Interesting video

[Perry]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/video/video-globe-now-amid-big-bee-die-off-do-farmers-hold-the-key/article19930012/

[Lburou]

Yes, interesting.  I think the farmer made the better case for considering the big picture and acting on science.  There is a fallacy in reasoning called the fallacy of the single cause.  As beekeepers, we need an open mind about the myriad of factors impacting bee die offs.  When definitive science is in, we should act, whichever way the results point. JMO   

[Jen]

Mkay, I'm going to take a stab at this. The only experience with neonics I have seen was just a few miles up the road, last year, was when neonics where sprayed onto blooming trees, which resulted in the raining of dead bees, thousands of them. I didn't know that neonics where the pesticide that coats seeds.

I feel that this grain farmer did have some points but also feel he sounded like a politician skirting the issue. I'm not a chemical biologist... but what I can see clearly is that neonics that are coating seeds and sprayed onto trees, airborn, are going to kill bees, pollinators and... people.

I don't have the answer, I'm just tired of poisons everywhere.

[Perry]

The only dissapointment I find is the deflection of responsibilty that seems to be occuring all too often. By stating that honey bees have all sorts of problems, it shouldn't absolve those that may be part of the problem of any responsibilty. Yes, I understand that mites are probably the biggest cause of colony decine in the last decade, but does that mean lesser forms of harm are then acceptable?
And while I sympathize with farmers looking to sustain a living using products to protect their livlihood, does it give them the right to use materials which may (or not) impact my ability to sustain a living.
If one were cynical, it could appear as if simply "muddying the waters" was a strategy, and that it seemingly appears to be playing out well.

[LazyBkpr]

   I have long argued that the systemic pesticides are WAY better than any previous types of applications, and always try to state that my argument is subject to change "IF" we ever get conclusive proof that the systemic pesticides prove to be more harmful than the older methods.
   I have seen dozens of hives in the process of dying after a sprayer drove through fields, and after a crop duster flew over the neighboring field.  I figure it is like voting for a new president.. you pick the lesser of two evils to vote for.   In this case I vote for the Neonic coated seeds, but that does not mean I have to enjoy knowing the bees are still bringing it back to the hives.  Given a choice, I would be quite thrilled to see ALL pesticides banned, but the impact on the crops would be horrific...
  Rather than developing resistant crops, we decided early on that we could fix anything with a chemical. Kind of like fixing any problem with a pill. So we did not work on resistant crops, we worked on new and better chemicals to kill the insects, and now the wheel of time is coming full circle.

[Zweefer]

 
Well put Lazy.

[Lburou]

...If one were cynical, it could appear as if simply "muddying the waters" was a strategy, and that it seemingly appears to be playing out well.

I think a reasonable (read not just cynical) person would conclude that the waters are muddy and nobody seems to see a good solution.  You may be correct about obtuse language as a weapon of ignorance and inaction.  Feeding the masses has its downsides.