Slashdot Mirror


More Than 40% of US Honeybee Colonies Died In a 12-Month Period Ending In April

walterbyrd writes: The Agriculture Department released its annual honeybee survey Wednesday and it doesn't look good. More than 40% of U.S. honeybee colonies died in a 12-month period ending in April. While the precise cause of the honeybee crisis is unknown, scientists generally blame a combination of factors, including poor diets and stress. Some bees die from infestations of the Varroa mite, a bloodsucking parasite that weakens bees and introduces diseases to the hive. Environmental groups also point to a class of pesticides known as neonicotinoids. In April, the Environmental Protection Agency said it would stop approving new outdoor uses for those types of chemicals until more studies on bee health are conducted.

220 comments

  1. It's not limited to the US by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Informative

    Same problem in Europe.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re: It's not limited to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah, sure. "British honeybees produce best output in 5 years" (2014)
      http://www.bbka.org.uk/files/pressreleases/national_-_honey_survey_2014_1416999394.pdf

      Where is your citation?

    2. Re:It's not limited to the US by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Interesting

      My parents have a small bee farm. They lost their colonies... Because it was too cold of a winter this year, and they froze.
      Global climate change, as created a lot of atypical, and more extreme weather conditions. I doubt there is a single issue, but a wide set of issues. I know it is complex and hard to put in a headline, so you vilify someone. But reality is there are not so many villains but the actions of many people. Often a combination of good intentions.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:It's not limited to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Same problem in Europe.

      Complete bullshit! The EU banned the pesticides US farmer use, and lo-and-behold, bee colonies stopped dying.

      Blame the farmers if you want, but ask why they're happy to kill and destroy the ecosystem first. They're being fucked over by the massive supermarket suppliers.

    4. Re: It's not limited to the US by drunk_punk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Just curious... You're parents don't regulate temperature in any way?

    5. Re:It's not limited to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Bees can handle the cold, however if they don't have enough honey reserves they won't make it through the winter. Also, it depends on where in the hive the bees cluster and where the honey is located. As a bee keeper you need to leave them enough honey to make it through the winter. One problem is when you get an early warm spell, the bees start gearing up for spring, and then that is followed by a cold period. Those are the times that bees often starve and they need honey reserves or you need to feed them.

    6. Re:It's not limited to the US by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 0

      You didn't read the article and have not followed the issue. Bees are dying off during the summer months. Their deaths have been heavily linked to pesticides. Do some research before posting inane comments.

    7. Re: It's not limited to the US by thaylin · · Score: 1

      And how exactly does that counter his post? It does not mention if the bee population is bouncing back in Europe, or not. I mean if you are going to call someone a moron atleast try to counter his arguments.

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
    8. Re:It's not limited to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Not three posts down and some lunatic brings up climate change.

      I swear, it's the scientific version of "I have black friends".

    9. Re:It's not limited to the US by pastafazou · · Score: 4, Informative

      Complete bullshit is right! How is it that some regions that use neonics are not suffering any bee colony deaths at all? Australia is one of the heaviest users of neonics, yet their bee colonies are quite healthy. Canada's prairies also use neonics, yet their bees are doing absolutely fine. Neonics were in use for 15 years before these bee colony deaths began to appear. Certainly not very much correlation at all between usage of neonics and bee deaths. It's quite likely that the real culprit is the varroa mite, and the bee viruses it carries. The mite has become a serious problem in both the US and Europe, and the spread of the mite correlates much better with the spread of CCD.

    10. Re: It's not limited to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit, big business is way more responsible for this mess than individuals, that reasoning is propaganda, a common stalling tactic corporate fascists use to hide their own crimes!

    11. Re: It's not limited to the US by Skinkie · · Score: 1

      Preliminary findings from Dutch bee research at http://www.beemonitoring.org/ for 2015 suggest "an evidently higher bee death number than last year (2014)". So nice if you have great honey production, especially if all bees die afterwards.

      --
      Support Eachother, Copy Dutch Property!
    12. Re:It's not limited to the US by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 0

      And not just climate change, but "Global warming is causing bees to freeze."

    13. Re:It's not limited to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      www.climatedepot.com - yeah, put your trust in Marc Morano.

    14. Re:It's not limited to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why you trollin' the jello?

      u mad bro?

    15. Re:It's not limited to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You point to the issues, but don't connect the dots.

      It isn't 1 factor that is causeing CCD, or even 2. It's multple factors. Namely some, or all of the following: mites, neonics, geographic location and varied seasonal weather extremes, fungus (forget what it's named..), and possibly another unknown. Just how much role, each of these plays into CCD, isn't at this time, to my knowledge, known as a scientific certainty.

      I'd rather we take some drastic steps at this point to eliminate the knowns, than have most of, or the whole of the US bee population go away. Same goes for Europe and anywhere else. I don't want to see what happens at the produce market, and econimic ramifications, if our pollinators disappear. Do you? That's not a risk worth taking frankly!

    16. Re:It's not limited to the US by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Australia uses the neonics differently, as I recall. Something about the way they spread the pesticide makes it less likely to interfere with bees.

      That said, it's an insecticide. It's meant to kill insects, and they're generally pretty indiscriminate. It's also fairly likely that even if it's a sub-lethal dose for bees, it's a lethal dose for different beneficial insects.

      I think there are multiple causes--varroa mites have been around for decades without causing such widespread colony collapse. We've got a changing climate and agricultural monocultures, as well as stress from neonics (which it turns out honeybees may prefer over non-treated nectar).

      Looking for single causes is usually hopeless. But we can control our use of pesticides, so it's one of the things on the chopping block. One way or another, we have to bring this problem under control.

    17. Re: It's not limited to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I Recall Correctly, Europe banned neonictinoids last year or the year before.....

      http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-22335520

    18. Re:It's not limited to the US by BCGlorfindel · · Score: 1

      Same problem in Europe.

      Europe also has a ban on Neonic pesticides... Too bad that's not likely to silence the anti-pesticide fud over here.

    19. Re:It's not limited to the US by Xest · · Score: 1

      Your argument doesn't really make sense, as the same arguments you've used against neonicotinoids applies to varoa mites.

      You claim that neonicotinoids can't be to blame because there are no large scale bee deaths in places where neonicotinoids are used. Well guess what? there are places in developing countries where neonicotinoids aren't used for cost reasons, the varroa mite still exists, and that also don't have the problem.

      Similarly, you claim that neonicotinoids can't be to blame because they were used for 15 years before CCD. Well guess what? The varroa mite has also been widespread in countries like the US for just as long.

      You're applying double standards in your logic in an attempt to absolve neonicotinoids and blame the varroa mite. Your whole argument is built on arbitrary yet contradictory application of correlation as causation to suit your preconceived belief that neonicotinoids aren't to blame.

      It's quite likely that a number of factors are to blame, and that neonicotinoids weaken bee colonies enough to ensure that varroa mite infestations lead to catastrophic collapse.

    20. Re:It's not limited to the US by Xest · · Score: 2

      To be fair, the European neonicotinoid ban is a bit half-arsed.

      They banned things like Imidacloprid, yet Thiacloprid and Acetamiprid which are both also neonicotinoids have not been banned.

      Conspiracy theorists in gardening communities (yes, they get everywhere) have this idea that the ban has nothing to do with the bees and has been carried out as a result of subversive lobbying by companies like Bayer whose patents on things like Imidacloprid are near their end can prevent generic brands entering the market and force everyone onto their still patented brands instead.

      But I'm not one for conspiracy theories without any evidence to back them, mostly I'd rather just assume it's typical political incompetence to only do a half assed job of temporarily banning neonicotinoids to measure the impact rather than the result of a conspiracy theory, so take what you will from that.

      I think it's unhelpful only doing a half assed job, because if things improve then companies like Bayer can say "Hey look, the bees are okay even though everyone is still using neonicotinoids like Thiacloprid!" and if there is no improvement, then they'll say "Oh, no change, so it wasn't the Imidacloprid so we can start selling it again" and environmentalists can say "Well, it's because other neonicotinoids are still in widespread use".

      So don't expect our ban in Europe to settle anything. It's not comprehensive enough to offer any conclusive results one way or another. At best it may throw a bit more correlation into the mix, but we have a lot of correlation, and not enough causation already.

    21. Re:It's not limited to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably because in america they spray the neonics while the bees are actively pollinating.

    22. Re:It's not limited to the US by StrangeBrew · · Score: 1

      Citation needed on your claim that honeybees are doing fine in the Canadian prairies.

    23. Re:It's not limited to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canada's prairies bees are dying like never before, and neoniconoids are pointed as the most likely culprit. Please get your facts straight.

    24. Re: It's not limited to the US by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      > British honeybees produce best output in 5 years

      After the EU banned the use of neonictinoids. Yes, we had the same problem. We did something about it.

    25. Re:It's not limited to the US by caseih · · Score: 4, Informative

      In Australia and western Canada, neonic-coated seads are typically placed in the ground via a gravity-fed metering system (box drill), or via an air drill that blows the seed into the ground behind shanks that open the soil. So dust particles laden with neonics get buried in the soil where bees won't be exposed directly to them. In the midwest US and eastern Canada, where the crops are predominantly things like soybeans or corn, they use vacuum planters which suck the seeds from storage one at time and drop them into the ground. Unfortunately the vacuum planters blow a lot of dust from the seeds into the air. So neonic-laden particles get blown everywhere and we know they affect bees and any other insect. So it could very well be that widespread use of vacuum planters is a part of the problem. Unfortunately air drills don't work very well for row crops that do best with rows of singulated seeds.

      The Alberta Bee Keepers Commission refuses to back any attempt to completely ban neonic use in Canada as it would decimate their industry. Fewer crops means fewer bees are required by farmers.

      The reason neonics are used is that when the plant is young, the neonics are taken up through the plant and make the plant toxic to pests that would eat the little leaves, killing the plant. On one of my dry bean fields last year was seeded without neonic seed treatment, and we did see some yield reduction from pests eating the plants at an early stage, including from works eating the shoots underground. If there's a chance neonics can be used safely, then for sure they are a huge benefit.

      There is the other issue of neonics present in the pollen, leading to bees getting a bit of a buzz. It's not clear to me how much neonic there is in the flower at that late stage of the plant's growth, or what the consequences of that are. Bees around here are heavily used to pollinate hybrid canola, all of which was treated with neonics. So it's really hard to say what the consequences are.

      It's true we can control the use of pesticides, and we should and do. This doesn't have to mean an outright ban. A complete ban would mean the return to more toxic insecticides being sprayed at more regular intervals on a crop, which none of us wants.

    26. Re:It's not limited to the US by bmajik · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Someone else covered this but is buried.

      Bee colonies do not freeze in the winter. They starve.

      We've been keeping bees in North Dakota, which is colder than wherever you are, for 7 years. All 3 of our colonies survived last winter. One is strong enough that we've split it this spring to try and prevent a swarm.

      The way that bees operate in winter is amazing. The bees form a sphere, with the queen near its center. They vibrate their wings and bodies to create heat. The bees on the outside of the sphere obviously lose heat the fastest. The bees on the inside stay the warmest. The sphere of vibrating bees constantly turns itself inside out, over and over, so that the cooler outer edge bees return to the warm core and replenish their warmth, while the warm bees from the core circulate out towards the edges after they've recuperated.

      This consumes lots of energy (and food).

      As the cluster of bees does this, it moves upwards in the hive, consuming stored honey.

      When they get to the top of the hive, they stop migrating. If they run out of honey, they die.

      We use 2 deep supers and 1 medium honey super to over-winter our bees.

      --
      My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
    27. Re:It's not limited to the US by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      What's a super?

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    28. Re:It's not limited to the US by gandalfu · · Score: 1
    29. Re:It's not limited to the US by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      If they run out of honey, they die.

      ... unless you feed them. My mom is a beekeeper, and we always had a few hives while I was growing up. We would periodically put a feeder jar of sugar water in the hive opening starting in January or February. The bees prefer honey, so they will leave the sugar water alone until they are low on honey. Once they start aggressively eating the sugar water, we knew they were out of honey, and would switch to daily feedings. We also packed straw around the hives for insulation.

    30. Re:It's not limited to the US by Minwee · · Score: 1

      www.climatedepot.com

      www.wattsupwiththat.com

      http://www.timecube.com/

    31. Re:It's not limited to the US by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      All you're saying is your parents are bad at beekeeping, sorry. It's called "anecdotal" evidence for a reason - it is solely your own. The reality is most people aren't as bad at beekeeping.

    32. Re:It's not limited to the US by bmajik · · Score: 1

      Totally agree. We put feeders on the hives in late winter / early spring for the same reasons. It's especially important here since blooming can be so variable.

      my point was - bees don't freeze in winter, they starve.

      --
      My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
    33. Re: It's not limited to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it cannot be overbreeding and the varroa mite. which does not kill indian bee hives.

      must be evil corpos. your prejudice is firm.

    34. Re:It's not limited to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's a super?

      It's a box with frames in it. The frames are where the bees build their combs and store their honey.

    35. Re:It's not limited to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://basicbeekeeping.blogspot.com/2007/09/basic-beekeeping-lesson-three-supers.html

      'Super' is a beekeeping term.

    36. Re: It's not limited to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Climate change is not weather unless it's extreme weather then??? Hmm "ODD" how that works....

    37. Re:It's not limited to the US by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      That's why I didn't know it. I'm am forbidden from keeping bees on my property by Hillsboro city code. I have no clue about beekeeping terms, except maybe for 'hive' and 'bee' and 'honey'.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    38. Re:It's not limited to the US by Zorpheus · · Score: 2

      I believe that too. Parasites and disease evolve so that they don't kill their host, since they would die too then. But they weaken their hosts. The combination of several ones can be deadly due to this.
      Leprosy disappeared in Europe when some big Tuberculosis epidemics came. People with Leprosy got infected quickly and died. Does is make sense to blame their dead on just one of the two diseases?
      You can take any of the factors which are weakening bees away to solve the problem. Best would be to reduce all of them, but neonics are the only factor that can be reduced easily.

    39. Re: It's not limited to the US by Anguirel · · Score: 3, Informative

      Bee Keepers don't need to regulate temperature in any way. The bees do that for themselves (in the wild as well as in keeper's hives). They do need enough honey to make it through the winter, though.

      --
      ~Anguirel (lit. Living Star-Iron)
      QA: The art of telling someone that their baby is ugly without getting punched.
    40. Re:It's not limited to the US by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      Thank you.

      That's super.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    41. Re: It's not limited to the US by MichaelMacDonald · · Score: 1

      Maybe? But this is more about the Farmers going after Monsanto and trying to blame them for CCD because they're butthurt about not being able to save off their seeds at the end of the year. The farmers pushing that are, for the most part, conservative. Their propaganda tents to be directed at Liberals, oddly enough.

    42. Re:It's not limited to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pollution, habitat loss, climate change... nothing to see here.

      captcha: append

    43. Re:It's not limited to the US by pastafazou · · Score: 1

      Here's your citation: Annual Colony Losses If you're too lazy to actually read it, here's the relevant numbers: Alberta 13% loss in 2012, 23% in 2013, 18% in 2014 Saskatchewan 17% in 2012, 27% in 2013, 18% in 2014 Manitoba 16% in 2012, 46% in 2013, 24% in 2014 You can read more about the devastation the varroa mite has caused here: Varroa Mites The varroa mite is developing resistance to our normal methods of treating them, resulting in a decreased ability to control and limit the damage they cause. The Canadian Honey Bee council lists the varroa mite as their primary concern.

    44. Re:It's not limited to the US by pastafazou · · Score: 1

      The decline in honey bee populations in North America correlates very well with 2 factors: varroa mites and cold winters. The mortality rate for bee colonies over winter correlates very well with both the spread of the varroa mite, as well as the development of resistance in the mites to treatments. We also see spikes in the mortality rates for bee colonies in regions that suffer an unusually cold winter. I didn't claim that neonicotinoids can't be to blame. I claimed that the data didn't correlate, and I claimed that it was more likely to be the varroa mite. And if you actually looked at the data yourself, you'd see that for yourself.

    45. Re:It's not limited to the US by pastafazou · · Score: 1

      And yet the actual data says they're not dying like never before, in fact they're doing quite fine: http://www.capabees.com/2014/0...

    46. Re:It's not limited to the US by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Good old Marc Morano. He was a representative for the most dishonest of blowhard radio "entertainers," Rush Limbaugh. He posted the false allegations from the Swift-Boat folks against John Kerry. He lied about activities in an AIDS research fundraising dance party. He popularized "Climategate," to falsely show a global scientific conspiracy, and he published private email addresses of climate scientists to harass them.

      With that record of honesty and integrity, why WOULDN'T we trust his word over the climate scientists of the world?

    47. Re:It's not limited to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I _TOLD_ you it is AFRICANS and Excrement Color Anthropoids who cannot stand SWEET nor Humans experimenting SWEET. SO honey is a target, as well as (sugar) CANE (plantation history, union crisis...). No one cares? They can act. Directly or through schizophrenics , *hearing* voices convincing them in confusion that bees NO. Combination of factors, eh? They attack as they CAN, but sweet NO. Anything else is just babbling and ignoring the problem they WILL WIN and EXTINGUISH BEES if we do not stop them. Farfetched? I am talking the madness of anthropoids who ONLY *hear* voices by birth and will never reach the C in ABD.

    48. Re:It's not limited to the US by Xest · · Score: 1

      But you still have two problems there. Firstly, when the US has had cold winters, Europe has had mild winters, yet suffered the exact same problem. So your argument of a correlation of cold winters is also false - it only correlates if you take an arbitrary subset of known data.

      Secondly, you argue that usage of neonicotinoids don't correlate - at best you can say they don't appear to correlate in the data you have seen, but plenty of studies show otherwise. For example, this study finds a correlation between the use of imidacloprid and cold winters, rather than varroa mite and cold winters:

      http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/ne...

      One could equally argue from this, and the European experience of mild winters, actually shows that neonicotinoids are in fact the common factor in the problem.

    49. Re: It's not limited to the US by davester666 · · Score: 1

      The parent's took too much honey, so they effectively murdered their bee's!

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    50. Re:It's not limited to the US by StrangeBrew · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the citations...honestly, I did a search before asking for a citation and didn't find anything overly relevant. However even the reports you reference don't really provide more than 8 years of data that do not specify what would be considered 'normal' losses in a mild or an average over-winter, without influence from insecticides and/or invasive parasites. I would also suggest that resistance to parasites could potentially be impacted by insecticides. Rarely in ecology is the health of a species determined by just a single environmental factor.

    51. Re:It's not limited to the US by pastafazou · · Score: 1

      Well first off, you're linking to the debunked work of Chensheng Lu. And I don't know where you're getting your info about Europe's cold and mild winters, but here's the top link from google when I search: http://www.theguardian.com/env... Finally, you fail to address the fact that Australia is one of the heaviest users of neonics, yet they have not suffered any issues at all with bee colony collapses. Oh, and they're also free of the varroa mite incidentally.

    52. Re:It's not limited to the US by Xest · · Score: 1

      Debunked by a blog post parroted by Bayer? No you're okay, I prefer peer reviewed papers thanks, you know, actual science.

      "but here's the top link from google when I search: http://www.theguardian.com/env..."

      Great. A newspaper whose assertion of a cold 2012/2013 winter is trivially disprovable by actual MET office records which show that much of the winter was spent above the already relatively warm (historically) 1982 - 2010 average:

      http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/cl...

      Even on the coldest weeks it only just barely crept below 0c reaching -2c on only two occasions at worst. The UK hasn't had a truly cold winter now since 2010. All our winters have been incredibly mild since that point. This is what an actual cold UK winter looks like:

      http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/cl...

      Here are the other recent winters:

      http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/cl...
      http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/cl...
      http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/cl...

      So you see, using the UK as a point to suggest cold winters in recent years is laughable. In 2013/14 we barely dropped below average for a single day.

      Besides, your assertion on Australia isn't even correct. There are plenty of issues in Australia too, whilst it may not be on the scale of other places, there are issues. As such, it's still entirely plausible that neonicotinids are a major contributing factor, and the fact that Australia always has warm weather merely cushions the impact. To pretend it's not happening at all there is just an outright lie.

      So maybe stick to actual science and data, rather than blogs and newspaper articles. You might stop looking so much like a Bayer loving shill then.

    53. Re:It's not limited to the US by pastafazou · · Score: 1
      Peer reviewed paper, huh? You know Nature rejected Lu's submissions, right? He ended up publishing his work in a "pay for play" journal known for publishing research rejected by mainstream journals. Lu Debunked: http://www.geneticliteracyproj...

      "Many of the world’s top scientists have challenged his research. Dennis vanEngelsdorp called Lu’s first study “an embarrassment” while Scott Black, executive director of the bee-hugging Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, characterized it as fatally flawed, both in its design and conclusions. University of Illinois entomologist May Berenbaum, who chaired the National Academy of Sciences 2007 National Research council study on the Status of Pollinators in North America called it “effectively worthless” to serious researchers. “The experimental design and statistical analysis are just not reliable,” she said."

      As far as cold in Europe, cherry picking a few UK averages doesn't actually impart much information about what's happening. Wikipedia lists unusual cold waves in Europe for 2004/5, 2005/6, 2007, 2009, 2010, and 2012. It's funny you ask me to stick to actual science and data, when I'm the one who pointed out that the actual science and data overwhelmingly support the case that neonics likely aren't the cause of CCD. You sound like a Greenpeace brainwashed whacko who refuses to examine the evidence. Enjoy your envirocult worshipping, I'll stick with the science that's enabled our society to feed 7 billion people worldwide and land rovers on Mars.

    54. Re:It's not limited to the US by Xest · · Score: 1

      "As far as cold in Europe, cherry picking a few UK averages doesn't actually impart much information about what's happening."

      You chose Britain. If your cherry picking backfired, don't blame me. Just learn to realise that if you're going to cherry pick based on some factually incorrect newspaper article then you're going to look a massive fool when it backfires.

      You talk of facts, science, and actual data. I've provided that all along - you're still just spouting bollocks without managing to back it up in the slightest with anything other than the exact opposite of facts and data - you're backing it up with others opinions who agree with yours. That is not fact, that is not science, and that is not data.

      Stop being a zealot and get over the fact your argument is broken and there's a severe lack of data to back the points you've made, and, if anything, an awful lot (as I've pointed out) showing the opposite.

      You spoke of cold winters in places like Britain that had bad CCD, I pointed out with actual data we have had incredibly mild winters in those years, I showed the temperature records, and you still try and deflect and call me the zealot. I can only assume you either work for Bayer, or are actually retarded.

      Science and data aren't things you get to declare, you have to actual do and show them, you've failed hard. Get over it.

  2. Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Thank you Monsanto, DuPont, etc etc...

    1. Re:Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by Tx · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's not proven that any particular pesticide or agro-chemical is to blame. The fact that urban bees are thiving in cities such as Paris and London, despite all the pollution in those environments, is inteesting. One mooted possibile reason is that cities have lots of different species of plants in their gardens and parks, blooming at differing times, so that there is always nectar available from some of them. In the countryside by contrast, with modern, vast, single-crop farms, it may be that there is only one species of plant in the bees environment, and once that crop finishes blooming, in sometimes a pretty small window of time, there is no more nectar. So it could be farming practices and lack of rural biodiversity that are to blame, at least in significant part.

      --
      Oh no... it's the future.
    2. Re:Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by disposable60 · · Score: 1

      Right - not a specific ag-related agent - but the industry trend to make anything but monoculture effectively illegal.

      --
      You're looking for quotes? See my journal.
    3. Re: Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks Obama!

    4. Re:Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by NotDrWho · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You forgot big oil, global warming, the War on Terror, the Koch Brothers, and all the other lefty bogeymen. May as well get them too while you're talking out of your ass.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    5. Re:Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most agro chemicals are also not present in high concentrations in rural areas so dont be so quick to give them a pass based on this.

    6. Re:Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > It's not proven that any particular pesticide or agro-chemical is to blame. The fact that urban bees are thiving [treehugger.com] in cities such as Paris and London, despite all the pollution in those environments, is inteesting

      Some years ago birds started to return to cities here in Brazil which they had previously abandoned because of air and sound pollution. The rationale by experts was the exact opposite of what you say: chemical and pesticide use in the fields was so intense that they could no longer live there.

      Cities became the lesser of two evils.

      Until more research is produced, we should ponder what risk do we prefer to take: to our survival or to the bottom line of some companies. Decisions need not to be based only on fact, but can also derive from substantial perceived danger -- if they die, we die.

    7. Re:Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by caseih · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In Alberta, where there are more commercial bee keeping operations than anywhere in Canada, of honey and other types, and where neonic use is higher than in many other places. Bees are simply are not having the problems seen elsewhere. The bee keepers association here in Alberta is strongly opposed to an outright neonic ban because it would severely hurt their pollination and honey business. Without neonics there would be a lot less Canola and other crops to pollinate.

      Now, this isn't to say that neonics aren't a big part of the problem of bees dying elsewhere. It could have to do with how the neonics are being used. In Alberta they are used when treating the seeds with fungicide, and typically they are placed in the ground with a gravity-fed drill, or an air drill that blows them into the ground. So all the neonic residue gets placed under the soil. In other places, they use vacuum planters (corn, soybeans) which blows neonic-laden dust into the air. So it could be this that contributes to the problem.

    8. Re:Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by BlackPignouf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While "innocent until proven guilty" is typically the right approach, "huge assholes until proven otherwise" has always been extremely accurate for Monsanto.

    9. Re:Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the city, you usually don't have some farm worker whose attitude is "I need to spray pesticides, and these 18 boxes of bees on the corner of the property aren't my bees, anyway. No need to notify the beekeper, I'll just spray."

      Mites are a problem, though, and the treatment can be a rather involved and delicate process.

    10. Re:Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Thank you Monsanto, DuPont, etc etc...

      You are right to thank them. Over the years they have helped to dramatically increase crop yields to keep the price of food down. The left is constantly yammering on about the plight of the poor out of one side of their mouth and then demonizing the people who make food affordable out of the other. Monsanto has probably done more to help the poor than all the give away programs combined.

    11. Re:Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're missing an obvious connection. There likely isn't a lot of pesticide, or agro-chemical being introduced in urban settings, when compared to commercial farm areas where bees are in vicinity, and CCD has been found.

      Not saying there's a correlation, but it's worth noting.

    12. Re:Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

      > It's not proven that any particular pesticide or agro-chemical is to blame.

      The evidence is pretty damning. Neonics do not directly kill, they affect the nervous system so the insects can take care of themselves. Many bees leave the hive, and cannot find the way back. That is exactly the way neonics would work.

      > The fact that urban bees are thiving

      Because they are pollinating crops that are contaminated with neonics.

    13. Re:Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by cjjjer · · Score: 1

      Thank you western civilization for wanting cheap quick food.

      Fixed it for you

    14. Re:Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      While "innocent until proven guilty" is typically the right approach, "huge assholes until proven otherwise" has always been extremely accurate for Monsanto.

      False. The "until proven otherwise" would imply that this has happened at any point, which would be untrue. They (Monsanto) are just huge assholes all the time.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    15. Re:Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by bzipitidoo · · Score: 1

      "Unknown" and "not proven" is the rat I smelled. Smells just like "doubt is our product".

      Yes, bee colonies are dying, and it's a TOTAL MYSTERY! Well, I rather think research in certain areas is being blocked and buried, otherwise it would be a lot less of a mystery. There is ample reason to distrust industry. They have a long track record of turning to propaganda to improve their bottom line. Big Tobacco started it. Big Oil saw how effective it was and jumped in to confuse the public about Climate Change. Big Media is still trying to sell the idea that copying is stealing, but that one is so ludicrous that even propaganda can't quite bridge that yawning gulf in rational thinking. And there's lots more than that. It's pervasive. Industry leaders simply do not grasp the immorality of propaganda, they really believe it's just another weapon in the arsenal.

      --
      Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
    16. Re:Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mosanto has, at the very least, subsided many rides at Disneyland over the years.

    17. Re:Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mass starvation is not caused by a lack of food or food that was too expensive. Starvation is caused by governments. It's a distribution problem.

    18. Re: Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it is much more drastic: agro business grows because demand grows. how many humans can earth handle ?

      it is definitely not just greedy companies...

    19. Re: Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah and soon we will handle 100billion humans, because "the poor must be fed". earth has infinite capacity and mr malthus was a complete idiot.

      pesticides will enable if we dont kill the bees or ourselves with them.

    20. Re:Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      Interesting. Several people I know have lost all their bees and they live in more rural areas. I live in a semi-urban area and my hive is thriving. This is purely anecdotal though, of course.

    21. Re: Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > it is much more drastic: agro business grows because demand grows. how many humans can earth handle ?

      That's really something to worry and better education already proved to be a major contraceptive. So we should make education -- specially for women -- a central point in our cultures.

      > it is definitely not just greedy companies...

      But it is. If you're dealing with productivity problems, the temptation to use chemicals and pesticides is tantalizing; there are other ways, though, with the use of age old techniques like using helper species (e.g. a kind of ant used to protect a crop -- IIRC they discovered ants can protect plants from elephants in Africa!). In the end, people selling products without regard for the environment are fooling idiots who believe the easy way has no hidden costs -- but we're the ones who are going to pay the environmental bill later.

    22. Re:Take A Bow For Your Accomplishments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't buy that pass-the-buck nois-logice one bit.

  3. Who's paying DICE again? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2

    While the precise cause of the honeybee crisis is unknown, scientists generally blame a combination of factors, including poor diets and stress. Some bees die from infestations of the Varroa mite, a bloodsucking parasite that weakens bees and introduces diseases to the hive. Environmental groups also point to a class of pesticides known as neonicotinoids.

    Because environmental groups, of course, are just a bunch of nutjobs and couldn't possibly include scientists...

    Get ready for the "humanity will survive because reason xyz" posts, possibly something about pollinating crops with low-paying jobs or even freakin' drones or something.

    [Robbie comes back from school in a bad mood]
    Robbie: [to the Grapdelites] Thanks for everything. I got an F. [throws his notebook close to the Grapdelites]
    Grapdelite 2: Oh, careful!
    Robbie: Oh, sorry. I didn't see you.
    Grapdelite 1: He seems distressed.
    Grapdelite 2: I hope it's nothing we done.
    Robbie: "Why dinosaurs ruled the Earth?" And I wrote a whole essay about what you guys said about how we're too wise to eat all the grapes. Look what the teacher wrote. [shows the Grapdelites his paper]
    Grapdelite 1: "There'll always be more grapes. That's what 'more' means."

    1. Re: Who's paying DICE again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know about the USA but in the UK, pressure groups are not usually driven by knowledge but rather "lifestyle"
      It is just a style thing to be an animal rights activist or whatever.

    2. Re:Who's paying DICE again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Humanity will survive because humanity will survive. That's what humanity does, it survives. I can't even remember the last time humanity did not survive.

      Look, there will soon be over eleventy billion of us on the planet, and we will need to find productive jobs for all of them (since manufacturing and car driving will all be done by robots). If that includes having people travel from farm to farm to blow on flowers then I say that's fine with me. I only ask that they not be citizens or even legal immigrants, that they be given no rights, and paid less than a subsistence wage.

    3. Re:Who's paying DICE again? by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      If the grapledites were so smart, they would have chosen a better example. Grapes are meant to be eaten; it's part of the reproductive cycle of the grape vine.
      Not the momma!

    4. Re:Who's paying DICE again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who cares if environmental groups contain scientists or not?
      A nuclear physicist won't have an informed opinion on biodiversity or pesticide use. Neither will a climatologist. They might read papers, but they rely on someone else to do the research.
      No one is saying environmental groups are a bunch of nutjobs except you. They do, however, have an agenda. They might be right, but if scientists say one thing while environmental activists say another, I'm more inclined to trust the people who have actually done research on the subject.

    5. Re:Who's paying DICE again? by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 1

      While the precise cause of the honeybee crisis is unknown, scientists generally blame a combination of factors, including poor diets and stress. Some bees die from infestations of the Varroa mite, a bloodsucking parasite that weakens bees and introduces diseases to the hive. Environmental groups also point to a class of pesticides known as neonicotinoids.

      Because environmental groups, of course, are just a bunch of nutjobs and couldn't possibly include scientists...

      Well, since many (most?) environmental groups are a bunch of nutjobs (don't hate me bro, they are..,), while they may include scientists, those will be also nutjobs.

      An example of a nutjob scientist from just yesterday: a parliament's commity deciding who will be the new vice-president of the Greek Food and Drug Administration learned that the goverment's proposal was a female veterinary medicine professor who believed that planes "spray stuff" to people! After questioning her about that, this lady stoped being interested for the position (thank God!), but she defended herself inside the commity saying that it is not right to be negatively judged for that! NOTE: after that she defended herself to the press by saying that it is her scientific views... THAT PLANES SPRAY "STUFF" TO PEOPLE!

      --
      Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
    6. Re:Who's paying DICE again? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      eleventy billion? Wouldn't that be 110 billion? I guess someone's making up for the bees' absence.

    7. Re:Who's paying DICE again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is also the question of who funds the scientists doing the studies.

    8. Re:Who's paying DICE again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly enough, China already has laborers doing pollination by hand.

      https://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/5193-Decline-of-bees-forces-China-s-apple-farmers-to-pollinate-by-hand

    9. Re:Who's paying DICE again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Big mistake. Rachael Carson's book, Silent Spring, made a bunch of claims which were not reproducible. DDT was banned based on junk science, and literally millions of people needlessly died of malaria . Sacrificed on the alter of environmentalism. True story.

    10. Re:Who's paying DICE again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We can just 3D print more bees of course. 3D printing will save the world!!! It is the panacea to end all panaceas!

    11. Re:Who's paying DICE again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because environmental groups, of course, are just a bunch of nutjobs and couldn't possibly include scientists...

      Because religious groups, of course, are just a bunch of nutjobs and couldn't possibly include scientists...

  4. Show me the money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't care why, but how will this affect crop yields this summer?

  5. What is normal and how many were born? by BitZtream · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Over a 200 year period, 100% of the humans on the planet die ... of course, more are born to replace them so the population actually grows ... making that number that looked super duper scary ... pretty much normal.

    So ... 40% in and of itself doesn't mean anything to me if Bees only live 2-3 years anyway.

    How many new colonies were formed and how was the total population effected in the end.

    The title and summary give no indication that something is wrong, only the indication that someone wants a sensationalist headline.

    Facts please ... you know, news for nerds.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    1. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, Mr Basic Reading Comprehension Failure, without even needing to read the article, the summary actually says colonies not bees.

    2. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Facts please ... you know, news for nerds.

      Facts doesn't cause nerds to discuss.
      It is against the interest of Dice to provide factually correct stories.

    3. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by NotDrWho · · Score: 2

      Unless honey bee colonies are immortal, I'm pretty sure there is still a normal range that would be relevant.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    4. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by JSC · · Score: 4, Informative

      Reading the article reveals this... "In an annual survey released on Wednesday by the Bee Informed Partnership, a consortium of universities and research laboratories, about 5,000 beekeepers reported losing 42.1 percent of their colonies in the 12-month period that ended in April. That is well above the 34.2 percent loss reported for the same period in 2013 and 2014, and it is the second-highest loss recorded since year-round surveys began in 2010."

      --
      Time's fun when you're having flies. - Kermit the Frog
    5. Re: What is normal and how many were born? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I am a beekeeper. 30% of feral bee colonies do not survive naturally and is also the number I try to maintain to keep genetic diversity. With that said other beekeepers and myself do not report this as loss to the DOA and count this as the price of doing business. I am right in line with this number with 10% loss on top of what I dispatched.

    6. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by silentcoder · · Score: 3, Informative

      The normal lifespan of a bee colony is measured in decades or in rare cases even centuries.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    7. Re: What is normal and how many were born? by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 2

      I am a beekeeper. 30% of feral bee colonies do not survive naturally and is also the number I try to maintain to keep genetic diversity. With that said other beekeepers and myself do not report this as loss to the DOA and count this as the price of doing business. I am right in line with this number with 10% loss on top of what I dispatched.

      Very interesting. Good info for the readers here. Thanks.

    8. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      According to the article the historical norm is more like 10% per year, most of which is in the winter and beekeepers are having trouble keeping enough bees to do their work.

    9. Re: What is normal and how many were born? by Holi · · Score: 0, Troll

      How so? You have a random post from an AC with nothing to back it up and you blindly accept it. How the fuck is that good info? In fact that is the exact opposite of good info.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    10. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Using your "human" analogy, human colonies survive for thousands of years. Damascus, Syria is over 6,000 years old. If human colonies started dying out, you'd notice.

    11. Re: What is normal and how many were born? by camperdave · · Score: 1

      So you're saying this is a propaganda piece by "big corn" who want to jack up the price of honey so more people switch to corn syrup? Diabolical!

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    12. Re: What is normal and how many were born? by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Please, add, correct, or dispute those numbers if you want. Just like any other post. I just highlighted it because it was AC and below some people's radar. Sorry you had to read it. Why does it bother you so much?

    13. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by NotDrWho · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that still doesn't tell us anything. A certain percentage of them would still die off every year.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    14. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by dmt0 · · Score: 1

      The title and the summary are meant to downplay the role the pesticides play in this - which were actually proven to kill the bees, and shift the attention to the other factors.

    15. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by BForrester · · Score: 1

      Using your "human" analogy, human colonies survive for thousands of years. Damascus, Syria is over 6,000 years old. If human colonies started dying out, you'd notice.

      Like, for example, Damascus, Syria.

    16. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by JazzLad · · Score: 1

      Let's see, I'm no mathematician (in fact I had to Google how to even spell it), but 40% every year seems like it couldn't sustain decades ... Someone better at math correct me if I am wrong, but to have a 'normal lifespan' of even 1 decade means no more than 10% loss every year (on average).

      Sometimes it's better to not double-down when you're wrong. :)

      --
      "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
    17. Re: What is normal and how many were born? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but when the colony dies it means they all died. No replacement, no next generation.

    18. Re: What is normal and how many were born? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, if only there were some way to create new colonies to replace the old ones, some form of "RE"-production.

    19. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends on what the replenishment rate is. A 40% colony death rate wouldn't mean anything if twice as many new colonies were added in the same time frame.

    20. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      Citation needed? I would be interested to read your sources about this, as I have never encountered this claim before.

      The term "lifespan of a bee colony" is also somewhat interesting. Are you talking about one continuous genetic line of bees with successive daughter queens existing in the same location for decades or centuries?

      Bee swarms do, very frequently, take over unused, abandoned, or dead hives, though there's no reliable genetic relationship there.

    21. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by gweihir · · Score: 0

      No, it does not. Basic math tells you that the average life expectancy is the inverse of the average probability of death per year. Reproduction rate does not matter one bit. 40% death per year gives you an average life-expectancy of 2.5 years. If it is supposed to be 10 years, then 40% death/year is dramatic and may mean extinction in th near future.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    22. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by vikingpower · · Score: 5, Informative
      Son of a former beekeeper speaking here.

      In summer, a typical worker bee lives for about 6 weeks. 8 weeks, maybe 10, if she has one of the rare posts of guardians at the bee colony's entry, or is one of the even fewer bees that feed the queen. Bees literally work themselves to death. The replenishment rate is, during summer, 100%; this is taken care of by the queen. A typical bee colony has between 10,000 and 40,000 bees in high summer, then goes into winter with about 1,000 bees, clumped around the queen to keep her warm, and comes out of winter with 400 to 600 bees. We are talking about apis mellifera carnica here, the so-called Italian bee, which is the variety most commonly used by beekeepers.

      An entire colony dying in spring or early summer is, normally, an extremely rare event, and indicates either an epidemy, or severe poisoning. Varroa mites are a known cause, but are a largely contained phenomenon now, at least in professional bee-keeping circles. What remains, is ... poisoning. Neonicotinoids or something else.

      --
      Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    23. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's like saying 40% of cities died.

      Sure lots of people die in each city all the time so that's not remarkable, but it would be somewhat remarkable if entire cities started dying out as a group.
      It would also be pretty remarkable if 40% of all our major cities just turned in to mass graves right?

      Same principal some bees dying out is a big deal be colonies dying entirely is a huge deal, until recent history most bee keepers would rarely if ever lose a colony

    24. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by Beerdood · · Score: 1

      Of course that tells us something. GP posted that the normal lifespan of a bee colony is measured in decades or in rare cases even centuries. That's a vague timespan of course, but that's maybe roughly on par with a human lifespan (30 to >100). Even if we assume the low end of that is 30 years, if 40% of them died within a 12 month period that's a massive indicator of some of sort of problem. A 30 year lifespan (again, LOW end guesstimate based on GP comments) means that on average, 3% of colonies should die off each year (12 month span). A 40% mortality rate would only be normal if colonies lived an average of 2.5 years.

      Cmon man, at least try and math a little before posting a response

      --
      Global warming and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking number of pirates - Gospel of the FSM
    25. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read on another article: The actual number of colonies has gone up, being around 400,000 (due to colony dividing) but the number of bees themselves has probably dropped a tiny bit and the stress factors of dividing a colony is bad for the surviving bees. So we have the same number of colonies, but they are weaker than the colonies of yesteryear.

    26. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 1

      No, it does not. Basic math tells you that the average life expectancy is the inverse of the average probability of death per year. Reproduction rate does not matter one bit. 40% death per year gives you an average life-expectancy of 2.5 years.

      Huh? What sort of argument is this? "Basic math" can only tell you in this case that you're making a lot of unfounded assumptions to get your numbers.

      First, we should be clear here that the stats are talking about colony deaths, not individual bees, which may have different dynamics in both death rate and reproduction from individual bees.

      But to your specific argument, in particular, you're assuming not only a perfectly constant population (actual species in the world vary significantly in their populations over time, particularly things with relatively short lifespans), but also that survival (to adulthood and thus reproductive) rate will be directly related to death rate and birth rate. That latter assumption is almost always wrong, since it's generally dependent on various external factors -- most species in the world reproduce at a rate that is higher than necessary to achieve 100% replacement assuming a 100% survival-to-adulthood rate. The excess can flourish and grow the species population in "good times," and at other times predators, disease, and starvation will lower the survival rate significantly.

      So, a 40% death rate per year may be abnormal, but exactly what it predicts in the long-term will be dependent not only on average lifespan, but on the ability of the species to reproduce at greater rates and/or survive at greater rates when under various external pressures.

      For a concrete example, suppose food is the limiting environmental factor. Many species compete for food. If a species is capable of producing 4 times the current amount of offspring that survive to adulthood, either their reproductive systems work differently when food is limited (and they reproduce less) or 75% of the offspring die of starvation before maturing. If you suddenly start killing off adults at a much greater rate, then the extra available food for the remaining members of the species may lead to greater reproduction and/or more survival of offspring (due to less starvation). Thus, "basic math" cannot determine whether any particular death rate or increase "may mean extinction" without more detailed modeling of a biological system.

      All of that said, the stats for the bees currently don't look very good...

    27. Re: What is normal and how many were born? by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      See the post below by the beekeeper's son. A beekeeper considers colony death an incredibly rare event. Many retire with most of their first colonies still alive..

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    28. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by RingDev · · Score: 1

      You have a point, if you spray a bee colony with neonicotinoids, the bees will die.

      But how many people in the world are spraying bee colonies with neonicotinoids?

      When you plant a neonicotinoid treated seed in a barren field, do you know where the bees are?

      I'll give you a hint: no where's near the barren field. There's nothing growing yet, there are no flowers, no pollen, nothing to eat. Those bees are still holed up keeping warm and waiting for plants to start budding.

      Are there idiots in the world that do spray neonicotinoids on flowering plants? I'd imagine so, but they are being retarded, not following instructions, and should be held accountable.

      Neonicotinoids are not pleasant things, but they are a hell of a lot better than the previous generation of insecticides. Ideally the next generation will be even better with lower risks than these present. But to lump all pesticides into a bucket of "bad" is grossly inaccurate.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    29. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What remains, is ... poisoning. Neonicotinoids or something else.

      I'm not saying it's aliens, but... it's aliens!
      Aliens make crop circles, bees polinate crops : the connection couldn't be clearer!
      /joking

    30. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it isn't. The typical lifespan of a colony is a few years not decades certainly not hundreds of years. Since varroa 2 years is the norm. What is reported as long lived colonies is the continual rehabitation of old nest sites by new colonies. Tom Seeley of Cornell did studies in an isolated forest in NY back in the 70s and revisited them recently. Not a single colony was still in place. He presented the information at the Florida Bee College this spring. I'm sure he has published it elsewhere also.

    31. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by gweihir · · Score: 1

      What made you think I was talking about individual bees? They do not have 10 years life expectancy under any circumstances. And my math is perfectly sound. That there are a lot of other factors and that my statement is only a very rough estimate is not in dispute either. A reduction of average life-expectancy down to 25% is extreme. So would be a reduction to 10...50%, and hence I do not need accuracy to make that determination. There is some severe threat to bee survival, no question about it.

      The stats for the bees currently don't look very good...

      That is all I meant do demonstrate.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    32. Re: What is normal and how many were born? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you were most likely responding to a paid propaganda operative. 40% clearly is a big time issue. it is in the same ballpark as 90%. when we had that, best of luck...

    33. Re: What is normal and how many were born? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      indian bee colonies are resistant to varroa. time to get not just indian programmers !

    34. Re: What is normal and how many were born? by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      I keep bees as well, though I am not hugely experienced. I don't mean to disrespect the other post, but it's riddled with errors.

      So you don't have to actually read all of my post--do you have ANY citation for hives that normally and naturally survive decades or centuries? I am not familiar with this claim and would like to read more.

      In summer, a typical worker bee lives for about 6 weeks. 8 weeks, maybe 10, if she has one of the rare posts of guardians at the bee colony's entry, or is one of the even fewer bees that feed the queen.

      No. Most worker bees go through a predictable lifecycle. See, e.g., http://www.clemson.edu/extension/county/oconee/programs/beekeeping/Honey_Bee_Life_Cycle_in_Pictures.pdf

      1-2 days old: Cleaning duty
      3-5 days old: Feeding older larva
      6-11 days old: Feeding younger larva
      12-17 days: comb maintenance and production (wax)
      18-21 days: guard bee duty
      22+ days: field bee (foraging)

      It's relatively rare for a bee to have only one duty over its entire lifespan, though this can happen. Sometimes phases are skipped in the spring if a colony really needs foragers, for instance.

      Bees literally work themselves to death. The replenishment rate is, during summer, 100%; this is taken care of by the queen.

      More than 100%! Colonies expand rapidly in the spring and into summer.

      A typical bee colony has between 10,000 and 40,000 bees in high summer, then goes into winter with about 1,000 bees, clumped around the queen to keep her warm, and comes out of winter with 400 to 600 bees.

      40,000 is on the low ends of most estimates I read for summer population. Some estimates are up to 100,000 bees!

      When you buy "package bees" to install in a hive, the typical size is 3 lbs of bees. This is over 10,000 bees, and is a small "starter" colony. So, I think your estimate of 10,000 to 40,000 bees for summer population is very low.

      Finally, FAR more than 300-400 bees survive the winter. I do not think a colony that overwintered with only 400 bees would be viable.

      We are talking about apis mellifera carnica here, the so-called Italian bee, which is the variety most commonly used by beekeepers.

      A. Mellifera Carnica is the "Carniolan" bee. It's another decently common breed of honey bee, but nowhere near as common as the Italian bee--Apis Mellifera Ligustica.

      An entire colony dying in spring or early summer is, normally, an extremely rare event, and indicates either an epidemy, or severe poisoning.

      Colonies death in spring is not at all uncommon. Colonies are actually at very great risk in the spring. When the queen starts breeding and the hive starts growing, resources that have been stored since the previous summer are used up very rapidly. A few bouts of bad spring weather that disrupts the early nectar flow or an unexpected hard freeze can destroy a colony that survived all winter long.

      Death in summer is more unusual.

      Varroa mites are a known cause, but are a largely contained phenomenon now, at least in professional bee-keeping circles.

      Somewhat. Effective treatments have become available only in the last several year. Near constant monitoring is still required.

      What remains, is ... poisoning. Neonicotinoids or something else.

      Speculation and hyperbole. There are thousands of reasons hives can die. I do not believe the neonic connection has yet been proven, though with Europe banning, we should have some good data coming in over the next few years.

    35. Re:What is normal and how many were born? by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      I posted most of this elsewhere. I don't mean to be disrespectful to you or your parent's experiences (I'm just a "newbee" myself), but a good bit of what you write isn't quite correct.

      In summer, a typical worker bee lives for about 6 weeks. 8 weeks, maybe 10, if she has one of the rare posts of guardians at the bee colony's entry, or is one of the even fewer bees that feed the queen.

      No. Most worker bees go through a predictable lifecycle. See, e.g., http://www.clemson.edu/extension/county/oconee/programs/beekeeping/Honey_Bee_Life_Cycle_in_Pictures.pdf

      1-2 days old: Cleaning duty
      3-5 days old: Feeding older larva (nurse)
      6-11 days old: Feeding younger larva (nurse)
      12-17 days: comb maintenance and production (wax)
      18-21 days: guard bee duty
      22+ days: field bee (foraging)

      It's relatively rare for a bee to have only one duty over its entire lifespan, though this can happen. Sometimes phases are skipped in the spring if a colony really needs foragers, for instance.

      Bees literally work themselves to death. The replenishment rate is, during summer, 100%; this is taken care of by the queen.

      More than 100%! Colonies expand rapidly in the spring and into summer.

      A typical bee colony has between 10,000 and 40,000 bees in high summer, then goes into winter with about 1,000 bees, clumped around the queen to keep her warm, and comes out of winter with 400 to 600 bees.

      40,000 is on the low ends of most estimates I read for summer population. Some estimates are up to 100,000 bees!

      When you buy "package bees" to install in a hive, the typical size is 3 lbs of bees. This is over 10,000 bees, and is a small "starter" colony. So, I think your estimate of 10,000 to 40,000 bees for full, established summer population is very low.

      Finally, FAR more than 300-400 bees survive the winter. I do not think a colony that overwintered with only 400 bees would be viable.

      We are talking about apis mellifera carnica here, the so-called Italian bee, which is the variety most commonly used by beekeepers.

      A. Mellifera Carnica is the "Carniolan" bee. It's another somewhat common breed of honey bee, but nowhere near as common as the Italian bee--Apis Mellifera Ligustica.

      An entire colony dying in spring or early summer is, normally, an extremely rare event, and indicates either an epidemy, or severe poisoning.

      Colonies death in spring is not at all uncommon. Colonies are actually at very great risk in the spring. When the queen starts breeding again and the hive starts growing, resources that have been stored since the previous summer are used up very rapidly. The bees leave the cluster and start moving around. A few bouts of bad spring weather that disrupts the early nectar flow or an unexpected hard freeze can destroy a colony that survived all winter long. If a spring colony has depleted all reserves and there's a nectar death and cold weather, things go bad fast!

      Colony death in summer is more unusual.

      Varroa mites are a known cause, but are a largely contained phenomenon now, at least in professional bee-keeping circles.

      Somewhat. Effective treatments have become available only in the last several year. Near constant monitoring is still required.

      Feral bees have come close to being wiped out nationwide. This is by no means a problem that is linked to just the much vilified commercial beekepers.

      What remains, is ... poisoning. Neonicotinoids or something else.

      Speculation and hyperbole. There are thousands of reasons hives can die. I do not believe the neonic connection has yet been proven, though with Europe banning, we should have some good data coming in over the next few years.

  6. Spike and pesticide correllation by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

    It would seem that bee deaths due to pesticide interaction should be relatively steady or steadily increasing if pesticide use is also steady, and that the spikes in bee deaths would more likely be from the other factors mentioned in the article.

    1. Re:Spike and pesticide correllation by NotDrWho · · Score: 0

      Not to mention the fact that the pesticides we use today are generally way more environmentally friendly than they used to be. Of course, the reflexive assumption of the lefties is that mankind is obviously to blame for anything like this (they'll probably also find a way to blame it on global warming, big oil, nuclear power, police brutality, and all their other usual bogeymen)

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    2. Re:Spike and pesticide correllation by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      I wasn't saying pesticides are not responsible for bee deaths, just likely not a big reason for the seasonal spike.

    3. Re:Spike and pesticide correllation by crunchy_one · · Score: 1

      It would seem that bee deaths due to pesticide interaction should be relatively steady or steadily increasing if pesticide use is also steady

      You may want to read up on how a dose-response curve works. As the dose increases, the affected population increases following a sigmoid curve (i.e., the rate of change increases).

    4. Re:Spike and pesticide correllation by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      Are there seasonal spikes on that curve?

    5. Re:Spike and pesticide correllation by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 0

      Not to mention the fact that the pesticides we use today are generally way more environmentally friendly than they used to be. Of course, the reflexive assumption of the lefties is that mankind is obviously to blame for anything like this (they'll probably also find a way to blame it on global warming, big oil, nuclear power, police brutality, and all their other usual bogeymen)

      Who the fuck peed in your Wheaties this morning?

      You forgot to mention Acorn, Neighborhood organizers, The present occupant's birth certificate, Tesla automobiles, O'Blamacare and Solyndra.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    6. Re:Spike and pesticide correllation by rhsanborn · · Score: 1

      "Environmentally friendly" doesn't mean, "can't be bad for certain elements of the environment". Sure, maybe today's pesticides to kill off predatory birds, but removing the "kill predatory bird" chemical doesn't imply that "kill the bees" isn't present in today's pesticides.

    7. Re:Spike and pesticide correllation by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Not to mention the fact that the pesticides we use today are generally way more environmentally friendly than they used to be.

      They can be simultaneously more environmentally friendly and more harmful to bees, just like your comment can be technically correct and also completely miss the point.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:Spike and pesticide correllation by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Well said.

    9. Re:Spike and pesticide correllation by camperdave · · Score: 1
      How can you have seasonal spikes in yearly figures?

      In an annual survey released on Wednesday by the Bee Informed Partnership, a consortium of universities and research laboratories, about 5,000 beekeepers reported losing 42.1 percent of their colonies in the 12-month period that ended in April.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    10. Re:Spike and pesticide correllation by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      How can you have seasonal spikes in yearly figures?

      Sorry, I should have said 'annual spike'. I would not expect such a curve to show a single annual spike, following a couple years of lower trending, as described in the article.

    11. Re:Spike and pesticide correllation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, the reflexive assumption of the lefties is that mankind is obviously to blame for anything like this (they'll probably also find a way to blame it on global warming, big oil, nuclear power, police brutality, and all their other usual bogeymen)

      What an excellent contribution to the discussion. Thank you for your keen insight.

  7. EU Colony Collapse Stopped with Neonicotinoid ban by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    The EU suffered colony collapse disorder until they banned the use of neonicotinoid pesticides. The EU figured it out. We won't listen, because Monsanto.

    Fuck the USA. You idiots deserve everything you get.

  8. How many die every year anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's the normal die-off rate, or does that data not exist? Also, since "American" honeybees are non-native, who gives a crap, let them die.

  9. Of course they do. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Neonicotinoid manufacturers say that the pesticides are much safer than others they have supplanted, and that in any case, they are safe when used according to instructions.

    Of course they did.

    The Environmental Protection Agency said last month that it was unlikely to approve any new uses of the pesticides until more tests on the risks to bees and other pollinators have been completed.

    So? It won't prevent anyone from using it for new uses.

    What this tells me that I need to go long - real long - on agricultural futures.

  10. What's the normal percentage? by NotDrWho · · Score: 1

    Simply saying "40% of the colonies died" doesn't mean anything if it's *normal* for 30%-50% of these colonies to die in the spring.

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    1. Re:What's the normal percentage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      normal is 10%

    2. Re:What's the normal percentage? by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      Normal should be a range.

    3. Re:What's the normal percentage? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Simply saying "40% of the colonies died" doesn't mean anything if it's *normal* for 30%-50% of these colonies to die in the spring.

      Absolutely. Given that all living things eventually die, that headline means we have allowed 60 percent of bees to achieve immortality.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    4. Re:What's the normal percentage? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Normal should be a range.

      Normal is when someone tells you 10% and you translate in your head to "around 10%". Nobody likes the kind of person who refuses to do that kind of translation in conversation. Trust me. If you really cared, you would have looked it up, which would have taken no longer than bitching about it.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:What's the normal percentage? by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 0

      I think your response was better 'bitching', and also longer than mine. You upped me!

    6. Re:What's the normal percentage? by Rande · · Score: 2

      I blame the immortal queens going around decapitating the other immortal queens.
      "There can bee only one."

    7. Re:What's the normal percentage? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      colony != individual. If you're having trouble with the word colony, replace it with the word "city" in your mind.

    8. Re:What's the normal percentage? by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Bee colonies. Individual bees don't really matter, apart from the queen. That 40% of bee colonies are dying off when it used to be about 10% is troubling.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    9. Re:What's the normal percentage? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I think your response was better 'bitching', and also longer than mine. You upped me!

      #WelcometoSlashdotYouMustBeNewHere

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    10. Re:What's the normal percentage? by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      I blame the immortal queens going around decapitating the other immortal queens.
      "There can bee only one."

      "Here we are, born to be kings, we're the princes of the universe!"

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    11. Re:What's the normal percentage? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      colony != individual. If you're having trouble with the word colony, replace it with the word "city" in your mind.

      If you're having trouble with a deduction of mine so silly it doesn't even qualify as a poe, then gosh, whooshes be upon thee, brother!

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  11. Indeed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The fact that urban bees are thiving [treehugger.com] in cities such as Paris and London, despite all the pollution in those environments, is inteesting.

    Where the carpet bombing of these pesticides is not done.

    Interesting indeed.

    1. Re:Indeed. by pastafazou · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, there's no carpet bombing of neonics, that's not how they're applied.

    2. Re:Indeed. by bugs2squash · · Score: 4, Funny

      They are painstakingly rubbed into the fur of each bee individually.

      --
      Nullius in verba
    3. Re:Indeed. by xevioso · · Score: 3, Funny

      Exactly. It takes a while but it is worth it; the bee actually really loves to be massaged and have his tummy rubbed.

    4. Re:Indeed. by samwichse · · Score: 1

      Says someone who's apparently never applied pesticides.

      http://www.nufarm.com/USTO/Saf...

  12. Good riddance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hate those little fuckers.

    1. Re: Good riddance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet it is wasps you hate. If a bee messes with you than you are the problem Honeybees die when they sting so it is their last option.

    2. Re: Good riddance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honeybees die when they sting so it is their last option.

      Literally.

    3. Re:Good riddance by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

      You must hate living them. Bees pollinate crops. They are vitally important.

  13. Wonder if its related to modern day bee keeping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There was an article that I can't seem to find that said almost all the bees used in commercial agriculture were trucked in for pollination, then trucked elsewhere for the same thing on and on, then back to a breeding/keep alive place when not in use. That seems to allow any disease or issue to be spread around the entire population. Could be problematic.

  14. Addicted by Muad'Dave · · Score: 2
    --
    Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    1. Re:Addicted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somebody go pick up a pack of Newports for the bees please.

  15. Paywalls? You amateurs by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Slashdot must be getting kickbacks from the NYT because all the story links go to their paywall now. But a nerd would go right to the source because the NYT is a fat fucking waste of time any more. They're the next CNN or Faux News, they just sensationalize other people's news. Too bad this ain't News for Nerds any more.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:Paywalls? You amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      yawn. just clear your cookies or open a private session and you can read the NYT all day.

    2. Re:Paywalls? You amateurs by antdude · · Score: 1

      What about a geek? :P

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    3. Re:Paywalls? You amateurs by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      just clear your cookies

      I'm using those.

      or open a private session

      I shouldn't have to do that. I shouldn't have to mouseover and find out if the link will be bullshit before I decide how to open it. Just pick a link that isn't shit to begin with.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  16. Great news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now make me some cheerios!!

  17. 12-Month Period Ending In April by rossdee · · Score: 0

    so 40% died in the 12-Month Period Ending In April

    snd now they have stopped dying?
    Presumambly the ones that survived will be tougher.

    Anybody remember a film called the Swarm? I think it had Michael Caine and Henry Fonda, in the late 70's

  18. Re:Holy Fuck by Carewolf · · Score: 5, Informative

    Take a bee colony and stick them in a deep freeze and see how many survive. In case anyone missed it, the U.S. and Europe experienced record cold this winter. How fucking stupid do you have to be to not put 2 and 2 together?

    Europe had an exceptionally warm and mild winter this year.

  19. Pretty sure my hive died from pesticides by EdwardFurlong · · Score: 1

    The winter finished them off, but last summer the hive seemed healthy, the warm nights the bees were bearding. Then one day they did not anymore. A few days later hundreds of dead bees outside the hive all with their proboscises extended. I know this is just my one example, I would not be surprised if on a larger scale it has to do with dozens of other factors. It's just sad to see my hive done in by pesticides.

  20. Re:Holy Fuck by Golden_Rider · · Score: 1

    Take a bee colony and stick them in a deep freeze and see how many survive. In case anyone missed it, the U.S. and Europe experienced record cold this winter. How fucking stupid do you have to be to not put 2 and 2 together?

    Europe had an exceptionally warm and mild winter this year.

    This. Where I live in Germany, we had pretty much no snow at all the whole winter. "Winter" just did not show up for work this time.

  21. Re:Holy Fuck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Confirmed. I live in the place...

  22. Stop shipping hives to California in winter! by nicoleb_x · · Score: 1

    So maybe greedy almond growers are the real problem. I can't imagine anything more stressful than doing this.

    "..80 percent of the world's almonds come from California's central valley, an 800,000 acre area of almond orchards that are 100 percent dependent on bees pollinating the trees. Surprisingly, almonds are the number one agricultural product in California.

    Once a year, in late winter, 1.5 million bee hives from around the country are delivered to these orchards where the bees' pollination efforts take place over the course of just a few days. It's the largest mass-pollination effort in the world."

    1. Re:Stop shipping hives to California in winter! by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      There really is something to what you say. They transport these bees from where they live to these fields where they eat pesticides, then transport them home again when they're done. But the bees can't live there because they can't abide the actual spraying. And the trees can't survive without the spraying because they haven't had to keep up with pest evolution... there are wild almonds out in the world, though, we won't lose all almonds if the almond crop monoculture gets wiped out. Not immediately, anyway.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Stop shipping hives to California in winter! by Xest · · Score: 1

      Any idea why they're delivered there at all? I was always under the impression California has a reasonable year round climate, so what's so difficult about them just keeping the bees there all year round?

      It strikes me as far cheaper and easier to just maintain colonies locally, than dick around transporting them god knows how far.

    3. Re:Stop shipping hives to California in winter! by danlip · · Score: 1

      You could, and it would be the smart thing to do, but you'd have to stop mono-cropping. With thousands of acres of nothing but almond trees the bees don't have anything to eat when the almonds aren't in bloom.

  23. Super Bees by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    Seems the obvious answer is to genetically modify some bees to be extra hardy, and toxin resistant. The possible side effects might include increased intelligence, gargantuan size, and a taste for human flesh, but we have to save the bees somehow.

    I for one welcome our new super bee overlords!

    1. Re:Super Bees by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

      They are trying to create bees that are more resistant to the neonics, and mites. I don't know about the super size and all.

    2. Re:Super Bees by Bardez · · Score: 1

      Maybe we can Africanize them in the process. It sounds like a great idea!

      --
      Perception is the thin dividing line between reality and fiction.
    3. Re:Super Bees by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe we can Africanize them in the process. It sounds like a great idea!

      So they can sit around all day smoking weed and collecting welfare?

    4. Re:Super Bees by LiENUS · · Score: 1

      Look into small cell foundation, The smart guys are actually trying to breed bees down in size. We managed to make them larger a while back and now we're finding that maybe that wasn't such a great idea.

  24. Because reasons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do those reasons include freezing during winter, and starving because a farmer paid for 24 beehives but only has enough plants to feed 8 beehives?

  25. Re:Holy Fuck by gnaac · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not al of the US had record cold this winter either. Yes, the North East portions had a lot of cold and snow, but in the Pacific NW there was an exceptionally mild aka warm) winter with very little snow. Snowpack in the mountains is 25% of where they normally are this time of year. Lowest snowpack on record according to this article: http://www.wunderground.com/ne...

  26. Groups a bit slower than the others. by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 4, Informative

    Post to Submission that originally linked to paywall

    2009
    Scientists Isolate and Treat Parasite Causing Decline in Honey Bee Population
    http://science.slashdot.org/st...

    2010
    Mystery of the Dying Bees Solved
      "As it turns out, the fungus N. ceranae that was thought to be killing off bee colonies had a partner in crime — a DNA-based virus that worked in tandem with N. ceranae to compromise nutrition uptake" Note: (N. ceranae = Parasite)
      http://science.slashdot.org/st...

      2012
      Studies Link Pesticides To Bee Colony Collapse Disorder
      http://science.slashdot.org/st...

    2015
    It's the pesticides!

    1. Re:Groups a bit slower than the others. by candinu · · Score: 1

      definitely.

    2. Re:Groups a bit slower than the others. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      But here's no outrage activism available if it's due to a fungus and virus. How can you have a good outrage if the cause is something natural and not *gasp* the fault of man??

      I've pointed out that same research IDing the fungi/virus cause multiple times here, and been pooh-pooh'd every time. This last time, I was informed that neonics had to be the cause even when the nearest use of same is hundreds or thousands of miles away, because, ya know, pesticide.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  27. Re:Holy Fuck by dryeo · · Score: 1

    And the worst part of winter seems to have started in April, at least that is when I first saw snow on the local hills this year (there was some in December). Keeping on topic, the wild bees were out in February when there were no local flowers out yet and later when the Huckleberries were flowering I saw no bees. Usually they're buzzing with various types of bee. Still cold and wet here and still no bees. No agriculture close by either.

    --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  28. Mycology to help the Bee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Paul Stamets did a interesting presentation on how fungi can boost bee's natural immune systems

    How Mushrooms Can Save Bees & Our Food Supply

  29. Re:Holy Fuck by smooth+wombat · · Score: 1

    If you look at Colorado, they had temperatures in the 70s in February. They, along with Alaska, were warmer during the month than almost anywhere in the mid Atlantic to northeastern U.S.:

    Link

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  30. Uh Oh by TooManyNames · · Score: 1

    I guess apiary-minded sheikhs better plan their visits to blonde entomologists with care...

    --
    "Is not a sentence" is not a sentence. Well damn.
    1. Re:Uh Oh by Anomalyst · · Score: 1

      Sounds a mite obvious. No shiat, Sherlock.

      --
      There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
  31. I hate bees. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They have stingers. And they fly. I would be happier if they all went extinct.

    I can live with agave nectar instead of honey. I am sure the global ecology will adapt.

    I know I know, I am being totally daft. I just don't like bees.

    1. Re: I hate bees. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, can you lIve without fruits, MUPPET ?

  32. Re:Holy Fuck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And US bee deaths were greater in this summer than the winter.

  33. Electromagnetic Pollution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone else notice that the decline of bees happened / is happening at the same rate as the proliferation of the smart phone?

    Resonance - Beings of Frequency

    Worth the watch, especially for bee keepers.

    1. Re: Electromagnetic Pollution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gads. You fucking moron.

  34. Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good thing most of the worlds plants don't require bees for pollination.
    Too bad most of the fruit does.

  35. Let's be a little more accurate by ferreirabill · · Score: 1

    Article: More than 40% of U.S. honeybee colonies Correct: more than 40% of European honeybee colonies in the U.S. The European honeybee is an imported invasive species that has been wiping out our native varieties. The European honeybee's only advantage is that we raise them commercially while we've little experience raising native bees (other than the Leaf Cutter bee for pollinating alfalfa). The native varieties pollinate every bit as well. Among the advantages of our native bees, other than adaptation to our environment, is that most either can't or don't sting. So let this pest die off.

  36. Are we still trucking hives? by istartedi · · Score: 1

    Honest question, I really don't know. Are we still trucking hives all around the country? IMHO that should have been one of the first things to stop when this crisis started. It seems like the opportunity for pathogens to spread multiplies when you truck colonies 500 miles.

    I can see this being a vicious circle: Not enough local bees. Truck some in. Trucked-in bees whack local population. Hey, things are worse. Now let's truck in MORE bees...

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  37. yet these are all commercial, harvested colonies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems to me that these numbers only come from artificially maintained, regularly harvested bee colonies.

    Not naturally occuring hives, swarms or bees that are not commercially raised and have their output taken out of the hive at regular intervals.

    Seems to me that this might be also a problem of overspecialization for given breeds of popular, productive bees, and perhaps due to human interference with the bees' output. Swiping their "excess" honey that they then cannot use when there is less food available, won't make that colony any healthier.

    Nor would specialization or selection produce a more robust overall bee population. Instead the opposite would be true-what harms one of the honey harvester's favorite bee will harm them all worldwide.

    If cows in commercial beef farms started falling over, would the first call be blaming pesticides or climate change? Or would the industries' practices themselves be strongly scrutinized?

  38. 40% of Colonies, not 40% of bees by RoloDMonkey · · Score: 1

    In a Colony Collapse (almost) all the bees die in a very short period. 40% of colonies dying off in one year is well above the norm.

    --
    Long live the Speaker Bracelet
    Rolo D. Monkey
  39. Give them a vacation. by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

    This might sound silly but why not give the bees a vacation from making honey for humans? They keep making it we keep taking it no wonder they are stresses and maybe overworked..slave bees so to speak. Same for the fish i can live with out eating honey and fish for say 2 years.

    --
    Jack of all trades,master of none
  40. Re:Holy Fuck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So did many parts of the US. Here in Seattle we had temperatures in the 60's in January, it's never happened before.

  41. Strange swarm behavior by angst_ridden_hipster · · Score: 2

    We've seen strange swarm behavior here in Southern California the past two years. Anecdotes follow:

    Last year, we had a swarm that probably lost its Queen (or didn't have one to begin with). They maintained a big ball in the tree for nearly four months, gradually all dying off. They made no honeycomb, just a few weird strands of propolis. In the past, when swarms failed to form a new hive, they didn't continue to go and harvest pollen and function like a hive, but all died off much more rapidly.

    This year, we had a swarm ball up in a tree mid-afternoon. They hadn't found a hive by the next morning. By the next evening, they were all falling to the ground and writhing as if poisoned or something. By the second day, there were just heaps of dead bees all around the garden.

    I don't claim to be any expert (although my Dad kept several hives when I was a kid). Still, I haven't seen this before. I don't know the cause of either phenomenon.

    --
    Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachtani?
    www.fogbound.net
  42. Genetic diversity is my guess by Cazakatari · · Score: 1

    While pesticides, disease and other stresses are certainly "causing" the collapses, more genetic diversity should have solved most of it.

    Honeybee breeding has typically been less rigorous than other livestock. Combined with the genetic bottlenecks they've been through with their domestication and spread around the globe, problems were bound to arise eventually.

    If enough genetic diversity was present, all of the individual possible problems (even pesticides) causing colony collapse should have been sorted out relatively quickly (especially given that queens mate with multiple males).

  43. obvious cause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    monsanto

  44. How about an almonds+ orchard? by PeterM+from+Berkeley · · Score: 1

    I.e., no longer a monoculture, but you also grow long-blooming, multiple varieties of wildflowers underneath your almond trees?

    Would that vastly increase the cost of raising almonds (increased water + hassle), or actually decrease it because you'd maintain a good pollinator population and populations of beneficial insects?

    Best,

    --PeterM

  45. Didn't they find the cause? by recharged95 · · Score: 1

    I just watched some PBS show that led to some conclusion that they did identify what was causing the populations to die.

    TFA says otherwise.

    And I just lost a colony two months ago--it was weird and I sent some in for analysis. Just a pile of bees at the base of my fruit tree...just looked sad.

  46. Re: EU Colony Collapse Stopped with Neonicotinoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    maybe you cpuld reduce swearing and increase citations to studies proving your point. thanks.

  47. Nature isn't your bitch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You humans are consuming faster than nature can replenish.
    You are also poisoning everything.
    You're getting what you've got coming.
    Nature ain't your bitch and doesn't give a fuck about you.