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
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Peter Loring Borst <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 21 May 2014 11:13:09 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (43 lines)
> I have been blaming the media for the overblown claims of honeybee declines and keeping CCD alive even through its disappeared as a malady years ago. Now I see even Jeff Pettis is part of the game 

Of course, it is possible that he was totally misquoted, that happens often enough. 

Meanwhile, a report quietly came out about a workshop that was convened to discuss the "pollination problem":

A workshop was convened during which bee experts were
introduced to a formal causal analysis approach to compare 39 candidate causes
against specified criteria to evaluate their relationship to the reduced overwinter
survivability observed since 2006 of commercial bees used in the California almond
industry. Candidate causes were categorized as probable, possible, or unlikely; several
candidate causes were categorized as indeterminate due to lack of information.

Prior to 2006, annual average “expected” losses in the United States were approximately
15%, but since then, U.S. beekeepers have been reporting losses (overwintering mortality) 
of about 30% 

These losses have not resulted in a pronounced decline in the overall number of
honey-producing colonies managed in the United States, because beekeepers have
apparently been replacing colonies to cover the losses

The date included in the problem statement reflects the fact that various factors
have caused declines in honey bees in the past, but around 2006, higher-than-normal
overwintering losses began to be reported (Ellis 2012). Although this time frame is
also when the problem of CCD began to be recognized, the workshop participants
specifically chose not to focus on CCD, due to the lack of clarity about the extent of
this specific syndrome (Ellis 2012).

The parasitic mite Varroa destructor
plus viruses was judged to be a “probable cause,” while nutrient deficiency
was judged to be a “possible cause” of the reduced survival probability of commercial
honey bee colonies in the California almond scenario since approximately 2006.

Neonicotinoid pesticides were judged to be “unlikely” as the sole cause of this reduced
survival probability, although they could possibly be a contributing factor.

Staveley, J. P., Law, S. A., Fairbrother, A., & Menzie, C. A. (2014). A Causal Analysis of Observed Declines in Managed Honey Bees (Apis mellifera). Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 20(2), 566-591.

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2