My Daddy told me, if I lived a clean life and worked hard, I would
prosper.  Daddy lied, because he assumed we live in a just society.  An
acquaintance suggested that, if the state won't let me make an honest living;
I should try crime.  I just can't accept that. In my heart I still want to
believe my Daddy.  But I have lost some of the drive to work hard. I am tired
of having it stolen from me.
 
   If any other kind of farmer had a tenth of the poisoning of his livestock
that I have had, he would have had all kinds of support, and the poisoners
would be held accountable.  Will you help?
 
   I am a pollination specialist - a beekeeper who provides bees to pollinate
our crops.  Rather than make honey, I am paid for the pollination service.
It is a reliable business, in that the demand for bees continues to increase
rapidly.  Growers need bees more than ever.  Poorly pollinated fruit and
vegetables are often seen at the market, and account for the lousy taste in
many cases. But, in order to maintain the business, I have to keep the bees
alive and healthy.  Mites and other factors have hurt, but the answers are in
my hands, if I just become more skilled.  Pesticide misuse is the only factor
that is completely out of my hands.
 
   The bureaucrats have devised a perfect bureaucratic *solution* to THEIR
problem.  When a violation or bee kill is reported, they do a whole lot of
paperwork, and absolutely nothing else. After a while, beekeepers get cynical
and no longer report incidents.  PRESTO!  *The problem is solved!   We do not
have any bee kills or bee label violations in our jurisdiction.*  As long as
they get away with it, nothing improves.
 
   I am in process of filing a million dollar civil rights claim on certain
officials (ex officio and personally) for refusing to implement and enforce
pesticide label directions that protect bees (my livelihood), despite ten
years of pleading for protection from illegal pesticide misuse.  This is a
seizure of my property without compensation and a denial of equal protection
under the law.
 
   Every time my business begins to look good, with the hive count up, with
healthy strong hives, I am struck down again.  My hive count is down a lot
from last years pesticide losses from multiple violations of label
directions.  I filmed one violation at our Clemson Extension Pee Dee research
station on cotton.
 
   With the refusal to enforce the law,  the frequency of violations, and the
increase of cotton acreage, I can see the end of my pollination business in
sight.  So much of my hard work and productivity has gone down the drain.  I
have no health insurance, no nest egg, no real estate, & no retirement.  It
has been stolen from me, time and again, by pesticide misuse.  I have fewer
hives this year, but they are in excellent shape.  Will they be at the end of
the spray season?   I am tired, and I do not have the energy anymore to build
back up.
 
   I have therefore decided to focus on those who have taken all this away,
those who have refused to implement and enforce pesticide law.
 
   Clemson Extension continues to provide pesticide recommendations:
a) as if label directions for bees did not exist, thereby indicating to
applicators that these are optional and not enforceable.  Sometimes it is
actually stated in such terms.
b) for materials which are bound to be in violation of bee label
directions if not qualified, ie.  non residual materials for use on blooming
crops without the warning that a prior determination must be made that bees
are not foraging.
c) which plainly recommended misuse, with residual materials which will have
bees
foraging within the residual life of the material.
d) which recommend alternatives such as notification of beekeepers to
circumvent applicator compliance with pesticide label directions.  The labels
protect all foraging bees, whether Apis or non-Apis, whether feral or
domestic, and whether on the property of the application or off; this
circumvention protects only those who have a human defender, and only if he
is able to do so (apparently at his own
expense!)
 
   For several years I have asked Clemson Extension leadership to provide
help to applicators in complying with the label directions.  I have seen no
discernable effort to do so, and the Director of Clemson Extension has never
bothered to answer my letters.
 
    The proper role of extension is to aid the applicators, by teaching them
when bees will be foraging, so they can take steps to comply PRIOR to
application,
ie: what crops (& weeds) are attractive to bees, when they bloom, and how to
monitor to determine when bees will not be foraging.
 
   I have a flow chart, which is part of an educational package for
applicators, which I cannot send electronically, but which I will gladly
provide anyone for SASE
 
   I would be glad to answer any other questions.
 
 
 
Here is a paper on some common misinterpretations and circumventions of bee
label directions:
 
>>PESTICIDE LABELS AND BEES
   What the Labels Clearly Do and Do Not Say
  (- Often Misrepresented and Misunderstood)
  Along with Logical, Common Sense Implications
 
   There are two types of  messages about bees on many insecticide labels,
which
are placed under environmental hazards.  These give specific instructions
which are statements of the pesticide law for that particular pesticide.  One
indicates hazard by direct contact only.  Example:  (Imidan  -Trade Mark)
*This product is highly toxic to bees exposed to direct treatment on blooming
crops or weeds. Do not apply this product or allow it to drift to blooming
crops while bees are actively visiting the treatment area.*
 
    Others also indicate a hazard by direct contact and by residues.
Example:  Penncap M  -Trade Mark) *THIS PRODUCT IS HIGHLY TOXIC TO BEES,
exposed to direct treatment or residues on crops or blooming weeds.  Do not
apply this product or allow it to drift to blooming crops or weeds if bees
are visiting the areas to be treated.*
 
    Both types prohibit application while bees are foraging. obviously the
ones with no residual effect are safe for use around bees, provided that they
are not foraging at the time of application. Those that are clearly marked as
residual would logically be prohibited if bees forage within the residual
activity period of the pesticide, in other words
on any plant that is attractive to bees, during the bloom period of that
plant.
 
1.  It is the applicator's responsibility to comply with the label
directions.  This responsibility cannot be transferred to beekkeepers or any
other party.  The applicator has chosen to use a material with environmental
hazards, in this case hazards to pollinators, and it is his responsibility to
use it safely by complying with label directions.
 
2.  The directions refer to the foraging bees, not the bee hives.  It is
irrelevant therefore whether the hives are placed on the property to be
sprayed, or whether they come from other properties within foraging range of
the bees.  Removing hives from the property where application will occur does
not necessarily indicate compliance with label directions, bees may be coming
from adjacent properties or unknown colonies on the property.
 
3.  The label directions protect the foraging bees in the application area,
whether the bees are kept or feral, and they protect all bees, whether
honeybees, solitary bees, or bumblebees (non-Apis bees).
 
4.  Many crops and even weeds are highly attractive to bees during their
blossom period. Compliance with label directions would logically indicate a
necessity for applicators, who use materials with bee protection directions,
to have a minimum knowledge of what blooms are attractive, and to have some
system of monitoring to see if foraging bees are present.  Failure to
monitor, prior to application,  when there is bloom attractive to bees, is
negligent. The proper role of extension and other pesticide advisors would be
to educate applicators on situations where bees will be foraging, and help
him monitor, so that he can avoid violations.
 
5.  Communication with beekeepers, while certainly a good idea, does not
release applicators from compliance with label directions, and demands that
beekeepers take the responsibility for protection of the bees indicates
intent to wilfully misuse a pesticide, which changes violations from civil to
criminal status.
 
6.  A public official, who encourages applicators to demand that beekeepers
take the responsibility for protection of bees is:
     a.  Recommending pesticide misuse - he is substituting an alternative in
lieu of compliance with pesticide label directions.
     b.  He is committing a malfeasance, in substituting a system that only
protects the bees which have a human defender.
     c.  He is seizing the property of the beekeepers involved, without
compensation, in violation of Ammentment V of the Constitution of the United
States of America. It is the  proper and logical role of public pesticide
advisors to teach
applicators how to comply with label directions, ie. how to establish whether
bees will be foraging in the application area.
 
7.  On crops which are known to be attractive to bees, it is a negligent
recommendation of pesticide misuse, to recommend use of an insecticide which
has a direct contact type of label direction, without a warning that use,
while bees are foraging, is in violation.  It is even more a recommendation
of misuse to recommend a pesticide with a residual type of label direction at
any time during bloom, because bees will be foraging during the residual life
of the pesticide.
 
    I have seen hundreds of bee kills from pesticides.  Every single case has
involved a violation of label directions.  NO EXCEPTIONS.  If bee directions
on pesticide labels are scrupulously followed, the poisonings of our
pollinators will drop to negligible levels.
 
   The law is a good one, but it is given only lip service.  It has not been
implemented into pesticide recommendations, which often give applicators an
alternative to circumvent label directions - that of sloughing off
responsibility to beekeepers.  This is the pre-FIFRA system, which never did
work, and has cost billions in lost pollination by killing off feral bees and
making beekeeping unprofitable.
 
   FIFRA set aside the previous precedent.  It made the applicators
responsible by specific label directions, directions which they often find
inconvenient, and have sought to evade ever since.  They have been aided by
authorities, who advise alternatives to compliance, and who refuse to enforce
the clear meaning of the label directions.  It is time for reform.
 
    Public officials who advise applicators how to circumvent compliance with
label directions must be held responsible for this seizure of the property of
the beekeepers without compensation, a violation of Ammendment 5 of the
Constitution of the United States.
 
David L. Green                    Internet:  [log in to unmask]
Dave's Pollination Service                  Eastern Pollinator Newsletter
PO Box 1215, Hemingway,   SC   29554
 
 
   *All the world's people can be divided into three groups; those who make
things happen, those who watch things happen, and those who haven't the
vaguest idea what's happening.*