on.



  11. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    jackson county, alabama, usa
    Posts
    4,941

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    good info mark, many thanks.
    journaling the growth of a treatment free apiary started in 2010. 20+/- hives

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Taylor County, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    713

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    Quote Originally Posted by WLC View Post
    The scientific consensus is that pesticide exposure is a contributing factor to Honeybee losses.

    So, the OP's post represents a minority viewpoint.

    WLC.
    Consensus does not equal science.

    Scientists once agreed that the Earth was flat.

    "There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period."

    http://eaglerising.com/677/michael-c...r7RLRFzwZ7e.99
    Try it. What could happen?

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Brasher Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    28,287

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    WLC, do you use the Scientific Method to arrive at your opinions or positions?
    Mark Berninghausen
    The answers are the end. The questions are the journey. Journey on.



  14. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    The new EPA labeling for the 4 neonicotinoids is policy.

    That was based on the scientific consensus that was reached.

    Although, I will say that getting sued by organizations representing thousands of beekeepers was a plus.

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Jefferson Co, TX
    Posts
    758

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    Rbees - really are you going to go back to the ages when we didn't think we could break the sound barrier and use those thought processes of an ignorant age to point to what science states.

    We now have DNA sequenced, are pointing to which alleles contribute to certain diseases, they are grafting tissue to grow heart valves for replacements, and we shouldn't really use those statements as factors to point to what modern science understands.

    I am certain that in another 20 years those in the know will understand much of this. Or maybe 50 years. But we sure shouldn't use the of age of ignorant to enlighten our thought processes today.

    But it does seem like there is lots of opinions here that are not backed by peer reviewed literature and yet are accepted as sound science.

    This is poor use of science, but follows the lines of what the world press does on regular basis.

  16. #36
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Flora,IL
    Posts
    2,644

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    Quote Originally Posted by MNbees View Post
    Gmcharlie why would you ever defend something like that? i mean are you a beekeeper or not. If you read research or have enough hands on experience you would know that in general the bees aren't as healthy as they could be and many people have proven that neonics contribute to that.
    And yes thank you for stating the obvious that there are a combination of factors.

    I keep bees in the heart of farmland just like you are referring to, and yes they are healthy for now.
    but this is simple science we are talking about.

    systemic corn seeds are planted, then they grow tassels and produce poison pollen. if no rain falls the poison pollen blows around in the wind onto sweet clover, the bees gather some of that pollen and store it away to later feed young.

    Feral bees aren't feral until they successfully swarm and raise a new queen on their own and survive for more than one season. but then who's to say how they are able to mate. i mean if they are only able to mate because of managed drones in the area then to me that's not feral.

    "real world evidence shows researchers to be fools" that is the most ridiculous thing i think i have heard on beesource yet!!
    let me guess you keep 100 hives and you have it all figured out. try keeping thousands alive, changes the playing field a bit
    Because these are feral hives.... and my bees now are healthyier and more productive than the bees I had in the 80's......
    The hives here are succesfuly swarming and reproducing at a very normal and healthy rate.

    Where do you come to the conclusion that your bees are not healthy???
    Most of the cutouts I do are at least 2 years old... several have been around as long as anyone can remember..

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    I'm going to give you my own analysis of what the new neonic labels really mean.

    The American farmer has been left holding the bag for the EPA and the pesticide industry.

    So, now when beekeepers sue, you're liable for applicator error.

    The EPA and the industry are exonerated by the new labels.

    Why some of you have taken the position that you have is inexplicable.

    You need to change your position.
    Last edited by WLC; 08-17-2013 at 07:43 PM.

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    jackson county, alabama, usa
    Posts
    4,941

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    "there you go again"

    (ronald reagan to jimmy carter during a presidential campaign debate)

    give us one example of anyone on this forum taking a position against labeling protection for neonics.

    the only position that the majority here have taken is that you are long on hype and short on facts, and that you have unsuccessfully tried to impugn the reputation of very well respected individuals whose contributions to beekeeping are unparalleled.

    i liked you better wlc when your posts were helpful to the rest of us trying to understand genetics. your politics leaves a lot to be desired.

    please, take your own advice and change your position.
    journaling the growth of a treatment free apiary started in 2010. 20+/- hives

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    By saying that there's no evidence for neonics causing honeybee losses.

    But, I've made that abundantly clear.

    It's not in the best interest of a beekeeper. It's not in the best interest of a beekeeper/farmer.

    If farmers oppose the new labels, they'll be going against public opinion.

    It's almost a 'forced play' for farmesr to join beekeepers who are suing the EPA.

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    jackson county, alabama, usa
    Posts
    4,941

    Default Re: Why/how I know the Anti Neonics guys are wrong

    ok, i'll play.

    short of planting dust kills, what evidence is there for neonics causing honeybee losses?

    and let's keep it to the u.s. and canada.
    journaling the growth of a treatment free apiary started in 2010. 20+/- hives

Page 2 of 15 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Ads