> Recently I asked a pesticide regulator what their thoug
Hi All



> Recently I asked a pesticide regulator what their thoughts were about
> Imidacloprid and bees.They reiterate what Peter posted above, that so far
> there is no linkage.

Unfortunately this is a complex issue, and the complexity just isn't going to go away.  If as Stan reported 20 ppb is a consensus value for chronic toxicity, then imidacloprid at 4,000 ppb in a bee-pollinated plantation tree represents massive environmental pollution.  The trees themselves, any ground cover, any waterways or groundwater in and from the plantations, any crops or forage that receives irrigation water from that.  The only way that is *not* a problem is if all bees, wild and managed, are repelled by any level of imidacloprid that could damage them.   Surely that has to be a wake-up call too?  At least for countries permitting this kind of use of the pesticide.

The fact that there are regulators who don't see this yet just means that there are regulators who are not properly awake.  Use in the arable context as a seed dressing (as long as the dressing sticks of course) and that *seems* to keep the level within the safe range - just!  It is these other uses that are not just risky but blatantly toxic.

How would you rank the risk to bees from farm pesticides and apiary pesticides?  Certainly anyone *not* taking into account the possibility of damage from beekeeper pesticides is deluding themselves.  Perhaps these regulators we talk about should take an interest in that too.  I wouldn't downplay the role of these beekeeping chemicals in this story at all, but it seems incontrovertible that some uses of these farm pesticides are foolhardy and just shouldn't be allowed.

best wishes

Gavin


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