> Your letter was reasoned and appropriate. It was I who was
confrontational, and I apologize.<
No apology necessary on my end. I did not take your post as 'confrontational'. I don't post often, most don't know me...I was simply trying to convey that I was not
criticizing the intent of the "Catch the Buzz" article, but the substance. I really respect and admire Kim and all he does for beekeeping, I just think this particular article raises 'objectivity' issues.
>It's just that this whole battle
between the beekeepers and the farmers has been going on for decades
now, with the same old unsupported accusations. Many of us, including
Bob, remember PennCap M. Beekeepers were instrumental in getting that
product removed from general use. But based on actual data, not bogus
studies and guesswork<
This is exactly my point...actual data, not bogus studies and guesswork! IF these systemics are killing bees, they should be banned, and beekeepers are key to proving it. I really
appreciate that Kim is "attempting to ameliorate the lack of information." The instructions on where and how to report help this (IMO the reporting process needs updating for today's environment). But, if beekeepers want to be seen as credible reporters of incidents...we need to use credible data! Where
is the proof that any of these bee kills were caused by
planting treated corn? I am not denying that we have seen a lot of
kills exhibiting 'classic' pesticide-kill symptoms recently, but this does not seem to match what we have historically experienced with systemics. I haven't seen
anything that says 'tests prove systemic XYZ found in recent bee kills". Much recent BEE-L discussion
focused on the flaws in the "Harvard study". Shouldn't we hold
ourselves to the same standards? If the "Catch the Buzz" article had
referenced "actual data" that corn planting is causing an
increase in beekills, I would probably still be a contented BEE-L
lurker. It didn't. It cited a Purdue study that proved the talc used
in treated seed can be toxic. The article then "implied" that because recent kills occurred in areas where corn was planted, the kills were caused by the toxic talc. I know samples of many of these recent kills have been taken--have any results specifically identified the agent involved?
>I was referring to the idea that beekeepers don't know what to do about pesticides. They should, that's all. And yes, Kim is attempting to ameliorate the lack of information. THis is the information age, after all, it only takes a moment to find http://www.epa.gov/compliance/complaints/index.html<
The provided link is to one of the reporting forms I did find when searching for a US reporting protocol. Frankly, there is no way I would use it to report a 'suspected' pesticide kill related to treated seed. IMO, it does not seem to fit. Title is 'Report an Environmental Violation...", but if we suspect systemic pesticide exposure, it is likely NOT a violation. The farmer planted treated seed per instructions on the seed label (most do!). The farmer probably spent hours setting-up the planter to the specific recommended settings (seed cost has tripled last few years, farmers do follow the directions!). The farmer bought seed developed by 'expert' ag scientists. The seed he buys is marketed to increase yield and target only destructive pests...and be less destructive to beneficial insects such as pollinators!
How is this a "violation"? I think we need a different approach, and hope the [log in to unmask] email reporting process leads to one.
-- Dan
***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm
|
