Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 45

Thread: Why did the SBA vote to keep Neonics?

  1. #1

    Default Why did the SBA vote to keep Neonics?

    At the recent AGM the SBA voted,by 34 to 31, not to support a ban on neonics.(conditions apply)

    Given the mounting evidence of harm and the known neurological effects of this highly lucrative product on insect life worldwide, and the reprecussions up to birds and down to worms, how on earth can you support them?

    Try and defend yourselves here.

  2. #2
    Administrator gavin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Tayside
    Posts
    4,464
    Blog Entries
    41

    Default

    Because the people in the room were unconvinced by the arguments put forward for the motion?

  3. #3
    Senior Member EmsE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Longbenton
    Posts
    404
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by worm View Post
    .... Try and defend yourselves here.
    No one needs to defend themselves here. Everyone is entitled to their own thoughts and opinions whether you agree with them or not. I guess it's along the lines of entitlement of free speech and probably covered by the human rights act somewhere or other.

    Some forum members may completely agree with you, others may disagree with you and some are still undecided, and that's absolutely fine so long as your able to engage in a respectful discussion.

  4. #4

    Default

    I see the terms "respectful" and "discussion" running for the hills as we speak. I wasn't at the meeting but would have voted against the motion if I had been - without feeling any need to justify myself to anyone. The anti-Neonic Taliban seem not to understand that people have a right to disagree with them.

  5. #5

    Default

    I don't think that's what they did, they didn't vote for a ban
    In fairness the SBA is about bees not an environmental pressure group
    So people would be deciding based on whether they felt their bees were being harmed
    I doubt anyone was saying they like pesticides being used

    I'm a floating voter if you like and unlikely to be won over by either side whacking me over the head with their wads of evidence
    Last edited by The Drone Ranger; 03-04-2013 at 10:47 PM.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Isle of Mull
    Posts
    799
    Blog Entries
    18

    Default

    To put it another way, only 31 out of the entire SBA membership, all of whom were aware of the motion, felt that the SBA should lobby for a ban on neonics.

    It could be said that the proposer was able to convince only 31 beekeepers in Scotland of the rightness of his cause?

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trog View Post
    To put it another way, only 31 out of the entire SBA membership, all of whom were aware of the motion, felt that the SBA should lobby for a ban on neonics.

    It could be said that the proposer was able to convince only 31 beekeepers in Scotland of the rightness of his cause?
    Hi Trog
    In fairness though only 34 voted against so either a lot of people didn't know enough to decide or they think its a non issue.
    It is possible that the majority of members are unwilling to be drawn into an acrimonious argument.?
    I like a bit of an argue and sometimes am bit of agent-provocateur but I was surprised by this thread
    There is real hostility here and another similar thread not very nice for visitors reading it
    Last edited by The Drone Ranger; 04-04-2013 at 08:38 AM.

  8. #8
    Administrator gavin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Tayside
    Posts
    4,464
    Blog Entries
    41

    Default

    Correct. The first post in the thread issued the challenge: 'Try and defend yourselves here', and people are reacting with a 'Not again!' thought brewing in their minds.

    There was a campaign to push a particular motion, and new people at the AGM who voted with the proposer. I know personally several people who went to the AGM for other reasons, who were undecided on how to vote or what was right, and after witnessing the debate and assessing the worth of the arguments presented decided to vote against the motion.

    It is fair enough for Trog to point out that the proposers could only raise 31 people to vote. It is a large organisation and the motion was published in the magazine that everyone receives. Given the publicity in the media you would have expected beekeepers to be up in arms on this issue and they are not. Especially those with their own experience of bees on the crop.

  9. #9

    Default

    I thought it was fair enough to mention the low turnout for the vote as well
    Some subjects seem to be surrounded by fierce argument
    And yet the majority of people have no strong opinions
    When it was GM crops there was a predicted bee Armageddon and the SBA magazine got thrown to the floor and stamped on a few times
    Yet here we all are, and that's the trouble with crying wolf--- one day the wolf will come

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Exiled Scot, North of Stoke on Trent,
    Posts
    483

    Default

    Yet another poster who posts on only one subject.

    I think neonics should be banned due to the clear impact it has on some human brains.. :-)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •