15 ms·
Pesticide link to long-term wild bee decline in 18 year study
- toodlebunions 10y agoPesticides are linked to insect deaths? What a surprise.
- bArray 10y agoSaw that coming. Nothing will be done of course.
- tptacek 10y agoIf neonicotinoids are causing a long-term decline in bee populations, why does their introduction correspond with a global increase in beehives?
- spraak 10y agoBecause more beehives are needed to keep up with the demand as bees die?
- tptacek 10y agoThe introduction of neonicotinoids corresponds with an increase in the number of active hives, to record numbers in some areas (like Canada). The number of honeybee colonies in the US (where honeybees are livestock, not an indigenous species) is up since the announcement of CCD in 2006. Colonies are down since around 1990, when wild honeybees were wiped out by the varroa mite --- which mites remain the biggest stressor of honeybee colonies in the US.
- unclebucknasty 10y agoAre you saying that neonicotinoids are causing an increase in active hive numbers? I'm guessing that's not your assertion. But, of course, the argument you appear to be making is just as invalid.
- levbrie 10y agoI believe the assertion is that in order to maintain the bee population at the level necessary to meet demands on agriculture given the extraordinary rise in the death rate of both individual bees and entire colonies, the beekeeping industry has had to import far more colonies per year.
- tptacek 10y agoThat doesn't make sense. Again: active colonies, not the number imported. Literally: there are more live bees in the US post-neonicotinoid.
- cmrdporcupine 10y agoActive colonies != total bee population. If the mortality rate is high, then you need more colonies with reproducing bees in them to maintain the population at a certain level.
- tptacek 10y agoCan you please cite the source that shows total bee population declining as number of active colonies increases?
- smallnamespace 10y agohttps://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43191.pdf https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43191.pdf Page 10 “Long-term population trends for the honey bee, the most important managed pollinator, are demonstrably downward.”
- tptacek 10y agoCite the whole context of that quote! They're referring to trends since the 1940s. The varroa mite literally wiped out the feral honeybee population in the US. There are no more North American feral honeybees! Of course the long-term population trend is downward!
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- cmrdporcupine 10y agoTFA refers specifically to wild bee populations, not the domestic honeybee.
- Ratufa 10y agoActive hives have increased because beekeepers have reacted to the increase in bee die-offs by splitting hives and otherwise increasing the number of hives they have. This causes an increase in demand for queens, and companies that sell queens will have more hives in order to meet that demand. Also, simple economic growth is a possible contributor to the increase in number of hives.
- tptacek 10y agoDo I properly understand your argument, like the one below, to be that despite the increase in beehives, there are fewer live bees in the US?
- Ratufa 10y agoWhen you talk about "increase in beehives", are you referring to hives that are managed by a beekeeper, or hives created by wild bees, and not managed by a human? When you talk about "fewer live bees", are you referring to wild bees, or bees in a managed hive? In my previous post, I was only referring to managed hives.
- tptacek 10y agoThere are no feral honeybees in the US. They were wiped out, not by neonics, but by the varroa mite, 30 years ago. (Before we colonized this place, there were no wild honeybees: they're an introduced species). Honeybees are livestock, not wildlife.
- ameliaikeda 10y agoAs an amateur beekeeper, I can tell you that honeybees _are_ wild, in a sense. A captured swarm is just a wild colony with the queen trapped in an excluder box in your hive. They can't be domesticated, and containing them after they swarm involves tricking the bees into thinking they are the ones making a decision (you can turn their hive 90 degrees after they swarm in summer and they will return in most cases, assuming they've found a new spot for a hive). Also, mites (and foul brood) are still a pain in the ass and I can see why bees need a beekeeper to even stand a chance.
- beardicus 10y agoThe article refers to wild bees, not managed. Regardless, a better metric to consider re: managed hives might be annual colony losses, not total quantity of active hives. Of course beekeepers can make new hives. Thus far they are thankfully able to keep up with higher and higher losses each year (and honey and pollination prices are continuing to rise as more energy and money is put into raising bees instead of bee products). This spike in losses is more recent than the varroa introduction. Graphing out one positive metric and pretending things haven't gone weird with honeybees in the past decade or so seems misguided.
- tptacek 10y agoI don't know about the UK, but there are (essentially) no feral honeybees in the US, and there haven't been in something like 30 years, not because of pesticides, but because of the varroa mite.
- beardicus 10y agoSure. Now how about the 'total hives' vs 'annual losses' issue? I think the metric you've chosen to indicate overall honeybee health is lacking.
- DanBC 10y agoThere are unlikely to be large colonies of wild honey bees in England and Wales. There are some feral honey bees colonies. http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/28290890 http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/28290890
- will_brown 10y agoWhere are you getting your global numbers? Because the USDA Honey Production Survey data tells a different tale. In 1989-1990 US honey Bee colonies were at about 3.5M. Neonicotinoids were introduced in the 1990's and since then the US Bee colonies declined to an all time low in 2012 (below 2.5M colonies). Since 2012 there was a small but steady uptick to just above 2.5M colonies; however, that is still down 1M and nearly 33% total since the introduction of Neonicotinoids. In fact, the biggest decline was from 1990-1996 when the number basically dropped from 3.5M to 2.5M. My understanding is Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) wasn't even acknowledged by the Government until 2006, which is odd because the decrease from 1996-2006 may have only been 2.5M to ~2.35M. Then again in 2006 our Government was championing the strength and stability of the housing market, so maybe they are just not the most proficient at interpreting numbers and data. As to wild/ferral honey bees, they may be endangered but I assure you they do exist in the US. In fact my parents just has a wild hive removed from their property resulting in 80lbs of honey (including the comb). You can check out Willy the Bee Man, he runs the largest wild bee removal business in South Florida and his website includes some videos of the removals.
- tptacek 10y agoYou're citing the time period corresponding to the varroa mite epidemic.
- will_brown 10y agoIs the time period for Neonicotinoids not accurate? I mean you completely glossed over my point just to say the time line I gave was consistent with the mites, I know the mites have had a devastating impact, but if their timeline is consistent with Neonicotinoids as I say, how do you just gloss over that, it would be on par with responding that the time period I cite corresponds with the introduction of rap/hip hop music. I was asking about your data in good faith because I know you are referencing global numbers and I am referencing US numbers, so I was genuinely interested, because if what you say is true about the introduction of Neonicotinoids in other countries having no impact on colonies in those countries that could obviously be very significant. Nevertheless, your position is bee colonies have increased since the introduction of Neonicotinoids, which again may be true globally and in specific areas like Canada which you cite, but US data shows that is not true and we are at a net negative 1M (managed) colonies since their introduction. Whether or not that is coincidence is beyond my point, as I said we know the mites have had a devastating impact on honey bees in the US, so we are left with the question why would the trend have reversed course (in the US) if entirely attributable to the mites? At least there is a theory I am aware of for the colonies reversing course despite the continued use of Neonicotinoids. Moreover, there are studies that suggest of the 4,000 honey bee species in the US, only some were susceptible to Neonicotinoids while other species resistant, hence the major decline in the first 6 years since the introduction of Neonicotinoids and a slow taper off over the next 12 years until those susceptible species are gone leaving the resistant species which are now growing. All things being equal, if the decline were solely attributable to mites, then what is your take on the US pattern for the initial huge decline followed by a slow decline and then the recent turn around? I know there has been some genetic modifications of both the mites and bees to address the issue, but that is more recent and wouldn't explain the big taper off in decline from 1996-2008 and it is not like they have been eradicated.
- jly 10y agoIf this is true, then it's likely just due to more beekeeping activity - commercial and hobby - due to the awareness of this issue and rapidly growing agricultural demands. Beekeepers tend to use annual colony losses for whatever reasons as a measure of overall apiary health. These are increasing (sometimes dramatically). For example, a commercial apiary may count 10% as normal and expected losses overwintering, while we are currently seeing upwards of 40-45% annual losses. The numbers can be replenished but this takes time and money and is the worrying unnatural trend that is being discussed. The absolute number of active hives at any given time is not necessarily a useful metric to measure declines.
- tptacek 10y agoNo, overwintering losses are at ~24%. The numbers are public; you can just Google them.
- jly 10y agoNumbers vary depending on the survey and most surveys only include maybe 1/3 of commercially managed hives, to start. Overwinter losses are probably around your number for the last several years but all-year losses are much higher. The USDA stated for 2013-2014, for example, higher summer losses than winter for the first time, for an annual total of 42.1% * Regardless of the exact number, my point is still valid in discussing your original question. [*] http://www.ars.usda.gov/news-events/news/research-news/2015/bee-survey-lower-winter-losses-higher-summer-losses-increased-total-annual-losses/ http://www.ars.usda.gov/news-events/news/research-news/2015/...
- hoodoof 10y agoThe strange thing is that the response will be "OK so lets create poisons that kill all insects EXCEPT bees".
- thatswrong0 10y agoGiven that pesticides have greatly increased agricultural efficiency, does that response not make sense?
- wavefunction 10y agoThe US wastes 40% of the food it produces. I imagine we could give up a fair amount of efficiency in favor of ecology.
- levbrie 10y agoThis response is precisely what has made insecticides so incredibly dangerous for world agriculture. Documentaries like "The Vanishing of the Bees" and "More than Honey" do a great job highlighting just how criminally negligent the agriculture industry as a whole has been to bees. What I haven't seen is an analysis of how devastating the large-scale destruction of insect populations is to the world's ecosystem. We are essentially decimating the most productive food-producing species in the world and expecting not to have to pay for it in spades down the road.
- tptacek 10y agoCould you be more specific as to how pesticides have been criminally negligent to bees? This specific article is about neonicotinoids, which were introduced to replace pesticides with far worse impacts on the environment. Is there a source you can find that shows neonicotinoids as used in the wild being calamitous for bees? I can find sources for you with commercial beekeepers pollinating canola crops seed-treated with neonicotinoids seeing no change in their colony survival at all.
- CodeWriter23 10y ago
- randomdata 10y ago.
- exhilaration 10y agoIt is not meant to be kept in the ground (few pests come from there anyway) it is meant to be in any part of the plant that an insect might feed on.
- Aelinsaar 10y ago"We're shocked!" -No One Seriously though, outside of a few desperate libertarians on the internet who needed not to believe it, I've never met a serious person who didn't see that likely connection.
- refurb 10y agoThere is evidence that neonicotinoids are harmful to bees and there is also evidence that they aren't. Why makes you so sure it's a slam dunk explanation? Hell, even the EPA and Dept of Agriculture conducted a massive study and said it's pretty far down the list of factors in the decline of the honey bee population. [1]http://www.usda.gov/documents/ReportHoneyBeeHealth.pdf http://www.usda.gov/documents/ReportHoneyBeeHealth.pdf
- Aelinsaar 10y agoJust to see if I'm still batting a perfect game here, do you describe yourself as "Libertarian"?
- caub 10y agoAs a fruit lover, I always choose old fruits, the damaged ones, because I can't bear waste. Most people don't have this behavior, they want shiny, clean, solid fruits, the ones obtained with pesticides. It's often the opposite of tasty, but people are stupid
- dmix 10y agoWhat correlation is there between damaged/old fruit and not having pesticides? They weren't treated exactly the same as the other fruit in the harvest?
- ForFreedom 10y agoIt took 18 years to understand pesticide link to decline in bees!
- jobigoud 10y agoBreaking: Insecticide Kills Insects!
- erikpukinskis 10y agoThat's what lobbying, PR, and soliciting influence through large grants can buy you.
- Loic 10y agoYou can download the study[0]. If you look at the model in equations (2), (3) and (4), you can see that they force fit the decrease in population of the bees on the neonicotinoid exposure. Because the decrease of the population in this model is only linked to pesticides, you need a very careful analysis of the confidence intervals and the quality of the fit or you can fall into the spurious correlation trap[1]. Also "The authors acknowledge that their study finds an association and doesn't prove a cause and effect link between the use of neonicotinoids and the decline of bee populations.". Which is good, it means they know the limits of this study. The other case is that around 2005, we had a shift to produce more biofuels by doing more extensive single crop farming. This also had devastating effect on the biodiversity needed for the bees, insects and the birds. The last point is, why bees are going very well in Australia even so Australia is the most extensive user of neonics? The issues with bees is really a hard problem, most likely a combination of many factors, so I do not want people to jump on a single factor (the neonics) then claim victory and move to other things even so neonics are most likely not the main factor. This year was bad for our bees, 8 hives, just 1kg honey per hive... [0]: http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160816/ncomms12459/pdf/ncomms12459.pdf http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160816/ncomms12459/pdf/nco... [1]: http://tylervigen.com/view_correlation?id=1597 http://tylervigen.com/view_correlation?id=1597
- madaxe_again 10y agoA neighbour who used to keep hives here (France) until a few months ago has had them repeatedly wiped out by fungal infections, as the combination of hot and damp then suddenly cold then hot again isn't normal for this part of the world. They had four false springs here this year - crops suffered too, and foresters are having a heyday taking dead trees out of the forest. Like you say, pesticide use alone is unlikely to be the issue - hell DDT and friends are far less friendly to insects, and we're used far longer - so it's likely a whole host of anthrogenic factors which are wiping out the bees, much like many other species. We're pretty much the worst thing since the cambrian-ordovician extinction event for biodiversity.
- pvaldes 10y agoNot to mention the expansion of the killer bee asiatic vesp in France.
- Zelmor 10y agoWe have known this the last 20 years, people just don't give a fuck unless the after-effects are cutting into their profit. I will miss the bees. I will not miss the people.
- Zelmor 10y agoAlso, it is fungicide what is the big issue here. It has the same effect on bees as if you were constantly washing your hands in sanitizers. You remove the beneficial bacteria (or in the case of bees, fungi AND bacteria) from their hives, so disruptive and aggressive fungi can invade and destroy them from the inside. I've read this in an article when I was 11 years old. The problem, as in most cases, are the humans. Some days I am wishing for a huge ecological disruption, famine and another Spanish flu to wipe 50-70% of the globe, even though I know I too might be one to go in such an event. In fact, that is what the Gates Foundation is expecting to be a coin-flip scenario in their lifetime, which is what, the next 20 years or so! So yeah, prepping in a WW2 bunker with broadband internet and half a year of supplies in the mountains doesn't sound so crazy after all. When shit hits the fan, shoot on sight and salt the meat.