Home Page
   Articles
       links
About Us    
Traders        
Recipes            
Latest Articles
Please act, now is the time.
Page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> The Apiary
Author 
 Message
Cathryn



Joined: 16 Jul 2005
Posts: 18750
Location: Ceredigion
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 12 7:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

http://theabk.com.au/article/neonicotinoids-australia

This is rather anecdotal but I think anything scientific on this would be beyond me.

Tavascarow



Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 6392
Location: South Cornwall
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 12 7:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Quote:
For the two studies, bees were directly sprayed with neonicotinoid products and the effects were analysed.

That's a complete lie.
In both studies (AFAIA) bees where fed syrup with concentrations of insecticide the same as found in the honey of colonies foraging over neonic treated crops.
Neither study showed bees navigation or communication where affected, although there is research elsewhere from Germany & the USA that indicate this.
The British study shows the laying ability of queens from colonies fed neonics is much reduced, & the French study shows bees fed neonics are more susceptible to Nosema, a common bee disease found in most hives that generally has little effect until other factors come into play.
Such as chemical contamination of food stores & stress through other mismanagement.
IMHO if they can't counter the argument with real facts it proves the point.

Cathryn



Joined: 16 Jul 2005
Posts: 18750
Location: Ceredigion
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 12 7:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    



I might ask him to substantiate what he has written.

Tavascarow



Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 6392
Location: South Cornwall
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 12 8:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Cathryn wrote:


I might ask him to substantiate what he has written.

& I will post your link on the natural beekeeping forum so those with better credentials & more knowledge than I can really rip into him.
Thanks.

Cathryn



Joined: 16 Jul 2005
Posts: 18750
Location: Ceredigion
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 12 9:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

http://grist.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/bees_guelph.pdf

I am just posting this here so that we can look at it at some point. It's Bayers research. I want to read all sides, eventually.

The use of bees to pollinate one crop only particularly in the US must surely be a bad thing as well and if they are already weakened then the effect will be magnified. Calling it colony collapse disorder is too convenient a label for something that probably has a multitude of causes.

Tavascarow



Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 6392
Location: South Cornwall
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 12 9:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Article in the economist
& if you have the time a webinar from America.

Cathryn



Joined: 16 Jul 2005
Posts: 18750
Location: Ceredigion
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 12 6:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

I have read the Stirling research.

I made time. I read a lot that evening. I kind of wanted to say that I want to hear all sides of it. Emotionally I feel it has got to have an effect. Emotionally I am inclined to feel that it should be banned. But I also want to see the other arguments. Pesticides have meant that crops are protected, that people do not go hungry (and I appreciate that this could be qualified). Issues are rarely black and white and I want to understand the greys of this as well.

Cathryn



Joined: 16 Jul 2005
Posts: 18750
Location: Ceredigion
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 12 7:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

There was something on wikepedia about how the chalk on the seed means that the pesticide is in the environment (rather like the aerosol effect) Cannot remember if I have read the research paper that it came from though. I don't think I have.

I did feel that I needed more information around the research that Bayer carried out when it was licensed. It was late though and I might have missed or not fully understood what it said about distance between control areas.

Cathryn



Joined: 16 Jul 2005
Posts: 18750
Location: Ceredigion
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 12 7:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

And just as I typed that the webinair got to the talc part.

Cathryn



Joined: 16 Jul 2005
Posts: 18750
Location: Ceredigion
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 12 7:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

And just as I typed that the webinair got to the talc part.

Tavascarow



Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 6392
Location: South Cornwall
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 12 7:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Cathryn wrote:
I have read the Stirling research.

I made time. I read a lot that evening. I kind of wanted to say that I want to hear all sides of it. Emotionally I feel it has got to have an effect. Emotionally I am inclined to feel that it should be banned. But I also want to see the other arguments. Pesticides have meant that crops are protected, that people do not go hungry (and I appreciate that this could be qualified). Issues are rarely black and white and I want to understand the greys of this as well.
One of the greys is the fact a vast area of planting is being subjected to these chemicals regardless of need.
Whereas a farmer is likely to spray only when he sees a problem emerging.
Also as well as affecting target pests & pollinators they are also killing natural predators that could possibly deal with minor infestation before it becomes economically damaging.
Of course Bayer counter this by saying it saves spraying which has its own draw backs, but at least with spraying If done correctly & away from bloom time the crop is relatively safe for bees to forage.
With plants grown from neonic treated seed the chemical is present throughout the plants life, & as that webinar says only a few parts per billion is enough to affect bees.

Hairyloon



Joined: 20 Nov 2008
Posts: 10118
Location: Today I are mostly being in Yorkshire.
PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 12 4:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

I have just heard back from my MP as to why he had not signed it when he said he would, and it turns out that I had not been clear, and he had signed EDM-1267, which is a call by Martin Catton MP to discuss neonicitinoids...
I can see how the misunderstanding arose...

So why are there two EDM's calling for much the same thing, but without cross referencing each other?
It looks like many of the MP's signing either are not aware of the other, since they have not signed both.

I am minded to Mr Catton MP and ask what he is playing at.

Nick



Joined: 02 Nov 2004
Posts: 29412
Location: Hereford
PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 12 4:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

The cynic in me says two EDM allow for plenty of people to sign up and neither to be successful.

But, that's me being a cynic.

Hairyloon



Joined: 20 Nov 2008
Posts: 10118
Location: Today I are mostly being in Yorkshire.
PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 12 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Nick wrote:
The cynic in me says two EDM allow for plenty of people to sign up and neither to be successful.


Yes. It is almost as if it was designed to fail.

Cathryn



Joined: 16 Jul 2005
Posts: 18750
Location: Ceredigion
PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 12 7:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Really?

thinks *must check my portfolio of shares*

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> The Apiary All times are GMT
Page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2
View Latest Posts View Latest Posts

 

Archive
Powered by php-BB © 2001, 2005 php-BB Group
Style by marsjupiter.com, released under GNU (GNU/GPL) license.
Copyright 2004 marsjupiter.com