BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Date:
Wed, 29 Feb 2012 17:59:18 -0600
Reply-To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID:
<51292D6B0CEC4D35B39CED5A692C986E@bobPC>
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original
From:
Bob Harrison <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (67 lines)
> All anyone ever did was to ask you to give evidence to support your
> hypothesis.

Sadly there is still not concrete evidence to support my back then
hypothesis or the chemical company hypothesis today.

One point I always like to make is it is harder to get a product pulled or
labels changed than get a product registered. Clearly Bayer did not follow
the rules presenting the required studies to prove the neonics were safe for
bees.

canola was also used when in the U.S. our concern was for seed treated corn.


> Your hypothesis is duly noted, but 20 years of intensive research has
> failed to lend it much support.

intensive research for TWENTY YEARS. Using 10 years as a figure is pushing
the years for research on the neonics.


> I wrote the owner of the hives in the study, which had heavy clothianidin
> dust blown right into the entrances.  All colonies recovered fully.

I will take your word for it but seems hard to believe.

I am glad his hives recovered (what period of time?)

> As I've previously stated, planting dust is indeed an issue that must be
> addressed.  But that study did little to add to our knowledge.

Until you consider clothiandin dust a problem for bees I will have a hard
time convincing you about the problems we see in other neonic treated plants
bees visit.


> The EPA has no qualms about revoking a label, as they recently did for
> clothianidin on cotton.

Please explain to the list why clothianidin was revoked for use on cotton.

Cotton was a big crop for bees in Missouri until the government took over
the ariel spraying. Spraying when bees were in the field was common. Then
clothianidin .

beekeepers avoid cotton these days.


Commercial beekeepers have always had hard times (almost impossible)
collecting for pesticide kills.
The old government indemnity program was wrote by chemical companies. Why
not let the tax payers pay for kills from their chemicals.

Workman's comp was the invention of companies to limit claims.

bees are collateral damage. always have been.

bob

             ***********************************************
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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2