Science > Environmental Issues
Pesticides killing bees
voyageur:
--- Quote from: Gimpy on April 11, 2010, 04:42:58 AM ---
Its not proof or a study, but I've learned to listen to people who have practical experience doing something. ;)
--- End quote ---
Exactly said Gimpy! :)
Keepers known to me move multiple colonies into varying monoculture's and natural ecosystems; they see the results, day in and out, the quality, the colony health and die-off, diseases and parasites. They know the farmers and what they do to their particular fields and orchards - they watch and learn and make adjustments - extensive practical experience says much indeed.
alphonse:
In my experience and very generally speaking, most farms converting to Organic production would leave an orchard or vineyard for at least 3 seasons free of pesticides before introducing hives, or lady birds. The residues in the soil would normally be a good indicator to determine how safe it would be for the insects to be introduced, and the time frames would vary in different countries and regions within those countries, as the degradation of the residues would vary depending on the type of soil - al
Potamus:
Anything from prisonplanet I take carefully. My friend sent me this one:
(Canada already learned: DON'T mess with Bayer)
_http://www.prisonplanet.com/leaked-document-epa-knowingly-approved-bee-killing-pesticide.html
--- Quote ---Leaked document: EPA knowingly approved bee-killing pesticide
Ethan A. Huff
Natural News
Jan 5, 2011
A Colorado beekeeper recently obtained a leaked document revealing that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) knows a popular crop pesticide is killing off honey bees, but has allowed its continued approval anyway. Despite opposition from its own scientists, EPA officials first gave the a-okay to Bayer CropScience’s toxic pesticide clothianidin in 1993 based on the company’s own flawed safety studies. But now it has been revealed that the EPA knew all along about the dangers of clothianidin and decided to just ignore them.
By now, most people know that honeybees are dying off at an incredibly disturbing rate. Colony collapse disorder (CCD), a condition where bees stray from the hive and never find their way back, is nixing millions of nature’s pollinators every year. Previous studies have pinpointed various environmental toxins as the primary culprits, including toxic pesticides like clothianidin (_http://www.naturalnews.com/028429_colony_collapse_disorder_chemicals.html).
And the leaked document, which was written by the EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, explains clearly that “clothianidin’s major risk concern is to nontarget insects (honey bees)” and that “acute toxicity studies to honey bees show that clothianidin is highly toxic on both a contact and an oral basis.” The letter was in response to a request from Bayer to have clothianidin approval expanded for use on cotton and mustard in addition to its other approved uses.
So if clothianidin poses a significant threat against honey bees, and the EPA has known about this all along, why was it ever approved in the first place? And if Bayer’s original safety studies have been shown to be contradictory to actual science, why has the EPA failed to go after Bayer for falsifying safety data? Apparently those who make the final decisions at the EPA have no actual interest in the truth and would rather cater to corporate interests at the expense of public health.Several European nations have outlawed the use of clothianidin, including Germany, Francy, Italy and Slovenia. U.S. growers of conventional crops, however, continue to use the dangerous chemical thanks to corrupt EPA officials. And when all the honey bees die and there are no pollinators left to grow food, these same EPA officials will be responsible for the mass murder of millions of people
--- End quote ---
EDIT: Just found this related post from two years ago: http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=8281.msg68941#msg68941
EDIT: For those into irony, "Cipro" is a truncated anagram of "CropScience"
voyageur:
--- Quote from: Potamus ---
(Canada already learned: DON'T mess with Bayer)
--- End quote ---
Yup, they and others seem to be driving the bus.
--- Quote ---Leaked document: EPA knowingly approved bee-killing pesticide
Ethan A. Huff
Natural News
Jan 5, 2011
A Colorado beekeeper recently obtained a leaked document revealing that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) knows a popular crop pesticide is killing off honey bees, but has allowed its continued approval anyway. Despite opposition from its own scientists, EPA officials first gave the a-okay to Bayer CropScience’s toxic pesticide clothianidin in 1993 based on the company’s own flawed safety studies. But now it has been revealed that the EPA knew all along about the dangers of clothianidin and decided to just ignore them. [...]
EDIT: For those into irony, "Cipro" is a truncated anagram of "CropScience"
--- End quote ---
Hi Potamus, received the same article someone sent me, too, and had to think about it a little, and not sure if these thoughts are correct, but the curious thing is that we are talking about pesticides, as well as herbicide impacts and EPA accepted studies. So if you think about what the aim is of a pesticide, in this case clothianidin or in others like dimethoate, there is no difference, each contains neurotoxin inhibitors and other traits with the former a neonicotiniod vs. the later an organophosphorus, and both are designed to indiscriminately kill insects without being targeted, although they may think or tell people they can do this.
In the case of clothianidin, aka a neonicotiniod chemical compound, there has always been reliable knowledge that this is harmful, fatal in fact to honey bees, as almost all of them are. So not sure about the “Leaked Document” aspect. This would be knowable across a large spectrum of scientists and even bee keepers. The EPA, like Canada's own Health departments have accepted the dubious and controversial test results from the chemical giants always, and like pesticides, herbicides, too, are accepted by the EPA like glyphosates, dicambas et al. and these are just the same; they all have bee killing chemical compounds as well as food-chain toxins to humans.
The EPA approves a staggering amount of chemicals, especially with Bio-tech influences, like clothianidin, which is used probably to work with the kernels, seeds and possibly embedded gmo complexes.
One of the interesting things in the article, as was stated, is the reference to ‘Leaked’, as if it’s some kind of Wikileak – dunno, why would the article say that when these things are well known?
treesparrow:
Then there is this sort of unholy alliance with the chemical companies :(
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beekeepers fume at association's endorsement of fatal insecticides
Britain's beekeepers are at war over their association's endorsement for money of four insecticides, all of them fatal to bees, made by major chemical companies.
The British Beekeepers' Association has been selling its logo to four European pesticide producers and is believed to have received about £175,000 in return.
The active ingredient chemicals in the four pesticides the beekeepers endorsed are synthetic pyrethroids, which are among the most powerful of modern insect-killers
The deal was struck in secret by the beekeepers' association executive without the knowledge of the overwhelming majority of its members.
After news of the deal emerged, some members expressed outrage and others resigned.
The beekeepers have now said they will end their pesticide endorsements – but have left the door open to future deals with agrochemical companies.
The battling beekeepers will have a showdown this weekend at the National Beekeeping Centre at Stoneleigh in Warwickshire.
An open letter signed by prominent figures in the world of the environment and agriculture condemns the British Beekeepers' Association for its commercial relationship with the German chemicals giants Bayer and BASF, the Swiss-based Syngenta and the Belgian firm Belchim – and demands that it permanently sever commercial links with agrochemical companies.
"A charity that claims to have the interests of bees and beekeeping at heart should never put itself in a position where it is under the influence of corporations whose purpose is to sell insecticides which are able to kill bees," said Philip Chandler, a Devon beekeeper and one of the organisers of the open letter, which has been signed by the botanist David Bellamy, the author and television wildlife presenter Chris Packham and Lord Melchett, policy director of the Soil Association, the organic farming body. "It is the equivalent of a cancer research charity being controlled by a tobacco company," Mr Chandler added.
The beekeepers' executive, which effectively controls all the association's affairs, has thus far fended off attempts by its membership at getting the policy reversed.
The beekeepers' association's deal with the chemical companies had been running since 2001, and it received £17,500 a year for endorsing four pesticides: Bayer's Decis, BASF's Contest (also known as Fastac), Syngenta's Hallmark and Belchim's Fury.
The British Beekeepers' Association referred to the pesticides on several occasions in the newsletter BBKA News as "bee friendly" or "bee safe". Yet a 2003 study in the Bulletin of Insectology on modelling the acute toxicity of pesticides to honey bees found that cypermethrin, the active ingredient of Fury and Contest, and deltamethrin, the active ingredient of Decis, were in the top four most toxic to bees of all the 100 substances evaluated. Cypermethrin was second most toxic, and deltamethrin was fourth. (The active ingredient of Hallmark, lambda-cyhalothrin, was not included in the test.) Other studies confirm these conclusions.
Protests have mounted as the revelations came out. Such has been the anger of grass-roots beekeepers that the executive announced a strategic review of its links with "the plant protection industry", which concluded that endorsement and "related product specific payments" would cease "as soon as practically possible".
Yesterday the British Beekeepers' Association president, Martin Smith, confirmed the pesticide endorsements had finished, although he said there might still be some pesticide packaging in circulation bearing the BBKA logo. "We would expect that to be withdrawn within three months," he said.
Mr Smith said that the deals had been originally done as a means of developing good practice in relation to bees with the pesticides when they had been introduced, but that this aim had been achieved – so they were no longer necessary.
His announcement left the door open to future deals by insisting that "the trustees do not preclude accepting funds in the future from either the crop protection industry... or individual companies". Some beekeepers feel this is insufficient and want all links to be broken.
At this weekend's meeting a motion put down by the Twickenham and Thames Valley Beekeeping Association stipulates that "the BBKA cease any commercial relationships with agrochemical or associated companies, including all endorsement of pesticides".
One of the drafters of the motion, Kate Canning, said last night: "They're leaving the door open for future agro-chemical relationships. Our bees deserve better than this. It's time for a clean, green break."
The beekeepers executive is trying to head off the move by inserting its own motion ahead of the Twickenham and Thames Valley one, which asks delegates to support them in the way in which it "should manage its intellectual property". It goes on: "This includes the use of its logo and maximises the benefits which can be gained from these assets and its reputation."
Mr Smith said the logo would not be used on pesticides in the future.
_http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/beekeepers-fume-at-associations-endorsement-of-fatal-insecticides-2182243.html
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version