>> How many native species are going to perish because of this effort....
> The short answer is zero.
There is a standard acronym for claims like those - "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch" (TANSTAAFL). But let's examine what the press-release from the government agency specifically said:
To preface, the article does not mention that the insecticide being deployed here is Fipronil. Does it pose a threat to non-target species? Clearly, yes:
"Despite large knowledge gaps and uncertainties, enough knowledge exists to conclude that existing levels of pollution with neonicotinoids and fipronil resulting from presently authorized uses frequently exceed the lowest observed adverse effect concentrations and are thus likely to have large-scale and wide ranging negative biological and ecological impacts on a wide range of non-target invertebrates in terrestrial, aquatic, marine and benthic habitats."
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-3471-x
So, on to the claims made in the press release:
"https://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/about-us/media-centre/releases/2022/general/varroa-mite-response-shifts-to-wild-european-honey-bee-management-on-the-mid-north-coast"
1) "The bait stations are designed to exclude other animals and insects, and to prevent contamination of soil and water."
The statement above is aspirational at best - the correct wording would be "the bait stations are HOPED to exclude...". I've designed lots of things, and design goals are invariably not completely achieved.
2) “During active use, bait stations will be monitored by trained staff, to minimise the risk of off-target impacts. Experience to date has shown zero feeding in stations by off target species."
Hold on - didn't they just say that the "design" excluded other animals and insects? Why would "trained staff" be required? This does not inspire confidence.
3) "Bait stations will remain in place for up to 12 months, but only in active use with insecticide for very short periods of time, to a maximum of 3 hours each session."
The statement above says nothing about how the very toxic fipronil residues will be dealt with once the 3-hour sessions are over, and the "trained staff" has gone home. While this seems a simple thing to assure, I remember the aerial spraying for mosquito control after Hurricane Floyd along the US North Carolina coast that was pledged to be "only at night" by the government, only to have the Air National Guard spray during daytime, as they could not find any pilots qualified and certified to fly the spray aircraft at night. Such SNAFUs are common in government, as there are so many players, and no clear chain of command in most all civilian settings.
4) "Bait stations are placed at least 2 kms away from the edges of the red eradication emergency zones to reduce the risk of European honey bees from outside the eradication zone interacting with the bait stations.”
This seems to mean that there is a 2km buffer around each eradication zone where it is possible for infested bee colonies to survive, and for the target pest to thereby exit the zone. But it couldn't mean that, so what does it mean?
To summarize, multiple serious questions jump off the page of the press release about this new and hitherto unknown use of Fipronil to eradicate honey bees (and NOTHING else!) in a fairly large swath of territory, and those questions should be treated with respect, and given full consideration.
***********************************************
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
|