[elkhound]

http://www.naturalnews.com/047058_neonicotinoids_colony_collapse_disorder_beekeepers.html



(NaturalNews) Canadian beekeepers have filed a class-action lawsuit against two pesticide manufacturers, seeking $400 million in damages for the devastating effects of the neonicotinoid pesticides that have been linked to the destruction of honeybee colonies.

"The goal is to stop the use of the neonicotinoids to stop the harm to the bees and the beekeepers," said Paula Lombardi, a lawyer with Siskinds LLP, the law firm that is handling the case.

The lawsuit was filed in the Ontario Superior Court on September 2 by two of the largest honey producers in Ontario, Sun Parlor Honey Ltd. and Munro Honey. The next day, the Ontario Beekeepers Association publicly announced the lawsuit and invited other beekeepers to join in. By September 4, more than 30 beekeepers had already signed on.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/047058_n...llapse_disorder_beekeepers.html#ixzz3EjWFcJqE
​

 

[copperkid3]

More power to them......just hope they have DEEP pockets and can wait an eternity.

 

[Wavertree]

I can speak to this since some of my friends have signed on to the class action suit.

Their argument is that Canada claims to adhere to something called The Precautionary Principle. However, it is only a guidance, not a mandate. In the European Union, the Precautionary Principle is law and it was used to allow the ban of neonicotinoid insecticides. Neonics are suspected in the failure to thrive of many hives. There are other factors compromising bees but if you look at the patterns of where bees thrive and bees fail, it is obvious that it is hard to be successful with industrial farming nearby. Neonicotinoid dust on seeds contaminates the water in the fields. If the bees feed on corn sap from the broken stalks after harvest, it kills them.

The lawsuit is challenging these two manufacturers on the grounds that they are negligent by selling products covered by the assumption that Canada also observes the Precautionary Principal because it is mentioned in gov't policies.
The beekeepers want protection under law against these chemicals, that is what they are trying to achieve.

Here's a comment from some of the people
involved....
"The Precautionary Principle is an environmental principle which says that we have a duty to prevent harm, when it is within our power to do so, even without full scientific certainty about that harm. Canada claims that its federal environmental policy is guided by this principle. Is there any issue more critical to our survival than the food supply? Perhaps global warming, but even that would not stamp us out as fast as widespread famine. Courts are beholden to standards like "more likely than not" when assessing scientific evidence, but policy holders are not. Some issues make clear that the "precautionary principle" isn't just a good idea, it should be an imperative"

In my area, beekeepers have had a fantastic year to the point where we cant keep up but we are all in rural-urban pasture areas, not in the corn and soy country. To the south, and the north west of me, numbers are way down.

 

[elkhound]

wavertree...thanks for the additional "on the ground" info....nice to see ya posting again too.

 

[tab]

WT, interesting info. Corn and soy are heavily grown in my area. I rarely see honey bees either. They used to be everywhere. I lovedvwatching them around a head of broccoli that was flowering, not so much now. Years back, soy was rare.

 

[farmerDale]

My Brother in law keeps bees and has not signed on, because his yields are incredible. Bees are everywhere. But then Sask is known as one of the easiest places to raise honey. 400 lbs a hive or so.

Like everything else, not all beekeepers are signing on, not all are having trouble, and not all areas are having issues. Which makes me wonder if the ones chasing this suit are barking up the right tree in the first place.

Like weather causing problems once in a while. The climate alarmists come out in full force, pointing fingers.

Same as with this bee issue. They need to point the finger at something. In a lot of cases they could be looking in the mirror at their management practices, IMO.

 

[TxMex]

A completely dead hive is pretty easy to spot, but many of the chemicals the bees are exposed to don't kill outright. I'm frequently hearing beekeepers from all over saying that they are having queens superceded after a few months. A queen should be productive for around 3 years.

Could it be that chemicals have been brought back to the hive on foragers and then have contaminated the wax of the comb? Then the hive raises brood in the contaminated wax....including the queen and drones. Is this affecting fertility of honey bees? This is a symptom of chemical exposure in other species, so I see no reason not to suspect it with bees.

I also suspect that constant chemical exposure is also affecting bees ability to fight off pests and diseases.

One reason that I use foundationless in my hives rather than commercially made foundation is in an attempt to keep chemicals out of my hives. Foundation is made from wax that is purchased from lots of different beekeepers and goodness only knows what is in it.

While the neonicotinoid pesticides are very blatantly killing bees, I think that we will discover that many of the chemicals being used, including herbicides, are causing bees not to thrive.

 

[elkhound]

in the u.k. the farmers putting in outside wildflower meadow strips around field borders for bees have seen 3x production increase yields per acre increase despite using less land because of bee strips.