COMMENTS: 39
What Was Behind the Honey Bee Wipeout?
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.
The flurry of media attention given this winter's bee losses, now labeled "colony collapse disorder," has updated the world of bees for a heretofore-clueless public. Our image of honeybees is a lot like our bucolic images of farm animals -- and just as far from the brutal truth of today's corporate agriculture. We picture fields of clover, blossoming orchards, the wildflowers beneath the trees, filled with happy bees industriously gathering nectar and pollen to take back to the hive. As the bees gather pollen, they transfer it from plant to plant, thus assuring cross-pollination.
Fewer people can picture what happens at the hive, where the bees feed the protein-rich pollen to their developing brood. The adults live on honey they make from collected nectar -- sipped from the throats of flowers into the bees' honey stomachs, disgorged at the hive into the hexagonal wax combs made by the bees, fanned by bee wings to evaporate excess moisture until it reaches the perfect syrupy consistency, and then sealed with a wax cap to keep it clean and ready to sustain the colony over the winter. In order to do all this, bees rely on a diverse range of flowers blooming over a wide stretch of the year.
The honeybee (Apis mellifera) is a European native, one of very few bee species in the world to store honey in bulk and live fulltime in large colonies (30,000 to 100,000 individuals). It is the only bee with a long history of intensive management by people. For almost all of this time, and continuing today in many parts of the world, the rosy picture of bee life painted above is largely accurate. But when beekeeping meets industrial agriculture, the result is very different. Colony collapse disorder may have many contributing causes, but it comes down to bees hitting the biological limits of our agricultural system. It's not so much a bee crisis as a pollination crisis. And we may end up calling it agricultural collapse disorder.
It's a rare beekeeper in the United States who can survive by selling honey. The trade loophole that has flooded this country with low-cost Chinese honey for the past ten years guaranteed that (fortunately for beekeepers, that hole has just been plugged by new federal tariff regulations). The only income remaining has been in pollination services. Alan Wilson's bees are rented out for almond pollination starting in February. After that they go south to the orange groves, then all the way to North Dakota where they make clover honey. Wilson's Central Valley location near Merced has little to offer bees over the dry summer months except roadside star thistle and the brief flowering of cantaloupes in August. Nearby agricultural chemicals are a concern, especially the defoliant used on cotton before harvest. Just the drift from the defoliant has taken the paint off Wilson's hives. Still, this year he plans to keep his bees closer to home where he can manage them more intensively and try to increase their numbers.
Every commercial beekeeper has different arrange-ments, but each involves long-distance trucking and the California almond crop. Almonds are entirely dependent on the seasonal importation of honeybees. Growers can't get crop insurance coverage unless they have at least two bee colonies per acre at almond blossom time; some growers use up to five colonies per acre for heavier yields. Over 800,000 Central Valley acres are planted in almond trees. As beekeeper Randy Oliver says, it is "monoculture at its absolute worst -- they don't allow one species of weed to grow": mile after mile of bare soil and almond trees. No native pollinators can survive on this wasted landscape to ease the honeybees' burden, and nothing lives to sustain bees before or after the almond bloom.
Truckloads of bees begin to arrive as early as November from all over the nation -- it takes virtually all of this country's commercially operated pollination colonies to cover California's almonds. While the bees roll down the highways, hive entrances boarded up, or wait in Central Valley bee yards for the trees to bloom, they're fed a mixture of high fructose corn syrup meant to replace nectar, along with soy protein meant to replace pollen. (Some beekeepers, Wilson among them, have switched to beet syrup as a safer though more expensive alternative.) Oliver sums up the patent absurdity: "When bugs from the east coast have to be trucked to California to pollinate an exotic tree because California has no bugs, it's a pretty whacked-out agricultural system."
Oliver's 500 bee colonies -- he was lucky, with losses under ten percent -- follow a relatively short migratory truck route that takes them from Central Valley almonds to Sierra foothill wildflowers to Nevada alfalfa. He attributes his success to fewer and shorter moves, reliance on pasture forage for much of the year, and avoidance of artificial feeding. "Some of these guys move their bees a dozen times a year," he says. Popular pollination routes include apples and blueberries, which rely on honeybees for 90 percent of their pollination, peaches (50 percent), and oranges (30 percent). Farmers won't bother planting squash or melons if they can't get beehives in place by bloom time. One-third of all US crops depend on honeybee pollination.
It hasn't been this way for long. Even 30 years ago growers could rely on a combination of native pollinating insects and local honeybees for most crops. In 1970, there were 35 beekeepers in Alan Wilson's area; now there are two. As farms grew more and more of fewer and fewer crops, using petrochemical pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers, vast tracts of land have gradually approached the reductionist goal of supporting no life at all except the target crop. It's not just the almonds -- every crop is grown this way. That's why it's called industrial agriculture, or factory farming.
Bee researchers have been calling bees "the canary in this coal mine," a different version of the birds and the bees. A quote attributed to Albert Einstein has been popping up all over the Internet: "If the bee disappeared off the surface of the globe, man would have only four years of life left. No more bees, no more pollination, no more plants, no more animals, no more man." Einstein never said it, but the instant ubiquity of the sentiment says everything.
Though the media only picked it up this year, bees have actually been in trouble for the past couple of decades. Mites -- parasitic insects small enough to use bees as their hosts -- jumped from other species to honeybees, another example of collateral damage from global transportation. First tracheal mites in the '80s, then varroa mites in the '90s -- even before last winter, the world's honeybee population had declined by half in 30 years.
UC Davis apiculturist Eric Mussen points out that before the mites arrived, winter losses of five to ten percent of a beekeeper's colonies were the norm. The mites increased yearly losses to 25 percent by the late '80s, and now we're at 40 percent or higher, with some years better than average and others catastrophic. Randy Oliver says, "If we made a list of collapses of the last 20 years, this winter's would not make the top five." Last year's losses were bad for Alan Wilson, but the last four years together have decimated his colonies by over 90 percent. The only beekeepers doing substantially better are the very small percentage practicing non-chemical mite control coupled with little or no trucking or artificial feeding -- in other words, labor-intensive vigilance combined with lower pollination income. It's not a financially viable option for many fulltime beekeepers.
The difference with this winter's losses is not having an identified cause, and therefore no quick (even if temporary) fix. For tracheal mites, beekeepers developed nontoxic preventive treatments -- Alan Wilson successfully doses his bees on a mixture of Crisco, sugar, and peppermint extract. Varroa mites proved trickier, and beekeepers started down the slippery slope of synthetic insecticide use. "Until the mid-'90s nobody dreamed of using chemicals in beehives," Oliver says. Once they did, the race was on, with insecticide-resistant varroa mites evolving neck-in-neck with the newest chemical treatment. European beekeepers, who have had the varroa mite longer, have pretty much given up on chemicals and use an Integrated Pest Management approach. US beekeepers who go this route find it labor- and attention-intensive, and effective within its parameters (not eradication but healthy bees living with a smaller number of mites). According to Oliver, "We're just prolonging our agony as long as we continue to use chemical treatments."
Everyone agrees the honeybee buzzed into the 21st century carrying a heavy load of stress. Colonies were weakened by mites, perhaps by chemicals used to kill the mites, and probably by at least some of the 25 different viruses carried by varroa mites. Add in a fungus, nosema, that's tolerated by healthy bees but a problem for already weakened hives. Then there's the stress of long-distance truck travel, longer distances for more bees every year. The small hive beetle, an African native recently found in Florida hives, posed another challenge; aggressive African honeybees attack the beetle, but European bees, bred to be docile, let it overrun the hive.
Cell phone interference has been proposed as a threat to bees, based on reports of a German study showing bees unable to find their way home in the presence of high-frequency electromagnetic radiation. This particular theory must be called inconclusive at best, since the study was not designed with enough apicultural knowledge to produce reliable results.
No bee taken from the hive for the first time, as was done in the study, would be able to find its way back, since bees navigate primarily by landmarks, not electromagnetic homing sensors. Their first few excursions are short orientation flights, not blind trips in a box to a release point.
Of all these factors, many beekeepers judge varroa mites the most consistently debilitating. But there's another weakening influence more obvious and more integral to the larger agricultural dilemma. It's the stressor Mussen calls the most important of all -- bee malnutrition. High-fructose corn syrup and soy protein are not any more nutritious for bees than they are for humans (see Spring 2007), and bees in transit and between pollination jobs often must subsist on nothing but these non-foods. Compounding the problem, we're talking genetically modified corn and soy, every cell of which contains a bacterial insecticide. Are bees not insects? US studies have indicated that Bt corn pollen does not kill healthy bees or brood reared on it, but a German study showed that Bt pollen led to "significantly stronger decline in the number of bees" in hives already weakened by varroa mites.
We do know that corn pollen in general is poor bee food, high in fiber and low in protein. The Midwest, up until now the country's best bee forage habitat, this year is being planted much more aggressively to GM corn as a source for ethanol -- aggressive meaning planting marginal areas and edges usually left to the asters and goldenrods that are high-quality pollen sources in late summer when bees need to raise the generation that will overwinter. Even when bees are out foraging for real nectar and non-GMO pollen, for much of the year they are likely to be ingesting a monocultured diet due to their use as pollinators for industrial-scale agriculture -- nothing but almond, then nothing but apple, then only watermelon. They're exposed to pesticides used on their forage crops as well. Oh -- and one more influence to factor into the equation -- very hot weather can damage the protein content of pollen, decreasing its food value for bees. Global warming is kicking our butts from more directions than we can comprehend.
Given these conditions, last winter's losses can hardly be considered a surprise. Neither can the failure of bee researchers to come up with one specific cause, much less a magic bullet cure. Still, the kind of thinking that got us this far continues. According to Mussen, "the only hope is the USDA Tucson lab" which is working on a liquid feed that bees can eat all year. Randy Oliver calls this the "holy grail" of bee research. The USDA's proprietary formula, if they come up with one that works, will be patented and licensed to a commercial producer, and the whole agricultural system may manage to lurch along for a few more years, complete with pollinators hauled from Florida to California in time for the almond bloom.
How did all those almonds get pollinated this year, on the heels of beekeepers' discoveries that half (in some cases up to 90 percent) of their colonies had suddenly gone missing? It wouldn't have happened without a change in regulations that allowed bees to be imported from Australia. Bee businesses Down Under went into boom mode, sending 100,000 packages of bees to the States. A package is a starter kit of about 10,000 worker bees and a queen, enclosed in a small screened box with a sugar water feeder. The receiving beekeeper shakes the package into a waiting hive, and given proper nectar and pollen resources, within a month a new generation of bees will be expanding the colony.
The Australian influx may be short-lived, as a colony of Indian bees (Apis cerana) was recently discovered living aboard a yacht off Australia. The Indian bee is host to yet another mite that could wreak havoc if it spreads to the European honeybee. Another factor in almond pollination this year was the rental price for a bee colony, which averaged $150, nearly twice what it was last year. This was the first year in which the income beekeepers realized from almond pollination surpassed the income received for the entire US honey crop. There's talk of opening the Canadian border for next year's almond season.
To paraphrase Randy Oliver, we're prolonging our agony by continuing with this profoundly unworkable agricultural system. Suddenly terms like "organic" and "biodiversity" shift from boutique buzzwords to elements of survival. This country has 4,500 species of native insects that are potential pollinators. On the East Coast, where farms are much smaller, more diverse, and broken up by uncultivated land, native insects account for up to 90 percent of crop pollination. Studies done on Costa Rican coffee crops have shown that yields are 20 percent greater within one kilometer of forest remnants. Canadian canola farmers show increased yields by leaving 30 percent of their cropland wild. It's all about pollination.
Fortunately for us, insects are quick to recolonize formerly dead areas. Hedgerows, windbreaks, wetlands, woodlots -- the particulars of restoration agriculture are easy and already known. It's the big picture that's harder to shift, from the extractive industrial petrochemical model to the biodiverse ecosystem model. Honeybees have upped the ante, giving us all the motivation we need to change -- do we want to continue to eat?
The material appearing here is copyright Terrain magazine, which is published by the Ecology Center in Berkeley, California. (510-548-2235). The material is to be circulated for educational purposes only, and is not to be reprinted in any publication, or distributed for commercial purposes, including copying for sale, without the permission of the editor of Terrain.
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Suzon on Oct 16, 2007 3:55 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bees can't write letters or organize demonstrations, much less have any hope of restraining destructive forces through the rule of law.
If you can't move people across state lines for immoral purposes, why is it okay to move the bees? Which should prevail, Monstanto or the bees?
Let them bees alone!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» bees protest!
Posted by: Iconoclast421
» www.votenic.com
Posted by: votenic
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Juniper on Oct 16, 2007 4:18 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Natural habitat and wild pollinators
Posted by: weatherking
Comments are closed-
Posted by: honeyman on Oct 16, 2007 5:39 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: john mcdonald
Posted by: dkm
» RE: john mcdonald
Posted by: honeyman
» RE: john mcdonald
Posted by: jareilly
» RE: john mcdonald
Posted by: honeyman
» RE: john mcdonald
Posted by: Spike Silverback
» RE: john mcdonald
Posted by: Spike Silverback
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ritadona69 on Oct 16, 2007 6:05 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Why is there a problem?
Posted by: dkm
» Plow suburban yards
Posted by: BlueTigress
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Bbear41 on Oct 16, 2007 6:18 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have tasted wild flower honey from my area (South east Texas) it was dreadful. I think it was the goldenrod.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I gather...
Posted by: weatherking
Comments are closed-
Posted by: oscarg on Oct 16, 2007 6:43 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» www.votenic.com
Posted by: votenic
Comments are closed-
Posted by: LeeAnnG on Oct 16, 2007 6:52 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But this fall during my annual party, there were no yellow jackets at all. I didn't especially miss them, as they have always been such a nuisance. However, it is disturbing to think that something might also be killing off these insects. I'm not sure if this is true, but it makes me wonder what else is being effected by pollution and weather.
I use absolutely no insecticides or herbicides, have both flower and vegetable gardens with a wide variety of growth, and make sure there are lots of flowering shrubs for bees to gather pollin. I've seen some bees this year, but not nearly as many as I have previously. I don't think this is a good sign.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» One possibility is the increased spraying for mosquitos...
Posted by: ABetterFuture
Comments are closed-
Posted by: PaulK on Oct 16, 2007 8:57 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One trick the commercial guys are trying is larger artificial hive cells. Larger cells grow bigger bees, which bring in more honey. Unfortunately, larger cells take longer to close up after an egg is laid in each cell, and that's one reason why the mites get in.
If you're having problems with mites, order smaller honeycomb cells for your beehive.
Another important factor is a brand new pesticide that seems to be extra-effective on bees. The name Merit comes to mind. You might google the issue. We need leadership from the Industry Protection Agency or the USDA on pesticides wiping out everyone's livelihood, not so much New Coke for bees.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Zero colony collapse complaints from 1000 organic beekeepers
Posted by: honeyman
Comments are closed-
Posted by: makeadifference on Oct 16, 2007 9:39 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Maybe it's the Chemtrails...
Posted by: kellysgarden
» Chemtrails and the useless eater population, bees, people whatever. . .
Posted by: saywhat
Comments are closed-
Posted by: peterlborst on Oct 16, 2007 10:05 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Until the mid-'90s nobody dreamed of using chemicals in beehives"
* Antibiotics have been used since the 1950s
"On the East Coast, where farms are much smaller, more diverse, and broken up by uncultivated land, native insects account for up to 90 percent of crop pollination."
* I live in NY State and there simply aren't enough native bees insects to pollinate crops. That is why growers rent bee hives.
etc.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: fanny666 on Oct 16, 2007 1:53 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Ian MacLeod on Oct 16, 2007 2:15 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Meats are loaded with nitrites and other chemicals (you can't call bacon "bacon", by law, if it doesn't have sodium nitrite in it). Look at the way corned beef is made: it's soaked in a chemical solution of a couple of weeks. All American meat is chock-full of garbage. The fish we can catch in US rivers are, many if not most, also not safe to eat. The oceans are being over-harvested, and the fish from there are suspect as well.
Environmental protections are being gotten around or simply removed, so the forests are in great danger from industry as well as climate change. We could replace a huge percentage of wood harvested from forests with help, but the DEA is assisted and backed in its paranoia by the forestry industry and others associated with it, because they make money from trees, not weeds. Hemp grows fast, and can also produce oils from seed, and could be a major crop in no time, but it would cut into current industry profits, so it is kept illegal by powerful industry lobbies and police agencies, even though the THC content is negligible.
In short, the environment, between industrial pollution and industrial "better living through chemistry" and the attempt to turn nature into a factory, is being destroyed from too many directions to count.
But a few people will die very, very wealthy.
Ian
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: This is all part of the "corporate mindset" that is destroying the ecosystem.
Posted by: Camilla Cracchiolo
» RE: This is all part of the "corporate mindset" that is destroying the ecosystem.
Posted by: Ian MacLeod
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Dwinston on Oct 16, 2007 4:04 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
having something to do with Colony Collapse Disorder
are just as off-the-mark as the earlier speculation that
cellphones were to blame.
Yes, all these issues are problems for beekeepers,
but they have been well-known problems for decades,
ones where solutions exist, and things aren't nearly
as bad as they are painted in this hand-wringing
treatment. CCD is a new problem with very
different and new symptoms.
Here's some coverage based upon actual facts,
published in a beekeeping magazine. There's
also copies of a paper published in the journal
Science on CCD and a detailed critique
of the paper:
http://bee-quick.com/reprints/
If nothing else, the viewpoint of an actual working beekeeper
is surprisingly clear as to the root causes of many problems,
including CCD:
http://bee-quick.com/reprints/udunno.pdf
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: randyoliver on Oct 16, 2007 5:17 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Our agricultural system is indeed based upon monocropping and herbicides, and this does indeed decrease the amount of natural bee pasture. However, before we indict farmers, be clear that most of them are forced into farming this way due to the fact that the prices offered to them by buyers will not support a more ecological approach. We have exactly the agricultural system that the consumer is demanding at the cash register.
There are few places in the world that almonds can be grown, and California is the main one. If consumers want almonds, farmers will grow them! But there is not enough good bee pasture or native pollinators in California to supply the insects needed to pollinate the almond trees in February. So bees are trucked in. Just as cattle or chickens are trucked from where there is room to grow them to where they are needed by consumers. An odd situation, yes. But not a damning indictment.
Commercial beekeepers practice good bee husbandry, and strive to keep their colonies as well fed as possible on natural pasture. Unfortunately, good natural pasture is disappearing rapidly due to changing agricultural practices, development, and the intolerance of the public for having bees in close proximity.
Furthermore, few young people want to do the hard work involved in commercial beekeeping. However, without bees being trucked to farms and orchards in season, some crops would go unpollinated. Thus, fewer beekeepers are forced to run larger operations to fill the demands of agriculture. We do the best we can to keep our bees happy and healthy--beekeepers don't make money if they don't take good care of their bees.
Yes, we do sometimes help our bees with sugar syrup and food-grade nutritional supplements like brewers yeast or soy flour to stretch what they can get from the natural flora. Feeding bees during drought is no different than giving cattle hay when the grass dries up.
Our current problem, CCD, has devasted many operations, but it would be inaccurate to blame agriculture or commercial beekeeping practices. Many of us are still recovering from losses when the two mites entered the US (on separate occasions), and from previous large-scale colony losses. Since U.S. consumers eat little honey, and are willing to buy cheap Chinese imports when they do, there is sometimes no other way to make a living at beekeeping than to move your bees to pollination contracts.
Commercial beekeepers are proud to be an important part of American agriculture. You can help them by buying US honey, by supporting farmers and sustainable farming practices at the cash register and grower's markets, and by promoting conservation of our remaining open spaces.
Randy Oliver
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Honey bee wipeout
Posted by: honeyman
» RE: Honey bee wipeout
Posted by: nathangsm
Comments are closed-
Posted by: henderson on Oct 16, 2007 8:35 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I use no chemicals whatsoever on my bees. I never pull ALL the honey off in the late summer and early fall as some commercial beekeepers do; I always leave them with about 80 pounds to take them through the winter, therefore I almost never have to "feed" them. A starved-out hive is a pitiful sight.
Honey is a gift of love from Nature, and I respect and love my bees - they are the most fascinating insects I've ever encountered. I got lots and lots of honey this year, and do most years, but I don't try to make it my sole income, so therefore I can relax and let them do their job; not force them to "produce" beyond what they may be comfortable with. And I never truck them around to various places.
Of course chemical companies and agriculture in general would love to have CCD be caused by a "mite" or "disease" so they can sell more chemical solutions, but I don't believe that is the case - I think the author is pretty much on the money.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: talkville on Oct 18, 2007 1:27 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Those meandering roads from Nature to Political-Economies, until Nature is no longer available. It's all Metabolisms - productions, exchanges, distributions and consumptions.
But leave it to Bio-Tech and Agri-Business -- they know what they're doing -- who needs those pesky bees anyhow?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: alibaba on Oct 20, 2007 7:16 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: votenic on Oct 22, 2007 8:04 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.votenic.com
Results Posted Tuesday Evening.
FREE, NON-BIASED
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Suzon on Oct 16, 2007 3:55 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bees can't write letters or organize demonstrations, much less have any hope of restraining destructive forces through the rule of law.
If you can't move people across state lines for immoral purposes, why is it okay to move the bees? Which should prevail, Monstanto or the bees?
Let them bees alone!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» bees protest!
Posted by: Iconoclast421
» www.votenic.com
Posted by: votenic
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Juniper on Oct 16, 2007 4:18 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Natural habitat and wild pollinators
Posted by: weatherking
Comments are closed-
Posted by: honeyman on Oct 16, 2007 5:39 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: john mcdonald
Posted by: dkm
» RE: john mcdonald
Posted by: honeyman
» RE: john mcdonald
Posted by: jareilly
» RE: john mcdonald
Posted by: honeyman
» RE: john mcdonald
Posted by: Spike Silverback
» RE: john mcdonald
Posted by: Spike Silverback
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ritadona69 on Oct 16, 2007 6:05 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Why is there a problem?
Posted by: dkm
» Plow suburban yards
Posted by: BlueTigress
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Bbear41 on Oct 16, 2007 6:18 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have tasted wild flower honey from my area (South east Texas) it was dreadful. I think it was the goldenrod.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I gather...
Posted by: weatherking
Comments are closed-
Posted by: oscarg on Oct 16, 2007 6:43 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» www.votenic.com
Posted by: votenic
Comments are closed-
Posted by: LeeAnnG on Oct 16, 2007 6:52 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But this fall during my annual party, there were no yellow jackets at all. I didn't especially miss them, as they have always been such a nuisance. However, it is disturbing to think that something might also be killing off these insects. I'm not sure if this is true, but it makes me wonder what else is being effected by pollution and weather.
I use absolutely no insecticides or herbicides, have both flower and vegetable gardens with a wide variety of growth, and make sure there are lots of flowering shrubs for bees to gather pollin. I've seen some bees this year, but not nearly as many as I have previously. I don't think this is a good sign.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» One possibility is the increased spraying for mosquitos...
Posted by: ABetterFuture
Comments are closed-
Posted by: PaulK on Oct 16, 2007 8:57 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One trick the commercial guys are trying is larger artificial hive cells. Larger cells grow bigger bees, which bring in more honey. Unfortunately, larger cells take longer to close up after an egg is laid in each cell, and that's one reason why the mites get in.
If you're having problems with mites, order smaller honeycomb cells for your beehive.
Another important factor is a brand new pesticide that seems to be extra-effective on bees. The name Merit comes to mind. You might google the issue. We need leadership from the Industry Protection Agency or the USDA on pesticides wiping out everyone's livelihood, not so much New Coke for bees.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Zero colony collapse complaints from 1000 organic beekeepers
Posted by: honeyman
Comments are closed-
Posted by: makeadifference on Oct 16, 2007 9:39 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Maybe it's the Chemtrails...
Posted by: kellysgarden
» Chemtrails and the useless eater population, bees, people whatever. . .
Posted by: saywhat
Comments are closed-
Posted by: peterlborst on Oct 16, 2007 10:05 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Until the mid-'90s nobody dreamed of using chemicals in beehives"
* Antibiotics have been used since the 1950s
"On the East Coast, where farms are much smaller, more diverse, and broken up by uncultivated land, native insects account for up to 90 percent of crop pollination."
* I live in NY State and there simply aren't enough native bees insects to pollinate crops. That is why growers rent bee hives.
etc.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: fanny666 on Oct 16, 2007 1:53 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Ian MacLeod on Oct 16, 2007 2:15 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Meats are loaded with nitrites and other chemicals (you can't call bacon "bacon", by law, if it doesn't have sodium nitrite in it). Look at the way corned beef is made: it's soaked in a chemical solution of a couple of weeks. All American meat is chock-full of garbage. The fish we can catch in US rivers are, many if not most, also not safe to eat. The oceans are being over-harvested, and the fish from there are suspect as well.
Environmental protections are being gotten around or simply removed, so the forests are in great danger from industry as well as climate change. We could replace a huge percentage of wood harvested from forests with help, but the DEA is assisted and backed in its paranoia by the forestry industry and others associated with it, because they make money from trees, not weeds. Hemp grows fast, and can also produce oils from seed, and could be a major crop in no time, but it would cut into current industry profits, so it is kept illegal by powerful industry lobbies and police agencies, even though the THC content is negligible.
In short, the environment, between industrial pollution and industrial "better living through chemistry" and the attempt to turn nature into a factory, is being destroyed from too many directions to count.
But a few people will die very, very wealthy.
Ian
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: This is all part of the "corporate mindset" that is destroying the ecosystem.
Posted by: Camilla Cracchiolo
» RE: This is all part of the "corporate mindset" that is destroying the ecosystem.
Posted by: Ian MacLeod
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Dwinston on Oct 16, 2007 4:04 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
having something to do with Colony Collapse Disorder
are just as off-the-mark as the earlier speculation that
cellphones were to blame.
Yes, all these issues are problems for beekeepers,
but they have been well-known problems for decades,
ones where solutions exist, and things aren't nearly
as bad as they are painted in this hand-wringing
treatment. CCD is a new problem with very
different and new symptoms.
Here's some coverage based upon actual facts,
published in a beekeeping magazine. There's
also copies of a paper published in the journal
Science on CCD and a detailed critique
of the paper:
http://bee-quick.com/reprints/
If nothing else, the viewpoint of an actual working beekeeper
is surprisingly clear as to the root causes of many problems,
including CCD:
http://bee-quick.com/reprints/udunno.pdf
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: randyoliver on Oct 16, 2007 5:17 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Our agricultural system is indeed based upon monocropping and herbicides, and this does indeed decrease the amount of natural bee pasture. However, before we indict farmers, be clear that most of them are forced into farming this way due to the fact that the prices offered to them by buyers will not support a more ecological approach. We have exactly the agricultural system that the consumer is demanding at the cash register.
There are few places in the world that almonds can be grown, and California is the main one. If consumers want almonds, farmers will grow them! But there is not enough good bee pasture or native pollinators in California to supply the insects needed to pollinate the almond trees in February. So bees are trucked in. Just as cattle or chickens are trucked from where there is room to grow them to where they are needed by consumers. An odd situation, yes. But not a damning indictment.
Commercial beekeepers practice good bee husbandry, and strive to keep their colonies as well fed as possible on natural pasture. Unfortunately, good natural pasture is disappearing rapidly due to changing agricultural practices, development, and the intolerance of the public for having bees in close proximity.
Furthermore, few young people want to do the hard work involved in commercial beekeeping. However, without bees being trucked to farms and orchards in season, some crops would go unpollinated. Thus, fewer beekeepers are forced to run larger operations to fill the demands of agriculture. We do the best we can to keep our bees happy and healthy--beekeepers don't make money if they don't take good care of their bees.
Yes, we do sometimes help our bees with sugar syrup and food-grade nutritional supplements like brewers yeast or soy flour to stretch what they can get from the natural flora. Feeding bees during drought is no different than giving cattle hay when the grass dries up.
Our current problem, CCD, has devasted many operations, but it would be inaccurate to blame agriculture or commercial beekeeping practices. Many of us are still recovering from losses when the two mites entered the US (on separate occasions), and from previous large-scale colony losses. Since U.S. consumers eat little honey, and are willing to buy cheap Chinese imports when they do, there is sometimes no other way to make a living at beekeeping than to move your bees to pollination contracts.
Commercial beekeepers are proud to be an important part of American agriculture. You can help them by buying US honey, by supporting farmers and sustainable farming practices at the cash register and grower's markets, and by promoting conservation of our remaining open spaces.
Randy Oliver
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Honey bee wipeout
Posted by: honeyman
» RE: Honey bee wipeout
Posted by: nathangsm
Comments are closed-
Posted by: henderson on Oct 16, 2007 8:35 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I use no chemicals whatsoever on my bees. I never pull ALL the honey off in the late summer and early fall as some commercial beekeepers do; I always leave them with about 80 pounds to take them through the winter, therefore I almost never have to "feed" them. A starved-out hive is a pitiful sight.
Honey is a gift of love from Nature, and I respect and love my bees - they are the most fascinating insects I've ever encountered. I got lots and lots of honey this year, and do most years, but I don't try to make it my sole income, so therefore I can relax and let them do their job; not force them to "produce" beyond what they may be comfortable with. And I never truck them around to various places.
Of course chemical companies and agriculture in general would love to have CCD be caused by a "mite" or "disease" so they can sell more chemical solutions, but I don't believe that is the case - I think the author is pretty much on the money.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: talkville on Oct 18, 2007 1:27 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Those meandering roads from Nature to Political-Economies, until Nature is no longer available. It's all Metabolisms - productions, exchanges, distributions and consumptions.
But leave it to Bio-Tech and Agri-Business -- they know what they're doing -- who needs those pesky bees anyhow?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: alibaba on Oct 20, 2007 7:16 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: votenic on Oct 22, 2007 8:04 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.votenic.com
Results Posted Tuesday Evening.
FREE, NON-BIASED
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Starbucks' Cop-Out to Gun Nuts: Customers Served Coffee While Strapped
California Carbon Trading Allows Timber Companies to Sell CO2 Credits for Their Worst Logging Practices
How to Answer the Dumb Things Climate Deniers Say




