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:
Charles Linder <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 22 Jul 2017 15:52:36 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (308 lines)
	
GMO plants, the herbicide-tolerant GMOs associated with Roundup directly
caused YOUR honey to become contaminated.


James note was quite interesting.  I have to admit the mental gymnastics if
GMO to the travesty of Falcons winning the bowl t shirts and too poor for
mud was quite a bit to follow!,  But lets stick to roundup for this one!

For you readers who norammly skip many parts,  (I do at times) read close as
there are some real interesting details buried in here!

 
The above line is the only part that  Could actually be supported,  all the
other claims about roundup are diengengious and misleading,  so lets get a
few things straight,  then make a decision.  I am not going to take Jims
note point by point as it would get to hard to follow. But lets just cover
things.


First,  he was eluding to my support for modern AG as some sort of  not
quite shill,  but overly friendly.  Rest assured,  my support for whats
going on out here is based, on 2 basics,  one an understanding of where we
were and where we are, and where we are headed,  and my 100% selfishness as
a beekeeper.  I do deeply resent the mistruths spread about AG,  but more
importantly,  should many of these "interlopers" succeed in what they think
is saveing the world,  My beekeeping is going to be sorely affected.  And
not for the better.  I shall detail this a bit more.  I pondered quite  a
bit why I care at all what many think or say,  and for the most part I
really do not care,  I also understand that most already have their mind
made up and will not care a about facts or history.  And then I recall many
conversations with Christina and Randy  where they took their time to
explain things to me  and realize its only fair.

Lest start with IARC and their claim  that Roundup is a "probable" cancer
agent  Probable is a key word here. I also noted an article about gluten
intolerance,  read the article...  the first two words were "what if"  2 key
probably and what if,  Frankly  I wonder how they get printed.  Keep in mind
there is no legal recourse to the IARC claim.  If there was it wold be
fought as all the reputable science would dispute it.

Also  key to note is the IARC also includes red meat, hot beverages and
being a hair dresser, smelling hot oil cooking and char grilling on that
same list!   Wow,  so it saying that if my hair dresser orders a Char
grilled steak side of fries, washes it down with hot coffee and a biscuit
with honey and roundup,  shes what many would now call the "walking dead"
Frankly speaking I suspect most of us who actually thought about it would
realize the list of 2a items is quite nonsensical.  If your of the mind that
a trace amount of roundup is now a cancer problem for you,  then your mind
is set and it is 
what it is.

I will add at this point,  I do think we could use less.  It is currently up
for review at the EPA  and I hope they make it a restricted use pesticide.
As A licensed applicator I do see a lot of misuse of it.


 Roundups History

  Roundup hit the market back in 1974  so its been around as long as many of
us. Roundup in your food at some level has been a fact of life, its just
recently we have been able to detect it at the levels we typically see.   I
would bet,  its been there a long time.  
Why is that in important?  In 1972 DDT was banned,  the heightened concern
over environmental issues was huge! Better believe every science person out
there was digging and hunting for something,  and the amount of research and
testing was extremely high based on what we knew then.

 

Jim makes a claim its residual effects are problematic.   Nonsense.  Even CA
shows its soil half life of 44 days. Any reputable work will show a quick
breakdown,  A quick search of this information is keystrokes away for those
willing to dig.  Same with water.  If that's really a fact you want to
exploit,  do the work,  there are certain types of soils that slow it,  but
your picking the fly poop out of the pepper. 

http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/emon/pubs/fatememo/glyphos.pdf  roundups
degradability in the environment is and has been a key to its commercial
success. Please check your facts before lecturing.


Lets point out what roundup actually is,  because its apparent to me,  most
do not understand.  When we talk about herbicides in particular,  there are
4 basic types  Broad leaf killers,  grass killers, broad spectrum (kills
all)  and sterilizers. We could debate pre emergent and post emergent,  but
lets just stick to these 4 for now.

Roundup is a post emergent broad spectrum killer. It does not kill plants
that are not emerged,  it does not penetrate the soil and kill weeds.  I
should also mention its mode of action,  as its actually pretty cool.  Many
of you are far more knowledgeable than me on this topic so just a brief
mention.  It is a plant growth inhibitor.  As such it kills plants somewhat
slowly by attacking an enzyme the plant needs.   I will not even remotely
attempt to go further as it's a bit above my pay grade,  but  what you need
to know is that its really cool,  and the development of that for commercial
use was and remains a cornerstone of Science and progress.   While it is
somewhat easy to "poison" a plant.  Doing so by attacking a plant specific
enzyme was and remains a ground breaking idea.  

BEFORE Roundup is a key thought we all need to comprehend.  Its also the
point most anti's use what I will term "Intellectual naivety" (I struggle
with a term open to  polite ideas)  In the 70's it was standard practice to
spray diesel fuel around the mailbox,  the sidewalks,  edges of the barns
and fences ect.  Weed eaters did not exist like they do now,  and diesel was
cheap.  I am pretty sure most of can comprehend the real consequences of
that action for water and pollinators. But as broad spectrum weed killer,
that and Atrazine were the go too items. Along comes roundup.   Things start
changing.   

One key point here  super huge,  the ultimate key for all of those who think
roundup killed the butterfly,  Roundup kills EVERYTHING,  its not and was
not used in pastures and ditches to coat everything.  It is at times spot
spray,  but pastures and  yards were/ are sprayed with BROADLEAF weed
killers,  not Roundup.

So for the first 15 years round up languished as a burn down chemical. Only
used as a desiccant for some crops,  and since no till was really rare back
then,  not used for much else but spot spraying.  If interested check the
history,  still a lot sold,  but not where we have been the last 30 years by
a long stretch.

In this time frame,  much awareness was being brought up on soil erosion.
In Iowa in the 70's most snow was brownish a day or so later as dirt covered
the snow from blowing.  Not much mind was given to it as most felt they
gained as much as they lost,  so considered in a wash.  You should be aware
of why there was so much exposed dirt,  all fields were plowed in the fall.
Dang rare was the field that got missed  the idea was to break up the soil
and put the old stalks and roots back into the ground to breakdown during
the winter.  The plow was a standard in every farmers toolbox.  Many were
starting to work out details about no till and soil erosion.  In this time
frame it was  really being researched and tested and worked out.  For this
note I will skip all the details about farm sizes and economy changes,  and
just deal with the development of no till.  Feel free to ask.   

 Problem 1
As no till was gaining traction,  it had a problem  residual weeds many
known as winter annuals. Others such as fall grasses were yield killers.
Corn left in the field from missed harvest wreaks havoc on next years beans.
Most of you don't know when you harvest beans and standing corn goes right
in the combine.  That corn is in the grain tank.  When you show up at the
elevator with corn mixed in,  You get a heavy docking.  So corn (VOLENTEER
CORN) is a huge no no and problem.  So,  No till is hitting a snag.  A huge
snag.  Weed control in spring.  As a result,  more and more are waiting till
spring to plow or cultivate (disk or harrow)  but for most of the country
this is problematic.  Spring weather is fickle,  counting on time to plow
disk  and plant around the weather is very dicey,  so a lot while loving the
idea of soil control,  were loathe to put it into use.

Problem 2
Its standard practice to rotate crops,  many believe its for soil heath,
but fact is weed control is number 1. We have reached a point in AG where we
can supplement the soil season after season and grow good corn  with no
damage.  What we didn't have yet was weed control.    
See when you plant beans  you cultivated,  and/or you used a grass killer.
This handled the tough grasses that had sprung up in last years corn such as
water hemp and foxtails,  as well as volunteer corn. FYI  grasses such as
waterhemp are really hard to get with mechanical means such as a cultivator.
The following season was corn,  and in corn you used a broadleaf killer to
attack the lambsquarter and pigweed,  those have cropped up while the beans
were growing.  So crop rotation was and is a method of weed control as much
as anything.

At this time,  most would apply a fall sterilizer and some sort of
cultivation to try to kill Atrazine was common as a fall killer for
broadleaf seed as well.  So  at this point in history (mid to late 80's)  we
want to use no till but its hard to do,  and we till the ground  on average
spring and fall for weed control.  I don't recall the numbers but tillage
cost are always high as the fuel it takes to do it is high.


Along comes the 90's  and low and behold roundup ready corn.  WOW  how cool
is that from a science point of view?  You guys can judge that on your own,
but from a farmer and consumer viewpoint  its pretty cool.  What we can now
do is ACTUALLY practice no till on the corn side at least.  We can wait till
spring, we can even plant and wait till the plant emerges,  and then a
simple herbicide spray takes care of all weeds (grass and broadleaf)  but
doesn't hit the corn!  Freaking awesome!  No till now has legs.   Do some
math and you also quickly realize fuel for spraying is a dang lot less than
cultivation,  so input cost start to go down! Man  Legal issues with seed
transfer left out of it,  the tech is cool.  No residual issues,  no
Atrazine in the water (was the number one cancer related water contaminant)
for all practical purpose this stuff is an inert miracle!   Of course not
long after comes beans.  And as they say,  now were cooking with gas!  No
till is now a standard reality!  Soil erosion is reduced to a level most
thought was impossible 10 years prior.   There of course was a yield bump,
but the real gold was in reduced input cost roundup is cheap,  effective and
easy to use as well as so much better than the prior items!    Did we/ do we
overuse it?  Probably.  Hindsight.  Make a note and move on.  


Now  this is where it gets real interesting.  I saw and article last month
about how roundup was killing winter annuals and hurting bees.  Complete
garbage!  Without roundup winter annuals do not exist in any volume!   For
those who care email me,  I will send you pictures.  Now,  every spring from
Mississippi to northern Il  the crop of purple deadnettle, hensbitt and
yellow rocket (there are others)  is allowed to bloom right up until
planting.  Net result  MILLIONS of acres of forage for bees and other
pollinators in early spring when they need it!  Most season we make honey
for 4-6 weeks on this.  What most have forgotten or don't know,  is 25 years
ago this did not exist.  James talk about unintended consequences,  well
this one is a huge one in our favor,  brought to you by roundup.  Moving
further north every season.


So lets recap, 
 Roundup 
safer for the environment than the options,  options being Atrazine, and
other residual herbicides. 
completely safe for the applicator
Easy to apply,  low drift, and vapor issues
Reduced soil erosion
Increase yields for farmers
Chance for winter annuals to bloom.


I am a fool,  many here would say that,  but I am smart enough to know that
roundup is helping me,  and the people I sponge off of.  I will defend that.
In fact I am quite disappointed to say roundup is failing,  many farmers are
switching BACK to older ways.  The fields are easy to spot.  Nothing growing
between seasons of corn or beans.  Damm shame that is.   Right now its
around 20% that are giving up on roundup.  I hope the new liberty link will
send them back.  Winter annuals are a huge crop, right when pollinators need
it.



Now Some are concerned with roundup in honey,  rightfully so,  we should be.
But  before you start screaming,  curb your enthusiasm.  First off,  Jim
quoted the researcher who "had trouble finding a clean sample"  typical.  We
need to do the homework.  Right now about 1/2 the honeys tested are clean.
That means half have traces of roundup,  yup  bad.   But lets get to facts,
they are in fact from bees direct foraging.  I have never seen any info
other than a reporter claim its "residual"  so lets parse that,  our bees
are foraging on someone else's property and stole nectar that was
contaminated!  No  why do I phrase it like that?  Because its reality.  We
all place bees knowing we do not have permission on all the ground they
cover. Those who claim otherwise are liars or wrong.  Why is this important?
I will give you my view.

Right now Sue bee is being sued. Of course to do this in a legal aspect we
have to show the beekeeper is negligent.(check the legal docs before we
debate it)  we as beeks are selling non compliant honey.  There are 2
recourse should the plaintiff win this legal battle  first,  honey is tested
and rejected.  If 1/2 the honey crop is now "contaminated" the loss to
beekeepers and almond growers is huge. I could detail it,  but anyone with
moment can ponder the implications.

2nd,  we somehow push that issue to the farmer/applicator.  How long before
we are not allowed to forage bees?  3 years?5 years?  Some will naysay.  I
was there in the 70's when you could go hunting anywhere,  and in the 80's
when lawsuits from idiots who hurt themselves on others land changed that.
Nowadays its impossible to get permissions.  That WILL happen for beekeepers
if and when we are viewed as taking contaminated nectar.,  no  they will not
stop spraying,  don't be fooled!  They will stop us from using the land.  So
fast it will make CCD look like a blip.  Be very careful what you go to
court over. In this case the Grounds are used against Sioux  as advertising
honey as 100% pure.  Most of is here realize what ppb looks like in
percentages. lots of 9's to the right of the decimal.


Now on to the fun part!  Jim commented about how bad and horrid and terrible
a small amount of a plant growth inhibitor is for us in our honey. IARC has
picked roundup as a bad actor,  CA is soon to follow!  While I agree  zero
is better, for fun let me point out a much bigger issue with contaminated
honey (ask Brent Barkman we have several worse than roundup)  

Benzaldehyde!  This agent is also listed with IARC as a KNOWN cancer causing
(list A) and is regularly sold for use with honey processing.  The label on
the containers I have show no cautions on handling or on spillage in honey
super (very possible) benzaldehyde was the first chemical I misused and
found to be quickly absorbed by the skin!  Since there was no label
otherwise on the bottle a few season back we were coating the backs of our
gloves with it to keep bees off,  turns out your skin absorbs it quickly and
you can taste it!  I had heard about and studied skin absorption for a
pesticide license,  here was a real example!  Quick lesson that was.

I wonder what 1 drop dribbled on a  honey super does to the PPM numbers?  I
think maybe the FDA or EPA need to be sure those warnings are on the bottle!
Where oh where are they when we need them??


For the record this products competition uses buytric acid.  A much stinker
choice,  but complete food grade by the MSDS sheets that come with it. 

If you understand the cost/ benefit ratio of Roundup better,  you can still
be against it,  but IMO any knowledgeable beekeeper should really get more
facts and ponder their position. I see it as a pretty big win for bees,
(forage), for water(Atrazine usage has declined by 80%) farmers (reduced
input cost) and for erosion problems.

But man,  we need to be careful throwing stones.  Never know when a lawsuit
will force honey bottlers or small producers to certify things like roundup
or Benzaldehyde,  you know unintended consequences being what they are.

I know there are many who have already formulated the rebuttals....  I have
heard most  and would gladly debate them offline.   The question is,  have
you actually pondered the benefits,  or already positioned yourself in a
place you can't get away from?


Charles

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