# More ... > Beekeeping and the environment >  Canadian poisonings

## gavin

Yet another country apparently facing bee poisoning from contamination at maize seed sowing time.  How come the problems in Europe and more recently in the US *don't* induce the regulators and the companies to act before this happens?

It is inconceiveable that the companies involved didn't know about the earlier problems in Europe.  From the testimony given it is plain that the Canadian farmers are still using air seeders that blow their exhaust skywards rather than down onto or into the soil as is required in Europe.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This from Allen Dick on Bee-L: 

> http://parlvu.parl.gc.ca/Parlvu/Time...ceFormatID=873
> This is a(n) audio track and may take a few moments to begin playing. The initial comments are pretty standard and boring, but the beekeepers' testimony is very impressive.

I finally finished listening to this and all I can say is this:

"Wow! Be sure to listen if you are on the fence about corn and neonics -- or even if your mind is already made up."

----------


## prakel

Thanks for the link Gavin, well worth listening to.

----------


## Stromnessbees

> Yet another country apparently facing bee poisoning from contamination at maize seed sowing time.  How come the problems in Europe and more recently in the US *don't* induce the regulators and the companies to act before this happens?
> 
> It is inconceiveable that the companies involved didn't know about the earlier problems in Europe.  From the testimony given it is plain that the *Canadian farmers are still using air seeders that blow their exhaust skywards rather than down onto or into the soil as is required in Europe.*


I can only recommend that everybody listen to this recording himself as Gavin is not giving you the full picture there.   :Frown: 

These beekeepers are very clear about what's happening, this is not only about planter dust but also about *colonies killed by the systemic action of these pesticides.* 

There are plenty of problems from neonics here in the UK too, but the authorities and dominant Beekeeping Associations are remarkably quiet about this. 

 :Confused:

----------


## Jon

> There are plenty of problems from neonics here in the UK too,


Such as....
Don't forget to provide some evidence.

----------


## Calum

Jon its highly unfair that you continue to demand petty things like evidence every time the 'TRUTH' is stated.
If we had to wait for evidence all the time how could humanity ever advance. Think about scientific method - this was discovered by Christians, and the court system, these crusaders for justice and human betterment never let evidence stop them. That’s why they were forever repeating experiments and why judges ask so many questions - they have to get the right result first, then, that counts as evidence after they fit the other pieces together to support that they have the truth.
You are getting in the way of progress seriously! Sarah Palin proves Darwin wrong time and time again by her very existance. The Birmingham five. Thats evidence you can put in your pipe and smoke.

All those that agree say : 'Gavin owns Monsanto'

----------


## gavin

> All those that agree say : 'Gavin owns Monsanto'


LOL!  I thought that it was the other way round?

----------


## Jon

The Canadian authorities are taking another look at neonicotinoids with regard to risk to pollinators.

----------


## Calum

Gavin: So you don't deny it then? I feel a Life Of Brian video clip coming on.....
Or maybe just your a very naughty boy...

----------


## Stromnessbees

> Such as....
> Don't forget to provide some evidence.


Last year the BBKA published an average national winter loss of 13.6 colonies with the following comments:




> This is the fourth consecutive year when BBKA members have reported *unacceptably high colony losses* which is especially puzzling when the weather should have been in the bees favour, but it does show how fragile the health of honey bees is.
> 
> Periods of poor nutrition within the active season from February to October remain a likely cause of weakness in adult bees that could cause them to *succumb to diseases they would otherwise shrug off.*


_
http://www.bbka.org.uk/files/library...1308824156.pdf

The World At One_ reported today that average colony losses have risen to 16.2 % over the last winter.
Report here:
http://www.bbka.org.uk/files/library...1339663845.pdf 

No problem then?


The fact that bees succumb to diseases they would otherwise shrug off is a clear hint at sublethal neonicotinoid poisoning, these products are working exactly as intended by Bayer: 'Premise Plus Nature' causes diminishing grooming behaviour, colonies (of termites) succumb to secondary infections.

----------


## Calum

Someone wrote somewhere that assuming a colony makes only one cast a year, and that at some point the number of colonies in an area has a natural limit, 50% losses in nature should be normal.

I am suprised with the problems of varroa that they only have 16.5% that is much lower than most european countries expect - and they supply far better support for dealing with varroa than I have seen in the UK so far.

To be clear if you offered a beekeeper, even without varroa, would you take 16,5% losses today garunteed or would you prefer your chances - an experienced beekeeper would take your hand off.
Sorry Doris but thats very thin evidence.
also you completely fail to mention the losses are about half of 2007/8 - and seem pretty stable for the last 4 years.
If a beekeeper cannot be happy with that sort of loss rate, they should really stop now. & seriously that post has lowered my opinion of the trustworthiness of your postings - that report was odviously cherry picked - anyone with a primaryschool level maths would see it does not match your assertations. I heard you're a scientist?

Oh dear god, just read your first link. Average colonies/ beekeeper about 4 - means 1 lost colony = 25% losses. Doris I expect that you critically review like any scientist would, the data that you are producing as evidence before you postulate it as fact. You are just opening yourself to attack.

----------


## Jon

LOL at the poor grasp of numeracy.
I always believed that 10-15% was the normal range for winter losses in the UK so 13-16% is hardly a significant deviation from the normal loss rate.

I lost one 2 frame nuc out of 19 colonies I had in the autumn. I could have 40 colonies by the end of the summer if I wanted.
I am splitting colonies to give 5 to my BKA and I still expect to end the year with more than I need.

This is the key fact to get your head around. (no bold or underline needed.)

In the past 3 years uk colony numbers in the uk have increased from 40,000 to over 120,000 according to the bbka.
That is how badly our uk bees are doing. Numbers have tripled.
Who knows where they came from. Outer space maybe.

You can make a strong colony into 4 good nucs in August and have 4 full colonies by the following May.

I know one guy who keeps his bees within 2 miles of me who has had winter losses of 80-100% 4 years on the trot.
Why would that be when we share the same forage area, pesticides and pathogens.

Well I have a theory (unrelated to the brontosaurus)
I treat for varroa with Apiguard and Oxalic acid.

Last autumn my hapless beekeeping neighbour made up a potion with camomile tea.
The year before it was a different potion and the year before that another beekilling useless potion.
The same bloke likes to rant about how pesticides are killing our bees.

Personally I blame the tea.

----------


## Stromnessbees

> Oh dear god, just read your first link. Average colonies/ beekeeper about 4 - means 1 lost colony = 25% losses. Doris I expect that you critically review like any scientist would, the data that you are producing as evidence before you postulate it as fact. You are just opening yourself to attack.


I have done my critical review, and it convinced me that the neonicotinoid pesticides are to blame for the bee decline. 

You on the other hand, as shareholder of a multinational company that uses these toxins, seem to have problems understanding the connections.  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## Stromnessbees

> In the past 3 years uk colony numbers in the uk have increased from 40,000 to over 120,000 according to the bbka.
> That is how badly our uk bees are doing. Numbers have tripled.
> Who knows where they came from. Outer space maybe.
> 
> You can make a strong colony into 4 good nucs in August and have 4 full colonies by the following May.


What you are demonstrating here is that even major colony losses to systemic pesticides can be compensated by production of nucs at apiaries that are not affected by the pesticides yet and with the help of imports from abroad (... rather than outer space).

Luckily this seems to be the case, but this situation is far from being normal and sustainable. 

In the past, beekeepers would make  2 to 3 nucs if they had 10 colonies, to cover against winter losses and lost queens. Now it seems to be necessary to take the same amount of nucs into the winter as the number of colonies, as lots of nucs and colonies just dwindle away. 

And just to repeat what was said many times before: 
neonics predispose colonies for secondary infections and parasites, and affected colonies cannot defend themselves against varroa anymore due to their compromised defense systems.

----------


## Stromnessbees

> LOL at the poor grasp of numeracy.
> In the past 3 years uk colony numbers in the uk have increased from 40,000 to over 120,000 according to the bbka.


Funny way of working. On the one hand you dismiss BBKA statistics when it comes to colony losses, and when it comes to increases you dwell on it.  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic): 

Can you provide the link to this claim, please?

----------


## Calum

> I have done my critical review, and it convinced me that the neonicotinoid pesticides are to blame for the bee decline. 
> 
> You on the other hand, as shareholder of a multinational company that uses these toxins, seem to have problems understanding the connections.


Odviously not - you do not in fact broach any of the points I raised about the evidence you laid out as proof of unacceptable bee losses in the uk. Instead you have chosen to question my integrity on the grounds of how I invest the profits from my beekeeping activities. You odviously didn't critically assess the links you cherry picked.
Also



> In the past, beekeepers would make 2 to 3 nucs if they had 10 colonies, to cover against winter losses and lost queens. Now it seems to be necessary to take the same amount of nucs into the winter as the number of colonies, as lots of nucs and colonies just dwindle away.


Yes thats true - pre and post the spread of varroa. This has nothing to do with saftey stocks in case of posioning. Additionally overwintering 2-3 nucs extra 'in the past' would equate to 20-30% loss expectation. So the 16,x% losses in England that you say are unacceptable, would have been, to quote you 'in the past' quite acceptable. 
If you overwintered2-3nucs in England you should, according to the statistics you yourself presented as proof of the decline of bees in the uk, be able to maintain a steady number of colonies.

You are tying yourself in knots with your own assertations.

----------


## Jon

> Can you provide the link to this claim, please?


It was a press release on the bbka website.

The press and some other people do not understand that there are historic winter losses of 10-15% and they present these losses as year on year as if there were a decline when is fact there is a healthy increase. I don't think a huge number of nucs are imported, mostly just queens and last time I saw the figures it was in the low thousands per year.




> you dismiss BBKA statistics when it comes to colony losses,


I don't. These are winter loss figures and they don't seem that out of the ordinary to me. I am sure those figures are fairly accurate as they are based on a survey of a random sample of bbka members.

----------


## Jon

2007/2008 2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/2012
30.5%              18.7%           17.7%           13.6%           16.2%

So why did the winter loss figure decrease year on year for 4 years from 2007/2008 until 2010/2011 at a time of massive increase of neonicotinoids in the UK.

These figures do not support your case at all.

If anything the figures for the last 4 years are very steady varying only from 13.6% to 18.7%

----------


## madasafish

I was trained as a scientist and object to frequent posting of  information in order to prove a point of view.

Firstly that information is often incorrect or irrelevant .
and secondly repetition of a case does not endear it to me.

It rather reminds me of the "Repent for the End of the World is nigh"...billboards I used to see in London. They have largely disappeared but the world has not. Strange that.

----------


## Stromnessbees

Repetition seems necessary when minds are shut.

I obviously need to repeat what the BBKA said about the 2010/11 winter losses of 13.6%:




> This is the fourth consecutive year when BBKA members have reported *unacceptably high colony losses*...


I assume the BBKA have good reasons to call these losses 'unacceptably high'.

This winter's losses were higher still!

----------


## Stromnessbees

> In the past 3 years uk colony numbers in the uk have increased from 40,000 to over 120,000 according to the bbka.
> That is how badly our uk bees are doing. Numbers have tripled.
> Who knows where they came from. Outer space maybe.


Jon, I think you either need to come up with a decent reference for that claim or stop using it. 

These figures should be official, but I can't find them anywhere. Are they correct?

----------


## beeanne

Surely: 10-something years ago beekeeping is unpopular hobby frequented by v elderly men in bad jumpers= there are fewer beekeepers (as they go tp the apiary in the sky) therefore fewer colonies.
Then: beekeeping becomes "trendy" hobby (see: attractictive Ocadians :-) with fewer cordroy patches on elbows) and colony numbers increase.

I don't see proof of anything in that. Are you not both arguing about nothing? The figures are nothing other than "lies damn statistics and misquotes" or however it goes.

----------


## drumgerry

> Repetition seems necessary when minds are shut.


Doris would I be right in concluding from that, that you believe a closed-minded position to be one that's unacceptable then?!  I think anyone who's read anything you've said in this last while would not unreasonably accuse you of that.  My advice - subscribe to BEE-L and read the archives carefully and at length.

----------


## Stromnessbees

> I don't see proof of anything in that. Are you not both arguing about nothing? The figures are nothing other than "lies damn statistics and misquotes" or however it goes.


You are right, of course.

As soon as there are major financial interests involved, important figures will be stretched or shrunk in order to achieve a desired picture.

In this case the financial interest is enormous. Just imagine the loss to Bayer if neonics were banned immediately!

That's why we need to look at all the figures available, examine them for their authenticity and try to interpret them correctly.

----------


## Stromnessbees

> My advice - subscribe to BEE-L and read the archives carefully and at length.


I have been reading BeeL for quite a while:
Unfortunately it also seems to have a certain number of prominent posters which claim to be neutral interpreters of science, yet when you dig a bit deeper you'll find that they are not so independent at all.

 :Frown:

----------


## drumgerry

Please elaborate Doris.  This thinly veiled conspiracy cr*p is most tiresome.

----------


## Jon

http://www.bbka.org.uk/news_and_even..._survey_200910
estimated increase of 40,000 to 80,000 from 2009-2010

http://www.bbka.org.uk/news_and_even...ey_survey_2010
A further 50% increase in colony numbers mentioned at end 2010

http://www.bbka.org.uk/files/library...1314733047.pdf
By 2011 the colony numbers are now claimed to be 230,000

http://www.pollinator.org/PDFs/OPERAReport.pdf
Try the graph on page 11 showing percentage uk colony losses from 1965 to 1990. Over 30% one year (1987, neonicotinoids not invented yet!!) and most years over 10%

----------


## Calum

Doris have you mixed up being a scientist with being a scientologist?
Because so far your input has been frankly been well below what I would expect from the former, but your assertations as unfounded as the latter. 
Again you are responding to serious questioning with putdowns and implication of financial intersts of the people who are questioning your arguments.
I think that you have a fairly simple problem - your belief that the majority of colony deaths are attributable at least to some extent to the company Bayer is clouding your judgement. Your inflexability to be able to even attempt to question this belief is costing you every shred of credibility you have had. 
Please walk a mile in another set of shoes as the ones you are wearing wore out long ago.

----------


## chris

This thread, concerning Canada, has quickly turned to a reiteration of all the other pro/contra *pesticides done it threads*. So I feel free  to post something that has nothing to do with the Canadian poisoning.

I live and keep bees in an area that is isolated and largely free from agriculture.The little farming that goes on is organic. The department has the largest acreage of organic farming in France.I know of no pesticide use nearby. I was talking with the bee inspector for this area (who has been a beekeeper since his early years, like his father and grandfather) and he told me that colonies in the area have been on the decrease for about 30 years. For him, the main reasons are the changing climate; poor beekeeping methods;very little spring forage caused by the tractor replacing the horse and farmers stopping to grow lucerne which was the spring build up plant; an illness that has been decimating the lavender; the fairly massive importation by bee farmers of bees that are not adapted to the local conditions. I asked about pesticides and he shrugged (Gallic) and said "Not around here".
I'm not saying that pesticides have no harmful effects, Simply that there are steady bee losses that cannot be pinned on them.

----------


## Jon

I was at a presentation given by Jamie Ellis last year and he has a graph which shows how the decline in US colony numbers since 1945 runs parallel to a line showing relative bulk honey price.

The link I posted to pollinator org has a lot of information about where colony numbers are increasing and decreasing worldwide. There are winners and losers and economic factors and varroa play a part.

It also had a very interesting quotation from 'Project Melissa' in Austria, one which Doris has mentioned here and elsewhere as providing evidence for pesticide damage to bees via neonicotinoid seed treated maize.




> Austria
> Another monitoring project with focus on neonicotinoid seed treatment products is the MELISSA Project
> in Austria. In this project, particular attention is directed to the investigation of any damage to bees that is
> reported in association of growing maize. (Latest report: Girsch and Moosbeckhofer, 2011). According to
> preliminary results, the safety of neonicotinoid seed treatment products to honey bees can be sufficiently
> ensured when the prescribed security measures for the use of these products are complied with.


Gosh. Now that is not what we were told but it brings us nicely back to where this thread started about problems occurring when the products are used incorrectly especially with regard to planter dust and the expelled talc.

----------


## AlexJ

I'm not sure it's worth contributing to the debate anymore - but as I've posted elsewhere the UNEP pamphlet (2010)

GLOBAL HONEY BEE COLONY DISORDERS AND OTHER THREATS TO INSECT
POLLINATORS

Notes:

2.1 Europe

A decrease in managed honey bee colony numbers in Europe has been observed since 1965, but the pattern is diverse14. Since 1998, individual beekeepers have been reporting unusual weakening and mortality in colonies, particularly in France, Belgium, Switzerland, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Italy and Spain. Mortality has been extremely high when activity is resumed at the end of winter and beginning of spring.

_14  Potts S.G. et al. 2010. Declines of managed honey bees and beekeepers in Europe. Journal of Apicultural Research 49(1): 15-22._

2.2 North America

A significant and constant decline in domestic honey bee colony numbers has been occurring during the past decades in this region18, 19. Losses of honey bee colonies since 2004 has left North America with fewer managed pollinators than at any time in the last 50 years. In this region, honey bees pollinate nearly 95 kinds of fruits such as almonds, avocados, cranberries and apples, as well as crops like soybeans20. In 2000, the value of crops pollinated by bees was estimated at US$ 14.6 billion in the USA alone21........

It appears there are those (with some apparent authority/credible background) who appear to disagree with the notion on this forum that honey bee colonies are not in decline in Britain/Europe?

----------


## Jon

> It appears there are those (with some apparent authority/credible background) who appear to disagree with the notion on this forum that honey bee colonies are not in decline in Britain/Europe?


Where do you want to measure from though, 1945, 1965, the arrival of varroa in the early 90s, the arrival of seed treated crops late 90s.
Again it is another case of lies, damned lies and statistics.
You can show what you want to show up to a point.

Uk colony numbers are of course lower now than in 1945 but considerably higher than in 2008.

The pollinator org PDF has a lot of the stats from Europe and worldwide.

----------


## prakel

Although a little off topic I think it would be interesting to see how many nuclei the top 5 (in quantity) suppliers are sending out each year (5 is a totally arbitrary figure off the top of my head -but is probably close to the number of large scale nuc suppliers) and then, to see how many of those colonies are still viable after a couple of years. The thing is that there still appears to be a lot of people wanting to get into beekeeping and buying these nucs which I'm sure must scew the figures one way OR the other on a yearly basis. 

Time will tell, once the bee (gold?) rush has calmed right down and maybe a few of the nuc suppliers have moved onto greener pastures but for the time being I'm not sure that I'd place too much weight on the stats -unless they're restricted to colonies going into a minimum of their second winter. 

Just a thought.

----------


## drumgerry

> Unfortunately it also seems to have a certain number of prominent posters which claim to be neutral interpreters of science, yet when you dig a bit deeper you'll find that they are not so independent at all.


So is this how it works Doris?  You make a statement suggesting something untoward is going on, in this instance on BEE-L, someone asks you to justify it, and you "respond" with a stony silence?  Like they say: "silence speaks volumes"

----------


## Jon

When the science suits, it gets quoted, when it doesn't, you make innuendos about the independence of the researchers, and who has funded the research.
Curiously, Bayer actually funded some of the studies which have not shown their products in a good light.
I think it was a Bonmatin study which Graham White used to quote all the time.
It is a tried and trusted modus operandi of most of the anti pesticide campaigners for some reason or other.
Re. Bee-L, there were a lot of disgraceful slurs made against Jerry Bromenshenk when he suggested in a paper last year that a novel virus was associated with ccd cases. Peter Loring Borst frequently gets accused of being a Bayer lickspittle. His problem is that he reads too much so he can cite dozens of papers which suggest that at field realistic levels, these products are relatively benign for honeybees.

----------


## The Drone Ranger

> innuendos


I've heard of those -- Italian suppositories I believe

----------


## The Drone Ranger

I don't know for sure about colony numbers but I do know the Aberdeen beekeepers association had more members in the 1930s and 1940s than the SBA has today.
That's according to old copies of the SBA mag.

Another thing worth noting was in relative terms hives were reasonably cheap but bees were pretty expensive and the cost of setting up was high.

Now if I take a guess I would say there are less bee colonies now but that is most likely due to less interest in beekeeping until recent times.

Adverts from the time said that you would recover the setup cost in the first year.
I don't think that would stack up these days for various reasons partly due to monoculture and loss of forage but also the hardware cost of hives frames etc and cheap honey imports

Adverts for bees almost always concentrated on their honey getting ability and hardiness , less stress was put on temper

----------


## Neils

I think when it comes to the BBKA There is also an element of context that has to be considered around this years winter losses. 16% doesn't seem that unreasonable. As far as I'm aware the Bbka has never stated what it considers acceptable. It's also trying to secure funding for research. If it states that 16% isn't that bad, not far off pre varroa levels then the desire to put money into investigating problems might go away so it doesn't surprise me that they're describing 16% losses as "unacceptable"?

I don't know the picture in Scotland, I'm a member of the SBA but I don't have a feel for what the SBA is saying, nor what the appetite is within the Scottish parliament to fund research

----------


## gavin

You post some perceptive stuff at strange hours.

The Scottish Government chipped in £0.5m into the Insect Pollinators Initiative pot of £10m or so and for that investment there are a couple of projects with limited Scottish involvement and one lead by - ahem - the University of Dundee.  Whether there is an appetite to find much more is not something I know about.

----------


## prakel

> Now if I take a guess I would say there are less bee colonies now but that is most *likely due to less interest in beekeeping until recent times*.


One of my past bee inspectors, Julian Johnston, wrote a small book titled 'Nomad amongst the Bees' in which I'm sure he documented winding up his commercial operation during the '80s. Although I don't have a copy to hand (so I may need correcting on this point) I'm pretty sure he stated that he destroyed most of his colonies because there simply wasn't a market for bees at the time.

----------


## The Drone Ranger

> One of my past bee inspectors, Julian Johnston, wrote a small book titled 'Nomad amongst the Bees' in which I'm sure he documented winding up his commercial operation during the '80s. Although I don't have a copy to hand (so I may need correcting on this point) I'm pretty sure he stated that he destroyed most of his colonies because there simply wasn't a market for bees at the time.


The recent stories about bees all dying out because of CCD and varroa generated a lot of interest

Certain groups people who got interested in beekeeping at that point became experts very quickly

They were saving the bees from certain extinction mostly from dangers the rest of us been ignoring

That included phone masts, electricity cables, fixed frame hives, foundation ,varroa treatments, gm crops etc.

So the new gurus found that top bar hives,no intervention ,no varroa treatment, long hives, tall hives were the key etc.

I realised  I had been living in cloud cuckoo land beekeeping was a whole lot more complicated than I thought, 
I wasn't losing any hives but surely it was only a matter of time .

I had my electric cut off, moved into a cave, bought a pushbike, and a solar panel and that's how I saved my bees from certain destruction

----------


## Jon

DR. 
My mantra is control varroa and control nosema and your bees will be fine and dandy.
It really is that simple.
Even simpler if you live in a varroa free area of course.

----------


## gavin

> ... bought a pushbike ...


You and Jon have *so* much in common.

I think that I have one myself somewhere in the depths of the shed.

----------


## Jon

I haven't bought one for years.
Covered 11 miles today between apiaries.
Car owners - worse than neonicotinoids.

----------


## gavin

> Car owners - worse than neonicotinoids.


I drive mine so fast I leave Chemtrails behind.

----------


## Neils

I dowse for diesel so I get the best of both worlds. Found a great natural supply on some land owned by texaco or something.

----------


## Jon

Dowse or tap Neil.

The Mexicans tap into the Pemex pipelines on a regular basis and every now and than provoke an inferno.
I pass through this town every time I go to Puebla.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-1...-of-fire-.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msDrG1SXxOU




> I drive mine so fast I leave Chemtrails behind.


Ayreton Senna eat your heart out

----------


## The Drone Ranger

you could make a lot of Frome mixture with access to a pipeline

----------


## Calum

> I've heard of those -- Italian suppositories I believe


Probably whats causing Gavins Chemtrails....

----------

