Bob Harrison wrote:
> Hello Bill & All,
>
> There is not clear picture of what CCD is or caused by.
I disagree, since it seems to becoming clear that it is a pathogen of
some sort. My problem is with those who insist, as the article whose
headline said, that it has been solved and its name is Bayer. I have
no issue with the fact that pesticides can cause bee and human
problems. As noted, I practice organic farming and do not use
pesticides for that reason. I have, however, a very big problem with
emotional responses against chemicals where there is no science.
You asked me to prove, through studies, that minute traces of a
pesticide do not kill or cause CCD.
All we need to do is look at organic beekeepers who suffer CCD.
But, even better, any beekeeper who has suffered pesticide kills knows
that there are degrees to the kill. It is not black and white but you
can have total or minor impact on a colony or apiary. In fact, often
there are colonies that are not effected at all, since the bees did
not go to that field while others are dieing out. Or a colony is
partially affected since the dose was sub lethal. Lethal doses kill in
the field, while sub lethal kill in the hive.
There is just no correlation with a pesticide kill and CCD. CCD sweeps
through an apiary, from one group of colonies to another until the
whole apiary is in collapse. That is a classic pathogen response. You
do not see a "little bit of CCD" which you would see with a sub lethal
dose of pesticide.
I was going to write a short essay on the scientific method and single
data points, but decided that it was not worth the bother. But what we
have here is an accusation that treated corn fields cause CCD, a
single data point. This is not unlike the same accusations that come
out about transmission lines and cancer, or being downwind of a
nuclear plant and cancer. Very often you can show that there are
increased incidences of specific cancer in some of those areas. But,
when one looks more deeply, it turns out it is not universally true,
but specific to one or more locations. When you look at those
locations, often you find many relatives who live there and it is
actually genetics that is the underlying cause of the cancer.
Could it be that large beekeeping operations in the Mid-West farmlands
are located near corn just because there is a lot of corn in the
Mid-West farmlands? We know that large operations are more susceptible
to CCD, so might it be the concentration of large beekeeping
operations in the same farmlands with attendant mixing of pathogens
that is the real cause of CCD with those operations?
That seemed to be a characteristic of CCD with almond pollinators: all
together to share a pathogen, get CCD, and carry it home, even those
who never got near corn.
In essence, the data point that is being used to show that corn and
CCD are related is not a very good one, based on all the other
variables at work.
Truth is, if there were a pesticide smoking gun, that would have been
obvious from the beginning. If you recall, it was hypothesized by the
Penn State person who was working on the Hackenburg colonies, but
dropped soon after. It would be too easy to identify any chemical
agent as the underlying cause of CCD. A pathogen is a different story,
especially a new one.
Bill Truesdell
Bath, Maine
****************************************************
* General Information About BEE-L is available at: *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm *
****************************************************
|