Are neonicotinoid pesticides responsible for the demise of bees and other wildlife?

[Jon]

Hi prakel. I think we are pretty much in agreement.

[Trog]

But what I really don't understand is why bee forums are polluted with all these threads. If I wanted to stop pesticides, I'd be trying to convince the farmers who use them that they'd be better off not doing so. Beekeepers aren't the ones spraying the fields . It's a bit like trying to persuade someone who has been shot that guns are not good.

An excellent point, well put.

[Trog]

Ah, yes, Jon. I can see that wasps would be a nuisance to apideas, though you must have considerably more wasps than we ever get. We don't even have problems with wasps eating plums (on the few occasions we get any on the trees) here, which is a blessing as I grew up having to be very cautious when picking fruit in Yorkshire.

[The Drone Ranger]

Wasps and Apideas do not mix once you get to August.
When you find they have killed half a dozen laying queens you start to lose patience although I do appreciate that they have their benefits especially earlier in the season.

The secret here is the wasps life cycle
In the early part of the year they collect protein
Luckily that includes lots of caterpillars --hooray !!!

The reason is that they feed this protein to the wasp larvae
The larvae reward the feeding by producing a drop of sweet liquid
Adult wasps work for the reward Hooray again !!

Later in the year the queen wasp slows her laying and the number of larvae drops
That means there is less sweet rewards available for the adult wasps Aawww!!

Then adult wasps get grumpy and sting everything BOOO!!!
They go delinquent and look for anything sweet like jammy dodgers Booo!!
And if they find a box full of lovely sweet honey they are striped hooligan shoplifters
Bar stewards!!!

So in spring/summer be nice to wasps but in summer/autumn take them out

[Bridget]

I think it's a shame that there have been so many threads recently which have taken a rather agressive tone due to differing views with regards to the neonics debate.
. The problem is that I'm starting to feel alienated from both camps because of the way some of the information is being presented not only here but on other forums too.

I agree with this comment. It's only a year I've been following this forum and sometimes it makes sad and uncomfortable reading. I wonder if your following is going up or down

[Johnthefarmer]

[QUOTE=prakel;12368]I think it's a shame that there have been so many threads recently which have taken a rather agressive tone due to differing views with regards to the neonics debate.

I also acknowledge that the neonics arguments get heated and aggressive.
There's a good reason for this. It's the imbalance of the resources of the protagonists. Basically the fact that the pro-nics include several multinational companies with massive vested interests, in-house scientists, publicity systems (probably including 'shills') etc, whereas the antis are a disparate bunch with fewer resources of money, time, organisation etc.
This can lead to the antis feeling overwhelmed and frustrated, and shouting louder to compensate .
It's reminiscent of the rows about the benefits and harms due to soluble nitrogen fertilisers, which started, maybe in the sixties, and still go on today but with a much clearer understanding of the issues at hand.
For many years, there was denial, or at least downplaying, of such things as run- off pollution, suppression of clovers, increased susceptibility to disease of crops which were also less dense in nutrients ,and so required additional fungicides, etc.
The pro blue bag camp had all the backing that pronics have today. Tree huggers, wooly- jumpered hippies, Japanese rice farmers and local anglers all felt they had to shout pretty loud to be heard past the massive commercial interests, mainsteam opinion and disinformation they were faced with.
I don't say that the two situations are exactly equivalent, just nearly.

[Johnthefarmer]

But what I really don't understand is why bee forums are polluted with all these threads. If I wanted to stop pesticides, I'd be trying to convince the farmers who use them that they'd be better off not doing so. Beekeepers aren't the ones spraying the fields . It's a bit like trying to persuade someone who has been shot that guns are not good.

If someone who gets shot with a gun is persuaded by his mates just to be thankful at least it wasn't a cruise missile,and just accept it gracefully,guns become acceptable generally.
Yes, it is the farmers, agribusinesses, biofuel producers, governments and regulators who most need persuading, but that only happens if individuals and pressure groups kick up a fuss.
The fuss also has to be well-grounded, correctly informed and seen to be in humanity's, and in our case, bees', best interests.

[prakel]

I also acknowledge that the neonics arguments get heated and aggressive.
There's a good reason for this.

We'll have to disagree on this.

...all felt they had to shout pretty loud to be heard past the massive commercial interests, mainsteam opinion and disinformation they were faced with.

Maybe, but shouting the wrong things don't make them right.

re the varroa/viruses are a sympton quote. Interesting, especially in the light of a post which I made a couple of weeks ago on another thread

http://www.sbai.org.uk/sbai_forum/sh...pring-Without- (POST NUMBER 16)

regarding Richard Adee who lost 30,000+ colonies to CCD; he was very clear that the findings of laboratory analysis of what was left of his collapsing colonies indicated that they had succumbed to viral infections. Sure, anyone can put a spin on this and say that they were initially wakened by neonicotinoids but that fails to explain why since starting to treat them his colonies have displayed no major health issues.

[EmsE]

Whilst there may be cause for debates becoming heated, there is never a good enough reason for them becoming aggressive. All parties entering a discussion need to accept that everyone is an individual and therefore has their own personal points of view, just like religion.
Pesticides still have a lot of issues to be debated, however aggressive arguments are not going to resolve them. One point to consider though is if it is later shown that the effects of pesticides are not as bad as those shouting the loudest are claiming, what will the impact be on the public to believe anything bee keepers are concerned about in the future?

[Johnthefarmer]

Just like to point out that my own most outrageous insult on this thread has been 'limited perspective'.
Gavin, our illustrious admin, has used 'bollocks', 'bonkers',' fantasy','garbage'etc. in his analysis of the article in question.
I agree that insults and aggressive comments are rarely effective.