Bees: Pesticide restrictions must be extended to wheat - new Friends of the Earth report

[waterbuffalofarmer]

Don't get taken in by the hype on Facebook and the like, all those "facts" they love to give out, and now seem to have become largely accepted by a lot of people, are complete myths, often with a tiny grain of truth behind them in a completely different context.
Bees as pollinators are important, and we certainly don't want to go destroying them, but they're nothing like as important as they're made out to be, and Einstein never said anything about them!
The reported slow and painful deaths are not from field trials of the chemicals being used in practice, but from lab tests with physical contact at hugely inflated doses (in practice they are a seed treatment, buried underground, months before bees come in contact with the flowers).
Have you heard mention of the half dozen or so new bee species discovered in Britain in the last couple of years? Probably not, but you'll have read multiple times about the five close to extinction species, with no mention that they are specific extinctions in Hawaii, a very fast changing set of islands.
As well as arable farming, I keep honey bees, six hives at the moment, and I would much rather healthy neonic seed treated crops of flowering plants like rape than I would having to cope with multiple doses of sprayed pyrethroids or more likely no flowering crops at all.

And yet there has been a lot of studies to prove that, that is the case, how they effect the bees. Fine they did do laboratory tests and such, but they have also studied bees in their natural environment too and noticed effects from that. So to say that it's all a load of crap is just pure ignorance. As farmers we should be working to a solution. How do you think farmers managed years ago? granted with great difficulty ik, but at least they knew how to farm and didn't depend on pesticides... Sorry may sound a bit harsh but facts are facts.

 

[bovrill]

And yet there has been a lot of studies to prove that, that is the case, how they effect the bees. Fine they did do laboratory tests and such, but they have also studied bees in their natural environment too and noticed effects from that. So to say that it's all a load of crap is just pure ignorance. As farmers we should be working to a solution. How do you think farmers managed years ago? granted with great difficulty ik, but at least they knew how to farm and didn't depend on pesticides... Sorry may sound a bit harsh but facts are facts.

The biggest difference from years ago is the standard required for human consumption. Holes, nibbles and bites out of a crop mean instant rejection in the modern world, and that's not going to change any time soon. In the past it was all good food, just wash the bugs out first!
The studies in their natural environment have not proved adverse effects from neonicotinoid seed treatments, whatever you have been led to believe. There was the big three country one concluded earlier this year, and the only one you'll hear about is the third with a very marginal detrimental effect on insects, nothing about the third that found no effect, and absolutely nothing about the third of the test that showed an improvement!

 

[shakerator]

The biggest difference from years ago is the standard required for human consumption.!

and quantity....don't forget quantity!!

 

[turbo]

And yet there has been a lot of studies to prove that, that is the case, how they effect the bees. Fine they did do laboratory tests and such, but they have also studied bees in their natural environment too and noticed effects from that. So to say that it's all a load of crap is just pure ignorance. As farmers we should be working to a solution. How do you think farmers managed years ago? granted with great difficulty ik, but at least they knew how to farm and didn't depend on pesticides... Sorry may sound a bit harsh but facts are facts.

Do you know how the field trails were undertaken?,neat chemical applied on the entrance to the hive that's how so no wonder it affected the bees!

 

[Hindsight]

And yet there has been a lot of studies to prove that, that is the case, how they effect the bees. Fine they did do laboratory tests and such, but they have also studied bees in their natural environment too and noticed effects from that. So to say that it's all a load of crap is just pure ignorance. As farmers we should be working to a solution. How do you think farmers managed years ago? granted with great difficulty ik, but at least they knew how to farm and didn't depend on pesticides... Sorry may sound a bit harsh but facts are facts.

I am interested in the phrase 'the knew how to farm' this I consider is an oft quoted phrase when any of the chemical bans are mentioned. But may I suggest that farmers years ago managed by simply accepting considerable variability in yield and crop quality between years - not that the 'knew to farm at all'. Hey ho.

 

[waterbuffalofarmer]

Do you know how the field trails were undertaken?,neat chemical applied on the entrance to the hive that's how so no wonder it affected the bees!

No tbh with you the case study I saw was scientists feeding bees pollen obtained from sprayed flowers and nothing but that, they then monitored the bees comparing them to others who had not consumed polluted pollen. It was a really sad result too. The bees who consumed the sprayed pollen lost all sense of direction, starved to death basically, I think also deforming happened too. It was I think tho a certain type of pesticide/herbicide, one only used in the US and banned in the UK, currently. Although I hate the use of them, I will rephrase what I said earlier... They do indeed have their uses, but only if spraying when necessary. It doesn't just effect the bee populations/insects but other wildlife and us too. Think of it a bit like antibiotics, necessary at times but are counteractive. What I mean is yes they deal with the initial problem, but can also create other problems. For example you take AB's, they strip the body of the good bacteria as well as the bad, causing weakness to the immune system and leaving it open for infection. I'm not saying here you shouldn't take AB's instead when you take them, ie if you spray your land with stuff like this, just make sure you supplement it otherwise promoting habitat and such, so the effects are not counteractive. Using the AB method as direction as it were. For example if on ABs take probiotics and echinaecia, which help to rebuild the good bacteria. For the land for similar for it. If you know my meaning ofc.....

 

[turbo]

No tbh with you the case study I saw was scientists feeding bees pollen obtained from sprayed flowers and nothing but that, they then monitored the bees comparing them to others who had not consumed polluted pollen. It was a really sad result too. The bees who consumed the sprayed pollen lost all sense of direction, starved to death basically, I think also deforming happened too. It was I think tho a certain type of pesticide/herbicide, one only used in the US and banned in the UK, currently. Although I hate the use of them, I will rephrase what I said earlier... They do indeed have their uses, but only if spraying when necessary. It doesn't just effect the bee populations/insects but other wildlife and us too. Think of it a bit like antibiotics, necessary at times but are counteractive. What I mean is yes they deal with the initial problem, but can also create other problems. For example you take AB's, they strip the body of the good bacteria as well as the bad, causing weakness to the immune system and leaving it open for infection. I'm not saying here you shouldn't take AB's instead when you take them, ie if you spray your land with stuff like this, just make sure you supplement it otherwise promoting habitat and such, so the effects are not counteractive. Using the AB method as direction as it were. For example if on ABs take probiotics and echinaecia, which help to rebuild the good bacteria. For the land for similar for it. If you know my meaning ofc.....

But we wern't spraying neonics on a flowing crop ,we were applying a seed dressing 8 months earlier.If used as recomended I don't think a single study has shown a problem

 

[bovrill]

and quantity....don't forget quantity!!

You're right, of course.
I didn't get into words what was in my head, I sort of meant the markets have changed, it doesn't matter what yield you grow now, the quality has to be very good to be sold for human consumption, which it didn't have to be in the days before insecticides.

 

[shakerator]

I am interested in the phrase 'the knew how to farm' this I consider is an oft quoted phrase when any of the chemical bans are mentioned. But may I suggest that farmers years ago managed by simply accepting considerable variability in yield and crop quality between years - not that the 'knew to farm at all'. Hey ho.

Religion also more involved !

It wasn't the omission of a critical triazole but dark fungal spirits that robbed the yield ....!

 

[stroller]

We do see farmers as potential allies and in both our reports on farming without neonics we've talked to farmers about their experiences and included practical case studies from both organic and conventional farmers. In fact it is this practical experience which has really convinced us that there are solutions to the challenges of controlling pests without neonics which do not involve increasing use of other pesticides.

In both our reports (on wheat and oilseed rape) we call for more proactive research into pest control solutions for farmers as products are restricted. The experience of our case study farmers suggests that the innovative approaches they are taking can bring multiple benefits - in particular improving soil health as well as pest control.

And in our wheat report we do flag up the need for farmers to continue to be supported to provide habitats that help wildlife and boost natural predators in post Brexit farming policy. Like many NGOs we are developing our own position on what should replace CAP - initial thoughts from my colleague in this blog https://www.foe.co.uk/blog/brexit-what-next-food-farming

We want to hear from farmers so if you have experience - good or bad - of farming without neonics or reducing insecticide use, or want to share ideas on what the Government should be doing to support farmers to find alternative ways of controlling pests as products get withdrawn do get in touch, Sandra Bell @sandrambell.

Are you going to push for the ban of any crops grown with neonics, or it it a case of exporting our pollution so that's ok?

 

[ollie989898]

The answer to most of the questions in this thread is: genetically modified crops.

Choose what method you would like. You can defend the crop from pests and disease, or you can create a transgenic one that defends itself.

Quite what opposition there can be to genetically modified cultivars I have utterly no idea provided a safety case is answered. Wheat, oilseed rape and the like are artificial creations and do not belong or exist in nature except in distantly related forms.