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

[Brisel]

Keep your friends close but your enemies closer?

FOE have their own agenda. Keeping farmers on the land as custodians is part of that agenda but I don't pretend that they are looking out for my well being.

 

[fudge]

Keep your friends close but your enemies closer?

FOE have their own agenda. Keeping farmers on the land as custodians is part of that agenda but I don't pretend that they are looking out for my well being.

Do you pretend that Bayer are looking after your well being?

 

[Brisel]

Do you pretend that Bayer are looking after your well being?

Only as long as I keep buying their products. Everyone has their own angle and vested interests.

 

[Andy Howard]

Have not read the report yet so not up to speed. But my understanding of the issue is that neonics are water soluble and only about 5% gets taken up by the crop so the other 95% moves with water in the soil across or downwards so they can affect plants in field edges etc. I don't think neonics would get approved today if they came on the market as a new product as the solubility is too high. I may be wrong. The toxic slug effect is correct. I went to the trials in the US. Also it has been proven in the USA that neonics adversely effect monarch butterflies. I cant personally see these products lasting long.

 

[Sandra Bell]

it is quite easy to collect pollen from honey bees in large amounts and then measure the chemicals in it
if chemicals were a big problem we would here about it from studies of pollen

the foe and rspb are in danger of killing off the pollen and nector producing crops that bees realy thrive on a few acres of pollen and nector will not keep many bees alive compared with 25% of arable land in rape and 15% in bean due to inscect pests there will be some countys with no nector producing crops

Neonic residues have been found in pollen collected from crops and wildflowers: http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.est.5b03459

Here is a brief round up of just some of the other evidence on neonics:

Only around 5% of pesticide is absorbed into the crop with the rest released as dust (1%) or absorbed into the soil and water (94%).

Exposure to neonicotinoid seed-treated oilseed rape crops has been linked to long-term population decline of wild bee species across the English countryside over a 17-year period.

It’s not just honeybees threatened. Solitary and bumblebees look to be even more vulnerable to neonics according to field trials conducted in Sweden.

Buff-tailed bumblebees and honeybees can’t taste the 3 restricted neonicotinoid pesticides. In-fact the chemical similarity to nicotine could be acting on their brains to keep them coming back for more.

And continuing the restrictions on neonics on oilseed rape doesn't need to mean the end of oilseed rape as we've been hearing from several rapeseed oil producers featured here http://www.rapeseedoilguide.com/ and several farmers including these two have shared their experience of producing oilseed rape with and without neoincs: https://www.foe.co.uk/page/farming-pollinators-profit and https://www.foe.co.uk/page/growing-oilseed-rape-farming-with-without-neonics

The neonic restrictions on oilseed rape will be in place for at least another year and could be made permanent. We want the Government and research institutions to prioritise R&D into alternative ways of controlling pests like flea beetle - to help bees and farmers - finding solutions that work for farmers needs to go hand in hand with restricting harmful products.
@sandrambell

 

[Sandra Bell]

Insecticides don't have to be a "big" problem to tip the balance against bee survival. From reading the latest round of claim and counter claim it would appear to me that FOE view farmers as potential allies in, as they see it, the sustainable management of the UKs habitats. Furthermore they are prepared to argue for agricultural support to achieve those ends. Of course you lads can all thrive without interference from govt, so you can afford to ignore such allies, and hope for a truly free market post brexit.

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.

 

[Brisel]

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.

I'd better read your linked literature before having another go at FOE, but I hope you'll understand my scepticism of NGOs and their agendae, particularly when it comes to seeking CAP funds for their own purposes...

Have a look in the Direct Drilling forums in here. You'll see posts by lots of no tillers who question the use of chemistry for pest control. They want to encourage natural soil fauna to help with pest control & improve their soils. Do a search for BYDV in Cropping & you'll see who has similar thoughts to you.

 

[Chalky]

But don't ignore out of hand those who have had catastrophes caused by seemingly insignificant small invertebrate pests.

If insecticides were not deemed necessary-why would they ever have been invented? We get off relatively lightly in temperate maritime climates-the hotter it gets, the more devastating insect pests get. Or do FOE only aim to hobble us here in the UK?

It was in the Bible remember..

 

[ollie989898]

Neonic residues have been found in pollen collected from crops and wildflowers: http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.est.5b03459

Here is a brief round up of just some of the other evidence on neonics:

Only around 5% of pesticide is absorbed into the crop with the rest released as dust (1%) or absorbed into the soil and water (94%).

Exposure to neonicotinoid seed-treated oilseed rape crops has been linked to long-term population decline of wild bee species across the English countryside over a 17-year period.

It’s not just honeybees threatened. Solitary and bumblebees look to be even more vulnerable to neonics according to field trials conducted in Sweden.

Buff-tailed bumblebees and honeybees can’t taste the 3 restricted neonicotinoid pesticides. In-fact the chemical similarity to nicotine could be acting on their brains to keep them coming back for more.

And continuing the restrictions on neonics on oilseed rape doesn't need to mean the end of oilseed rape as we've been hearing from several rapeseed oil producers featured here http://www.rapeseedoilguide.com/ and several farmers including these two have shared their experience of producing oilseed rape with and without neoincs: https://www.foe.co.uk/page/farming-pollinators-profit and https://www.foe.co.uk/page/growing-oilseed-rape-farming-with-without-neonics

The neonic restrictions on oilseed rape will be in place for at least another year and could be made permanent. We want the Government and research institutions to prioritise R&D into alternative ways of controlling pests like flea beetle - to help bees and farmers - finding solutions that work for farmers needs to go hand in hand with restricting harmful products.
@sandrambell

Come off it, what are you suggesting? Control flea beetle through alternative means?

Come on. What exactly do you suggest? Don't grow OSR, that is what you are getting at, isn't it?

 

[ollie989898]

There is no farmer in the UK who farms purely for the benefit of Bayer nor anyone else. I have heard that kind of crap before, probably on a FOE forum actually. Farmers do not use products unless they see a need for it. They are not recreational nor have they ever been. If a product confers no commercial advantage to the farmer it will not sell. And where the CRD are involved a product has to pass muster or it just won't be approved. End of story.

And the argument that big corporations control world agriculture is wearing thin. Big corporations dominate everything because of regulatory capture and the fact only they can afford to spend the money to meet with the regulatory hurdles involved.

 

[Chemical nick]

Slightly going of thread but as i understand it F of E support an immediate ban on Glyphosate. Can they please understand of the environmental disaster this would bring in ending no till and conservation agriculture. The soil should be the most precious asset to conserve and regenerate in this country. Soil regeneration and the practices that enhance this have the knock on effect of C02 capture not loss through cultivation, water retention helping prevent flooding and drought. However at the moment we cannot carry out these practices of no till without glyphosate. There are no alternatives without comprehensive research which would take at least 10 years.
F of E would get more support in the farming community if they laid off Glyphosate until we have a sensible array of alternatives hopefully cultural to use in no till. THE SOIL SHOULD BE THE PRIORITY.

 

[Richard III]

I am one of the band of No Till farmers attempting not to use insecticides. I can't remember when I last used a pyrethroid spray and last used deter dressing in 2013. There is no doubt that No Till reduces the risk of BYDV, but it certainly doesn't remove the risk. I got away with minor damage last year, but I know that some other No Tiller's were not so lucky. For three years now I have chosen to gamble and not use any insecticide, but it is just that, a gamble and the risks are high against a small cost saving.

If I was an agronomist there is no way I would advise a client against treating, the risks of getting it wrong and getting sacked would be far too high. For myself, I could do with finding better ways of assessing risk and identifying when aphids are present, then I could sleep a little easier over the winter months.

 

[dontknowanything]

Explain this then friends of the earth

Uncontrolled wild oats in 2012 wheat crop deter treated hammered with BYDV. Wheat crop totally unaffected.

Conclusion: seed dressing is well targeted to the plants being farmed.

It doesn't really matter anyway as neonics about off patent and diamide$ ready to replace them Which I'm sure @dontknowanything will find interesting

Come now, let's not use absurdities to make a point. Two different specie are affected differently - that means nothing and you know it!

Use the same variety of wheat, some treated and some not, then see what happens. Also one must consider that sub-lethal doses may also have a negative effect on other species, like bees for example.

 

[dontknowanything]

FOE are far too heavily biased to be impartial IMHO.

I'd say about equal impartiality with farmers who see these chemicals (rightly or wrongly) as being a route to more £ in their bank accounts.

 

[dontknowanything]

Who says I don't give a sh!t about the environment ?.Just because I don't beleave your armageddon stories dosn't make me care less about it.

 

[turbo]

Am I being thick because I don't understand that

 

[dontknowanything]

it is quite easy to collect pollen from honey bees in large amounts and then measure the chemicals in it
if chemicals were a big problem we would here about it from studies of pollen

Pretty sure that has been done already?

 

[Brisel]

I'd say about equal impartiality with farmers who see these chemicals (rightly or wrongly) as being a route to more £ in their bank accounts.

By protecting our crops from pests, having looked at the risks and concluded that a seed dressing was the best way of keeping BYDV out instead of applying multiple doses of broad spectrum pyrethroid insecticides. You had BYDV last year...

Being green doesn't always pay the bills. There's lots I'd like to do but losing a cereal crop to BYDV isn't going to keep me in business.

 

[dontknowanything]

By protecting our crops from pests, having looked at the risks and concluded that a seed dressing was the best way of keeping BYDV out instead of applying multiple doses of broad spectrum pyrethroid insecticides. You had BYDV last year...

Being green doesn't always pay the bills. There's lots I'd like to do but losing a cereal crop to BYDV isn't going to keep me in business.

So you'd consider yourself to be totally impartial and unbiased on this matter?

 

[Brisel]

Not at all. I'm looking after my own interests. Using chemicals to mitigate risk is one of them. Going cold turkey overnight is going to get me sacked WHEN I lose a crop. My successor will then have a brief to stop messing about with greenies and grow the damn crop. Then what good have I done?

Would you do everything a NGO told you to?