SBA AGM Vote in the Herald

**gavin** · 19-03-2013, 01:45 PM

Check it out here:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/h...cides.20543869

There is also a letter here by Clare Darlaston who spoke on Saturday in defense of Eric's motion:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/commen...cides.20543861

Not much on the views of the beekeepers that voted against the motion. Maybe it is time to write a letter .......

**Trog** · 19-03-2013, 02:25 PM

Nice to see a balanced article where the reporter has taken the trouble to seek a reply to the accusations. Let's hope any others do the same.
Does anyone know the Glasgow beekeeper who wrote the letter? How long has she kept bees?

**Black Comb** · 19-03-2013, 03:27 PM

2 "imagines" prove nothing.

**gavin** · 19-03-2013, 03:48 PM

Originally Posted by Trog

Nice to see a balanced article where the reporter has taken the trouble to seek a reply to the accusations. Let's hope any others do the same.
Does anyone know the Glasgow beekeeper who wrote the letter? How long has she kept bees?

I've met her a few times at beekeeper meetings in Glasgow. She sups from the same well as Eric opinions-wise and seems to have sent her letter straight to Moraybeedinosaurs (always nice to give them a mention) which might suggest a degree of behind the scenes collaboration between the campaigning types (see Jimbo's post on the other thread). Although I suppose it could have been Eric or maybe he just trawls the papers every morning.

Anyone else up for writing to the Herald with an alternative view?

**The Drone Ranger** · 19-03-2013, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by Trog

Nice to see a balanced article where the reporter has taken the trouble to seek a reply to the accusations. Let's hope any others do the same.
Does anyone know the Glasgow beekeeper who wrote the letter? How long has she kept bees?

Hiya Trog

In fairness they do quote the SBA president on the small size of the voting members compared to the size of the SBA

re-reading that previous sentence it has a slight air of smut which of course was unintended

I often think new bee keepers are the best informed (except for the organic ones they are nuts)

Gone snow blind and stir crazy now

**Trog** · 19-03-2013, 07:22 PM

Err, Droney, I wasn't being sarcastic. It WAS nice to see a balanced article where the reporter has taken the trouble to put both sides of the argument!

Ho hum. Time to put the hens to bed and read the bees their bedtime story

**The Drone Ranger** · 19-03-2013, 08:30 PM

Originally Posted by Trog

Err, Droney, I wasn't being sarcastic. It WAS nice to see a balanced article where the reporter has taken the trouble to put both sides of the argument!

Ho hum. Time to put the hens to bed and read the bees their bedtime story

All hens already in house due to 9" of snow.

Sorry I'm a bit slow

I'm starting a campaign to promote the benefits of star or evening primrose oil.

"Why plant rape when borage is nicer" is the campaign slogan

When the immovable force meets the irresistible object its time to hide

**EmsE** · 19-03-2013, 07:30 PM

Originally Posted by Trog

Nice to see a balanced article where the reporter has taken the trouble to seek a reply to the accusations. Let's hope any others do the same.
Does anyone know the Glasgow beekeeper who wrote the letter? How long has she kept bees?

Yes

She's not a new beekeeper and this doesn't surprise me, although it does disappoint.

I'm baffled by the fact that the vote surmounts to supporting neonics. I'm sure the vote wasn't do you want the ban or do you want to support the neonics, or am I missing something.

**Neils** · 19-03-2013, 04:01 PM

This false equivalence that not supporting a ban amounts to endorsement still annoys me.

Without a supporting framework behind the ban regards to what happens next it remains very difficult to support because the assumption has to be that the path of least resistance is to resume use of what came before and I remain unconvinced that it represents a better choice either for bees or the wider environment as a whole.

**wee willy** · 19-03-2013, 05:13 PM

Originally Posted by Neils

This false equivalence that not supporting a ban amounts to endorsement still annoys me.

Without a supporting framework behind the ban regards to what happens next it remains very difficult to support because the assumption has to be that the path of least resistance is to resume use of what came before and I remain unconvinced that it represents a better choice either for bees or the wider environment as a whole.

I agree wholeheartedly
Neonics kill all invertebrates they come in contact with but to just ban and then watch the fall out is fool hardy . I remember fishing on a nearby river when I heard puffing and panting followed by seeing a chap running with a flag ! He was a marker for a crop spraying light aircraft!. I was next enveloped in a cloud of some noxious substance concocted by the petro-chemical industry. What settled on the water look on a technicolor iridescent sheen !
Please let's not return to those days!
A strategic withdrawal from neonics I has got to be the sane option!
WW

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk