[Barry Digman]

Here's a story about some of the effects of increased carbon dioxide and temperature on plants. At the end of the story they state:

The changing seasons may have both positive and negative effects. Dr. Morgan and his colleagues have found that the Wyoming prairie become more productive with an extra supply of carbon dioxide, for example.

On the other hand, Dr. Iler worries that the changing flowering times of plants may disrupt their pollination. Some species may end up competing with each other for visits from pollinating bees. “It’s reshuffling the community,” she said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/science/springing-forward-and-its-consequences.html

It raises some questions about the impact on bees.

 

[Bkwoodsbees]

Nature will find a balance.

 

[Greenride]

I saw a study years ago about the growth of shrubs on Los Angeles freeway medians which stated that they grew faster than the same plants a few miles away from the freeways. The commentary/point of the study was that the plants got more CO2 from exhaust and higher temps because of the asphalt. I seem to remember they had numbers on the co2 from data logging measurement at 5 minute intervals over some good length of time, but can't remember what they were, just that they supported the hypothesis.
Fabian

 

[Chemguy]

Very interesting. For what it's worth, poison ivy gets more potent with higher levels of CO2. The link below doesn't go to a peer-reviewed publication, but instead a local newspaper summary of some of the research that's been done.

http://www.post-gazette.com/health/...y-grow-bigger-and-badder/stories/201307220149

 

[BeeGora]

The earth goes through these cycles. Life adapts and evolves. It happened before humans showed up and it'll still be happening after we're gone.

 

[JWChesnut]

The earth goes through these cycles. Life adapts and evolves. It happened before humans showed up and it'll still be happening after we're gone.

You know this because you have researched this or are you just repeating some twaddle because it sounds like it should be true?

As someone who has spent a professional career studying rare plants and animals on the verge of extinction (from many diverse causes), I would counter -- most animal species when faced with an existential change -- will die. Most taxa go extinct. Even the ones that survive undergo a "genetic bottleneck" where the population drops to a vanishingly small number that permits the rare favorable mutation to fix into the newly evolved adapted species.

Furthermore, from our limited perspective, humans are poor judges of geologic or evolutionary timescales. The period of time required for species formation is enormous, and is not measured in puny human lifetimes, or even in the limited period of the American empire, or even western industrial expansion.

 

[sqkcrk]

So, JW, would you go along w/ the idea that humans have little to no influence on what appears to some to be happening? That what humans do doesn't matter to the environment in which we live, the climate? Or that we shouldn't control ourselves and our consumption of natural resources and how we pollute the environment?

"Most taxa go extinct." Any idea about at what rate? And should we do something about that? Can we?

 

[sqkcrk]

It happened before humans showed up and it'll still be happening after we're gone.

You mean humans haven't been here since the beginning?

 

[marsh rat]

I'm thinking our planet has gone through several climate changes in the past few hundred thousand years.

 

[sqkcrk]

It raises some questions about the impact on bees.

We will probably feel more impact on beekeepers as we see the impact on bees. Since everything in the environment is connected, dependent on everything else, the impact will be interesting to see. When we will see it is not apparent.

I keep hearing and reading news reporters asking about the supposed honeybee shortage and how that will effect pollination of agricultural crops. CCD isn't dead in the news media. Gloom and doom sell. Anyone who goes around saying that there will be plenty of bees available for pollination gets shut down or ignored. Saying things will be fine doesn't sell newspapers.

 

[Nabber86]

As someone who has spent a professional career studying rare plants and animals on the verge of extinction (from many diverse causes), I would counter -- most animal species when faced with an existential change -- will die. Most taxa go extinct. Even the ones that survive undergo a "genetic bottleneck" where the population drops to a vanishingly small number that permits the rare favorable mutation to fix into the newly evolved adapted species.

Right, and isnt it true that 99.9% (or some number close to that) of all species that have ever been alive on earth have gone extinct?

 

[Nabber86]

I'm thinking our planet has gone through several climate changes in the past few hundred thousand years.

Make that about 5 billion years.

 

[BeeGora]

You know this because you have researched this or are you just repeating some twaddle because it sounds like it should be true?

As someone who has spent a professional career studying rare plants and animals on the verge of extinction (from many diverse causes), I would counter -- most animal species when faced with an existential change -- will die. Most taxa go extinct. Even the ones that survive undergo a "genetic bottleneck" where the population drops to a vanishingly small number that permits the rare favorable mutation to fix into the newly evolved adapted species.

Furthermore, from our limited perspective, humans are poor judges of geologic or evolutionary timescales. The period of time required for species formation is enormous, and is not measured in puny human lifetimes, or even in the limited period of the American empire, or even western industrial expansion.

I'm glad you agree with me on that ChestNut.....some people get patronizing about statements like that........

 

[Barry Digman]

Before this derails and I have to move my own thread to Tailgater let's consider the original question.

What might the impact of earlier springs and longer growing seasons be on bees. And beekeepers?

 

[Lowe land apiary]

Before this derails and I have to move my own thread to Tailgater let's consider the original question.

What might the impact of earlier springs and longer growing seasons be on bees. And beekeepers?

It has very little impact over the long run. Every year is different, growing seasons are an average. Last frost dates are not set in stone. They are the average date that your climate will have its last killing freeze. So this year you may have 10-15 days less for plant production. Next might be 20 days longer. The next may be 15 days longer. Then you have a year 18 days shorter. As for climate change, just remember the same people and or organizations claiming global warming were warning of a coming ice age in the 70's. Changes that man sees and logs are acute compared to geological time.

 

[TWall]

In the spirit of the original post here are a few thoughts. I'm assuming that we are talking about climate warming, not cooling.

First, the AFB line would move northward. Along with this pests like SHB would be more persistant farther north.

Over time we could see a change in 'native' flora. This may result in more nectar producing in traditional boreal forests. Winters would be shorter, right??, so overwintering would be easier. Shorter winters mean longer growing seasons. This would allow longer season crops to be grown in areas they traditionally have not been grown. Maybe almonds will be grown outside of central CA? Maybe cotton will be grown in Ohio?

As long as there is a profitable market for bee products, honey, wax, pollination, etc. beekeepers will adapt to the changes.

Tom

 

[waynesgarden]

We will have a longer period of mite build-up. More and longer episodes of drought requiring feeding? Wax moths will become a problem in Maine.

I remember the "ice-age" claims of some in the 1970's. It did not have much in the way of scientific support.

Wayne

 

[Michael Bush]

Have you noticed it's not "global warming" anymore? It's "climate change". There has always been "climate change". That's why we are no longer in an "ice age"... Now no matter where it goes, up or down, they can blame it on "climate change".

 

[Santa Caras]

Sounds to me like "more Honey!!" (with longer growing seasons)
As for the rest......Ebb and Flow Ebb and Flow
Read a science fiction book called "Evolution" that kinda blew my mind.
Story based on a creature from before time and it traced the genetics/evolution through all the changes, into humans, and what MAY come after us, until the end of Earth when our Sun goes nova. Made me realize just what a blink in time we are.

 

[ForrestB]

No one really knows for sure what the long term effects of emitting gigatons of greenhouse gases into a closed system will be, but the notion that it will have no effect is wishful thinking. I can't help but notice that when there is a profit to be made, human beings seem capable of amazing things, but if the consequences of burning fossil fuels means they might have to turn down the heat in winter or drive a more efficient car? ...suddenly nothing we can do can have any impact on the planet, we are just as insignificant as ants.