UKC

Calling on scientists, clever people. Unlike me.

Can you please inform me what is the actual truth about the reduction in the 'world bee collective'?

Do neonicotinoids harm bees?

What are the scientific facts please?

Thanks

In reply to The Ice Doctor:

Bee's what?

In reply to FesteringSore:


Wellbeeing.

In reply to FesteringSore:


Knees?

In reply to The Ice Doctor:

There is strong evidence in France. Beekeepers with empty hives in storage. They have watched as neonics have been introduced and their hives have failed.

There is plenty of evidence that as we use more chemicals to look after our own food supply (in the short term), nature suffers.

In reply to The Ice Doctor:

Neonicotinoid pesticides

Bumble bees: reduce colony growth and queen production http://science.sciencemag.org/content/336/6079/351


Honey bees: performance reduced http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10646-010-0566-0
no increase in mortality http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261219403002308

In reply to The Ice Doctor:

I believe neonicotinoids harm bees and continue to support a ban.

In reply to The Ice Doctor:

Yes. Unambiguously shown for wild bee and bumblebee populations in Southern Sweden, where Neonicotinoid seed coating kills hymenopterans both on treated fields as well as in adjacent areas.

The full article (UKC submission system makes a mistake parsing the URL, works from the preview even though it claims the URL is broken)

is behind a paywall but the discussion

http://www.nature.com/news/bee-studies-stir-up-pesticide-debate-1.17366

should be accessible.

CB

In reply to Phil1919:

Whilst this may well be true, anecdote is not evidence or science.

In reply to cb294:


Where is the evidence for it harming honey bee populations? The general consensus is that neonicotinoids are pretty awful for wild bees/solitary bees but don't affect mortality in honey bees.

In reply to The Ice Doctor:


Beekeepers and chemical manufacturers probably have different ideas of what 'harm' constitutes. But even if neonicotinoids don't cause bees to instantly keel over and die the behavioural changes they seem to encourage can have a negative effect on colonies.

Somewhat perversely, Bayer - recently in the news for its efforts to merge with Monsanto - is, as far as I know, the only company that makes anything that is effective in controlling another threat to bees, the varroa mite.

In reply to Phil1919:



That isn't evidence.

Neonics should be banned because of the affects they have on wild bees.

There are plenty of reasons why honeybees are suffering - rising levels of varroa, colony collapse disorder and various diseases. Working out what is causing the increase in these issues is the problem.

In reply to marsbar:

No, but we generally ignore scientific fact when it comes to issues of economy over environment so a bit of a tale about a beekeeper in France who had more than 50 hives in 2007 and now has a couple of weak ones is worth a shout.

In reply to ad111:

That is part of the problem. The other is actually acting on the scientific research that is done.

In reply to Removed UserBwox:

I din't realise they manufactured MAC strips? If fact I'm sure they don't.

In reply to ad111:



I thought there was mounting evidence that these were because of neonics?

That touches on our other stupid mistake, which is to have "bee monoculture". I.e. if one (iow - all one) of our "cultivated" species of bee gets sick, then our entire bee population is at risk. That's monumentally stupid, as most of our cultivated food relies on bee pollination. We already faced the same with the Gros Michel banana and almost lost bananas from the food supply because of it. We're facing the same with GM crops (the guidelines for planting GM crops stipulate that they should not be monocultured, which heavily increases the rate at which insects develop immunity, so for example there are insects already immune to Bt from less than a decade of exposure).

In reply to SenzuBean:

I think one thing with neonics is that is outside of the hive, whereas other problems are in the hive.

In reply to The Ice Doctor:

from my understanding the latest test (last 2-3months) showed that in artificial experiments some wild solitary species of bees suffered, but not at concentration levels they 'may' encounter in fields with 'normal' use. There are no conclusive tests done to date, that have been repeated for honey bees. There is some suggestion that average joe who uses round up etc.. at home or on their allotment is probably causing more harm, as they over use chemicals, only their acreage is much smaller.

I have 7 hives and no one uses any chemicals, of any type within 2 or 3 miles of me, so I'm not personally overly worried. Despite the evidence not yet being conclusive, I still support a ban, not just because bees, but spraying plants that eventually rot into the same ground we grow food in is unlikely to be a good idea in the long term.

Better to prove a chemical safe before use, than to keep using it until proven it is 100% dangerous.

In reply to Phil1919:


If I remember correctly the bees gather the neonics and accumulate them (unintentionally) in the hive, where they build up to dangerous concentrations.

In reply to SenzuBean:

varroa is a mite and in no way related to what bees eat. Mites have always existed, I've seen solitary bees with them too. Resistance may change with other factors impacting a bee though, but artificially keeping honey bees induces or increases mites development. In the wild, hives will grow in size and swarm, finding a new home which will be mite free, so initially only the mites they may carry with them would live in this new colony. It was or is a kind of natural way of house keeping. Now we have to do it for them, trying to use 'chemicals' that kill varroa, but not bees.

In reply to summo:


I'm not so sure of that. I was pretty sure (but am too lazy right now to double-check) that the weakened hives were found to be more susceptible to varroa. A bit like AIDS not actually killing people, but rather leaving the door wide open to other things that are now more easily able to.

In reply to SenzuBean:



I haven't seen the evidence. But it could be there - just harder to find.

While we do only have one species of honey bee, we have hundreds of species of pollinating bees and there are thousands of other insects who also pollinate. It's not exactly stupid as we're not the cause of there being only one species of honey bee in the UK.

A number of more progressive agricultural experts are focusing on more symbiotic farming strategies in order to utilise natural pest control etc. I think that this is a more positive path than our current intensive and monoculture strategy. Before people accuse me of wanting to use "traditional methods that worked for their gran etc" more comprehensive farming strategies exhibited publicly with forest gardens etc have plenty of scientific evidence behind them. I just have better things to do with my time than link in studies.

In reply to SenzuBean:

varroa is a parasitic mite, they suck the blood from bees and drone larva(mainly). There is thought that the wound leaves them slightly like to suffer other illnesses or infection etc.. but little is proven. Perhaps the other illness would not develop if it weren't for the chemicals in their food in the first place. There is little that can be done in terms of rearing for varroa resistance as it's just a parasite that latches on, but more that can be done in terms of forage and rearing for all round resistance.

Some of the countries with worse colony collapse issues like the USA have had a pretty bad system of beekeeping for many years. Some parts of the USA rear masses of queens, I means thousands of small hives. Then they truck them to almond groves and others plants in the south at spring time, they do a mass fertilisation and when the flowers go there is nothing else, it's an almond monoculture, so the bees are all dead by winter. They repeat the cycle annually. That type of keeping was never going to develop a disease resistant species. Parts of the UK are at times oil seed rape monocultures(rubbish honey though), I personally think bees do better on a variety of forage.

In reply to SenzuBean:

I'd heard that the bees get disorientated by its effects and fail to return to hive.

In reply to Phil1919:


Ah, I'm a bit out of the beekeeping loop - I was referring to Bayvarol strips, which I think were the only anti-varroa treatment available in the days I was involved.

In reply to Removed UserBwox:

Yes, the varroa has developed resistance to them.