Who Killed the Honey Bee?

mike65

Heads up for this tonight at 9 pm on BBC4

With an affliction dubbed Colony Collapse Disorder wiping out bees worldwide, Martha Kearney explores the terrifying implications of their possible extinction and the loss of their most vital service to nature, pollination, without which global food production would collapse. The threat to keepers, farmers and our food supply is acute and growing, and yet the cause of this 'Marie Celeste syndrome' that causes bees to flee their hives remains a mystery.

me_right_one

mobile phones?

djpbarry

mike65 wrote: »

With an affliction dubbed Colony Collapse Disorder wiping out bees worldwide, Martha Kearney explores the terrifying implications of their possible extinction and the loss of their most vital service to nature, pollination, without which global food production would collapse.

Are they trying to imply that food production would collapse without bees? Because that's complete nonsense.

mike65

Whatever about that claim it was interesting, the long and the short of it appears to be no one thing is too blame. Monoculture farming, chemicals, climate variations, hive movements, a few nasty "leeches" all have a role it seems.

O'Morris

There's a famous quote attributed to Einstein about how man would have only fours years of life left on the planet following the dissppearance of the bees. It really grabbed me by the balls at the time but I've since found out that he never said it.

It does get a man thinking about the role these little critters play in the ecology though.

Sidney Parade

Apparantly the cause is a specific pesticide group called neonicotinoids.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2012/apr/11/bees-pesticides-decline-colony-collapse

I always wonder if Ireland should use it's position (more) as a 1st world country and an island to be a bigger player in scientific research - this is a good example issue.

Markcheese

Sidney Parade wrote: »

Apparantly the cause is a specific pesticide group called neonicotinoids.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2012/apr/11/bees-pesticides-decline-colony-collapse

I always wonder if Ireland should use it's position (more) as a 1st world country and an island to be a bigger player in scientific research - this is a good example issue.

That's interesting , will take years for enough evidence to ban it...
What puzzles me is that anecdotally ,i hear of problems with farmed and wild bees in east and west Cork... Agriculturally very different, east has much more tillage, more intensive more pesticide, the further west you go the less crops, and less intensive.... Also bumblebees seem to be thriving but maybe not all types...

Oldtree

new scientist has a recent article saying a similar thing:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21428596.000-pesticides-cause-bees-to-lose-their-bearings.html

Red Neck Hughie

Surely Monsanto's involvement in bees genetics research can only be good for bees, farmers and all kinds of everything. Only a complete loon would wonder if there was some other motive, like possibly suing producers of foods with traces of Monsanto patented gene sequences in them.
http://www.rodaleinstitute.org/20120202_ge-honeybee

Cork boy 55

Saw a show on this a few weeks back
cannot recall name

They pointed out in show(it was england based)
that bee populations in urban or semi-urban areas are fine.

jessei

http://www.europolitics.info/sectorial-policies/committee-fails-to-approve-ban-on-neonicotinoids-art349401-11.html

anyone know why?

fits

Most likely because the farming and pesticide lobbies are strong ones.

Macha

fits wrote: »

Most likely because the farming and pesticide lobbies are strong ones.

I'd say that's it. UK and Germany were also strongly opposed.

fits

For the same reasons.

It has definitely been an interesting story to follow. Bayer and Syngenta have invested an awful lot of money into their campaign completely disregarding the published science which demonstrates that neonicotinoids affect bees.
Look at this!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNyJ3qaebgg&feature=youtu.be

Hondo75

Looks like they are trying to stall the ban by planting flowers..
Their plan includes the planting of more flowering margins around fields to provide bee habitats as well as monitoring to detect the neonicotinoid pesticides blamed for their decline and more research into the impact of parasites and viruses

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/mar/28/pesticide-makers-plan-help-bees

Hondo75

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/mar/28/pesticide-makers-plan-help-bees

The plan to plant flowers to save the bees.

El Kabong!

5 of our 7 hives have had colony collapse. 3 in a rural area, 2 in a rural village.

The only 2 to survive are, unfortunately, the narky hives!

paddy147

Honeybees are responsible for providing a third of what a person eats...with regards to pollinating.

If honey bees die out completely then we as human beings are completely FCUKED.

Dr Silly Bollox MD

It's all good, we have little robots to do it for us.



http://inhabitat.com/scientists-develop-flying-robobees-to-pollinate-flowers-as-bee-populations-decline/


It's a pity the ban isn't being implemented until December.

Dr Silly Bollox MD

http://www.gizmag.com/harvard-robobee-flying-robot-insect/27432/

Prof Nincom Poop Ph.D

IAmA Beekeeper who tends to 2000+ beehives year round. Ask me anything buzzzz.

Hondo75

So is colony collapse an issue in ireland?

netflix are showing vanishing of the bees at the moment..

And IWT have written to Simon Coveney about his no vote

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/irish-wildlife-trust-slams-coveney-over-bee-vote-29225960.html

le sigh

Dead Bees: Pesticide Kills 50,000 In Car Park

The state Department of Agriculture said that tests showed the deaths were "directly related to a pesticide application on linden trees" that was meant to control aphids.

It is investigating whether the application of the pesticide Safari was against the law.

Most of the dead insects were gold-and-black bumble bees, but honey bees and some ladybirds were also found.

Safari is part of a family of pesticides called neonicotinoids that are considered acutely toxic to pollinators.

Stupid ****ers! Whoevers responsible should be made drink safari.

billynojob

Have seen very few honey bees this year (lots of bumble bees), but that is an improvement upon former years. Have a video (9th July 2013) of a few honey bees hoping about some wild flowers. Can upload it with link should someone be able to tell if they are feral or not.

Location is Dublin Citys green belt. Would like to know, for there are a number of planning applications to "transform" the area, and if they are feral it would be a shame to have them wiped out for the sake of a few projects ($$).

Heard that they were extinct on RTE news a few years ago, but these herbicides are less prevalent here, given its close proximity to Dublin City.

Anyhow, do message if you have some insight.

MOTM

Have wildflower garden at the front of the house. Unfortunately the variety of flowers has succumbed to clover and grass somewhat. Am hoping to plant Yellow Rattle next year to subdue grass and get a bit more variety back in the crop. That said, I've seen plenty of bumble bees this year. Not so many honey bees though.

Macha

Well, I am really liking the new EU Commissioner for Health. The EU's just banned fiprinol, another pesticide linked to declining bee populations:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/jul/16/eu-fipronil-ban-bees

Looks like Ireland voted in favour on this one.

mike65

Friday 9 pm BBC2

What's Killing Our Bees? A Horizon Special

Bees are worth £430 million to Britain's agriculture sector and a third of UK food is reliant on pollination, but their numbers have been falling dramatically. In this film, journalist and beekeeper Bill Turnbull examines the array of conflicting evidence in a bid to determine what is responsible for the decline and meets scientists who are fitting radar transponders to the insects to establish why numbers are falling

This summer has seen more bee activity than for a while but it was a close run thing. Had the two mini heat-waves not happened chances are a majority of hives in Ireland would be wiped out by now.

paddy147

mike65 wrote: »

Friday 9 pm BBC2



This summer has seen more bee activity than for a while but it was a close run thing. Had the two mini heat-waves not happened chances are a majority of hives in Ireland would be wiped out by now.

Theres actually a very interesting programme on BBC2 right now,about the black bee and the Irish Monks bringing them over to Scotland to introduce them there.:)

paddy147

A very facinating programme that was on BBC2 tonight.

A real insight into what might be the actual cause of the bees being wiped out.

Well worth the watch.:)

mike65

All plausible explanations. That honey bees thrive in "polluted" urban environments and die in the countryside has long been the intriguing dichotomy.

Jim Martin

mike65 wrote: »

All plausible explanations. That honey bees thrive in "polluted" urban environments and die in the countryside has long been the intriguing dichotomy.

It's a different kind of pollution in urban environments which they seem, apparently, able to deal with, unlike agricultural pollution in the countryside!

periodictable

I was left with the notion that one main reason for the decline is the pattern of agriculture whereby wild flowers are significantly reduced, giving rise to "green deserts". Flowers in urban areas are plentiful and bee numbers and honey production outstrips countryside production.Certain insecticides may also be a negative factor. In this country, wet summers are a big problem-for the first time in several years I've seen huge numbers of bees and it has to be down to the warmer and drier summer.

Markcheese

periodictable wrote: »

I was left with the notion that one main reason for the decline is the pattern of agriculture whereby wild flowers are significantly reduced, giving rise to "green deserts". Flowers in urban areas are plentiful and bee numbers and honey production outstrips countryside production.Certain insecticides may also be a negative factor. In this country, wet summers are a big problem-for the first
time in several years I've seen huge
numbers of bees and it has to be down
to the warmer and drier summer.

Apparently it was almost too dry ... Nectar dryed up and the bees were swarming ....!!

mike65

Newstalk doing Honey bees now.

Eoghan Barra

This is an extremely interesting (and important) topic and thread. The BBC's original documentary (which is on YouTube, if anyone who missed it is interested) is excellent and thought-provoking. As they say in the documentary, we have pushed nature so far into the margins, turning the countryside into a green desert, with vast swathes of monoculture crops, treated with pesticides etc., and wildlands practically eliminated, that something had to give. (It's so ironic that bees are doing fine in the cities, but can't survive in the 'unpolluted' countryside.) This may be one of the first indications of many to come of just how damaging the 'take no prisoners' approach of agriculture to the natural environment has been.

Many thanks to Mike 65 for raising the issue, and to all the other contributors too.

periodictable

Eoghan Barra wrote: »

(It's so ironic that bees are doing fine in the cities, but can't survive in the 'unpolluted' countryside.) This may be one of the first indications of many to come of just how damaging the 'take no prisoners' approach of agriculture to the environment has been.

It also raises another question which has bugged me-payments to farmers to keep their land in an environmentally sound condition. Are other citizens paid not to trash their property?
Why should that cost be borne by others? It doesn't take much to put some money aside to buy 50 thornquicks or 50 oak saplings-at most €50 euro. There has to be some personal responsibility for maintaining land, and for realizing that by leaving a swathe of untilled land/wildflower area benefits accrue.

Eoghan Barra

periodictable wrote: »

It also raises another question which has bugged me-payments to farmers to keep their land in an environmentally sound condition. Are other citizens paid not to trash their property?
Why should that cost be borne by others? It doesn't take much to put some money aside to buy 50 thornquicks or 50 oak saplings-at most €50 euro. There has to be some personal responsibility for maintaining land, and for realizing that by leaving a swathe of untilled land/wildflower area benefits accrue.

It's important to remember that a farmer's livelihood is his farm, which is run pretty much like any other business, albeit with some important differences. A farm isn't comparable, for example, to a city garden, which is mostly for relaxing in.

Only a tiny minority of farmers are ever going to take decisions which are going to work directly against - as they see it - their ability to make a living from the land, such as leaving wild areas, or allowing them to develop - unless they are encouraged to do so financially.

In that they are no different from any other group of people. How many people (very few) used shopping bags that could be used over and over until the plastic bag tax was brought in. Then we all changed and stopped using the throwaway ones. That seems to be an unavoidable part of human nature.

So encouraging farmers financially to be more wildlife friendly is essential if we are serious about conserving what wildlife remains. The problem is that the current set-up (i.e. the CAP), despite pretending to encourage the preservation of wildlife, does largely the exact opposite. For example, penalising farmers who allow land to 'degenerate' into scrub - which in reality means disallowing the process of ecological succession back to native woodland.

mike65

0.5% of every owned plot should be left fallow by law, the land owner could choose the a single area or to split up the area so long as its 0.5%.

Eoghan Barra

mike65 wrote: »

0.5% of every owned plot should be left fallow by law, the land owner could choose the a single area or to split up the area so long as its 0.5%.

An interesting suggestion, though to make it really work farmers would have to be paid something for it, perhaps with duties attached, such as removing invasive species etc., as well as inspections.

To impose something without any attempt to get those most affected on board is rarely the right approach, either in terms of fairness or, more importantly, achieving the right end result.

periodictable

Eoghan Barra wrote: »

It's important to remember that a farmer's livelihood is his farm, which is run pretty much like any other businesss they are encouraged to do so financially.
So encouraging farmers financially to be more wildlife friendly is essential if we are serious about conserving what wildlife remains.

I took over the running of a farm 10 years ago. New gates, roadside plantings, hedgerow maintenance, planted shelter belts and copses. A neighbour asked me what REPS measures I was signed up to. I replied that I wasn't in REPS. He immediately told that I could get paid for what I was doing. So I signed up and got €5k/yr for the next five years, and had nothing to do. I reckon the total cost of what I had done cost €2k, which worked out €400/yr.
Frankly I think I was overpaid by what REPS offered!
I guess I have pride in what I have, and can see the benefits of what I am doing, know I have a duty as a caretaker of land and the wider environment, and know that there will be a financial benefit both tangibly and intangibly for future owners.
Perhaps it's a mindset-to me €2k is a holiday so it's money better invested in what I did.
However, in the case of forestry, the Cinderella of agriculture, once someone is into second rotation and the premia and grants have stopped and it's not supported by the state, best practice such as setback distances and other environmental considerations are mandatory.

Eoghan Barra

periodictable wrote: »

I took over the running of a farm 10 years ago. New gates, roadside plantings, hedgerow maintenance, planted shelter belts and copses. A neighbour asked me what REPS measures I was signed up to. I replied that I wasn't in REPS. He immediately told that I could get paid for what I was doing. So I signed up and got €5k/yr for the next five years, and had nothing to do. I reckon the total cost of what I had done cost €2k, which worked out €400/yr.
Frankly I think I was overpaid by what REPS offered!
I guess I have pride in what I have, and can see the benefits of what I am doing, know I have a duty as a caretaker of land and the wider environment, and know that there will be a financial benefit both tangibly and intangibly for future owners.
Perhaps it's a mindset-to me €2k is a holiday so it's money better invested in what I did.
However, in the case of forestry, the Cinderella of agriculture, once someone is into second rotation and the premia and grants have stopped and it's not supported by the state, best practice such as setback distances and other environmental considerations are mandatory.

REPS, which was probably full of defects (I'm not that familiar with it) is pretty well gone now; it seems that there are replacements like aeos, but these are less of a gravy train than REPS from what I can gather.

I would be like you, periodictable, in terms of seeing the environmental side of things as important, but 99% of people won't be interested without an incentive, and 1% of the population aren't going to change much.

paddy147

With regards to the urban bees...I hate seeing house after house in this country with just nothing but concrete or paved driveway and not a single plant or flower in it.


There should be some sort of law which states that you must have a garden/green area of a particular size and porporition to your house/land size.

We created/made our front and back gardens as bee and insect friendly as possible and also we did the same on the alotment,to attract in the honeybees,wild bees and butterflys too.

periodictable

Great idae. I's like to see it mandatory to plant and maintain a tree, even a dwarf tree for small gardens.

mike65

paddy147 wrote: »

With regards to the urban bees...I hate seeing house after house in this country with just nothing but concrete or paved driveway and not a single plant or flower in it.


There should be some sort of law which states that you must have a garden/green area of a particular size and porporition to your house/land size.

We created/made our front and back gardens as bee and insect friendly as possible and also we did the same on the alotment,to attract in the honeybees,wild bees and butterflys too.

You're German aren't you?!

As someone who has larger a than average modern suburban back garden with several large trees and bushes plus a selection big flowering shrubs I agree.

I was wondering if boosting the urban bee population could be a way to maintain pollination of crop, could a programme be developed to move hives to the countryside for the pollination of a specific crop.

envaction

djpbarry wrote: »

Are they trying to imply that food production would collapse without bees? Because that's complete nonsense.

That is the same thing that I was thinking. I mean I could see that happening because I have heard that bees are actually very important to life and food. So, I could see why it would be bad if we kept on killing them.

Macha

[mod] Old thread. Closed. [/mod]