Author Message
Gareth
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 6:44 pm    Post subject:

stevecook172001 wrote:
I stopped reading when I got to this particular oxymoron (the emphasis being on moron)

Quote:
The underlying goal is sustainable intensification of our agricultural sector


In a contrariwise fashion, this makes sense if it means that the humans will sustain (ie continue) the process of intensification. The fact that nature is also involved, and may not sustain the process, has not occurred to the author. Thus, the blinkered, and ultimately self defeating, approach of the author is revealed by his/her own words.
stevecook172001
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 6:30 pm    Post subject:

I stopped reading when I got to this particular oxymoron (the emphasis being on moron)

Quote:
The underlying goal is sustainable intensification of our agricultural sector
Gareth
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 3:08 pm    Post subject:

stevecook172001 wrote:

Either we will get an arms race between GM organisms and the "pests" leading to an eventual situation where the only way anyone will be able to successfully grow crops is if they use a GM ones via the likes of Monsanto et al. Or, we will get a situation where GM organisms have been so cleverly designed that the rest of the biosphere is unable to suppress them and we will find the environment overrun by such organisms.

Insanity.


If you want to see the full flavour of what deluded De Mauley wants to achieve, take a look at this: A UK strategy for agricultural technologies

Insanity doesn't even come close!
stevecook172001
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 12:45 pm    Post subject:

GM will be the worst thing to happen to the natural world since the so-called "green revolution" of the last half of the last century.

The trouble started when we co-opted large swathes of the natural world to grow mono-cultural crops several thousand years ago. The beginnings of farming, in other words. This was then massively exacerbated by the green revolution of the last century when we bred up super cereals that could be made to grow in ever more inhospitable (but still largely wild) environments. But, only with the help of massive amounts of hydrocarbon derived fertilisers and pesticides.

Now, with nowhere left to grow we are developing even more super-duper strains of crops to raise the production levels of the land we already use yet further. However, this time we are not doing it by mimicking nature's natural selection processes. Instead, we are circumventing millions of years of evolution by taking characteristics from one domain and inserting them into another. This could virtually never happen in nature (barring the small amount of genetic material that can get passed around via viruses). This means that one of two things will happen.

Either we will get an arms race between GM organisms and the "pests" leading to an eventual situation where the only way anyone will be able to successfully grow crops is if they use a GM ones via the likes of Monsanto et al. Or, we will get a situation where GM organisms have been so cleverly designed that the rest of the biosphere is unable to suppress them and we will find the environment overrun by such organisms.

Insanity.
Jt
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 10:00 am    Post subject:

Yes a good stab at explaining the problem to TV land.

My view is that many problems with the environment are caused by US. What worries me is that we do not learn this lesson and leap from one crisis to another by implementing new ideas which have uncertain long term outcomes. This is evident in the policy of ripping out hedgerows to make super fields and the march towards monoculture. We then apply vast quantities of lovely chemicals to control pests. Years later we start to understand the complex relationships of bio diversity but the systems in place are now huge businesses and money is the driving factor.

Now the scientists suggest GM is the answer. With GM they argue we will need less pesticide etc.. And the effect on the natural habitat is?. This planet and supported systems have taken millions of years to evolve. I think history has shown us that changes introduced by man will in the long term kill the planet unless we change our ways.
goudensjaak
PostPosted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 4:54 pm    Post subject:

I watched it and thought the german research using radar receivers on bees to see what the effect of neonics on the vector and landscape memory of bees trying to find the hive was very impressive.

Lost bees are something we don't easily notice, but in the program it was clearly demonstrated it does happen after the bee comes into contact with neonics.

For this alone, i would recommend watching it.
Rene
biobee
PostPosted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 3:46 pm    Post subject:

I thought he did a pretty decent job, considering the BBC paranoia about 'balance'. I think too much time was spent on Varroa and not enough on beekeeping methods; the importation issue was rather glossed over; no mention was made of pesticides other than neonics (esp. fungicides, herbicides, etc) and a few other niggles - such as saying 'neonics only affect insects' which is patent nonsense - but it was better than the hacked-about Martha Kearney doc of a few weeks back.
madasafish
PostPosted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 3:19 pm    Post subject:

The answer was "lots of things"...(as above)
Lack of variety of forage
lack of forage
monoculture
Neonics
Varroa
weather


Fairly balanced I thought..

Did not mention beekeepers killing bees.
Barbara
PostPosted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 2:49 pm    Post subject:

Ok thanks for that, I will find some time and make the effort.

Cheers

Barbara
Cie
PostPosted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 1:55 pm    Post subject:

Yes I did learn something.

Bill has covered most of the bases including talking to scientists. He broke the subject down well, covering varroa, pesticides and modern agricultural practices as the main threats, but talked about urban beekeeping and why that seems to be doing well. He also covered the potential GM solution to pests but rounded it all up by saying that the problem is us.

Everyone should watch it Smile
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/bigscreen/tv/episode/b037y0zf
Barbara
PostPosted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 12:16 pm    Post subject:

Hi Cie

Did you learn anything from it? Was it worth watching or am I better off spending my time doing other things, like helping people with problems on this forum and cracking on with building my new and much needed hives.
Sounds like it just reinforced your perspective on the subject, which is something that I think we share. Not sure I need to watch something depressing that I won't get any positives from.

Regards

Barbara
Cie
PostPosted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 11:38 am    Post subject:

Barbara, it's on BBC iplayer so you can watch it there. The outcome... probably depends on your outlook; everything we're doing as human beings was the answer that I took from it, but maybe that was my view before the program.
Barbara
PostPosted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 11:23 am    Post subject:

So.... who saw it and what was the outcome?
I was out last night and missed it.
Brijay
PostPosted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 11:11 am    Post subject: Poll Question

Try not to make the question more complicated than it is.

It merely asks what you think the program will say is killing the bees. Nothing more.

Oh, and it is not intended to be helpful. Just a point of interest.
Bimand
PostPosted: Fri Aug 02, 2013 5:01 pm    Post subject:

Monocultures and modern beekeeping methods weakens the colonies' resistance to pests and diseases and pesticides, especially when combined with fungicides and other chemicals, weaken them further.
madasafish
PostPosted: Fri Aug 02, 2013 6:54 am    Post subject:

I cannot vote as there is no option for "lots of things".
Bugscouter
PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 11:48 pm    Post subject:

Exactly. Although I don't think I would have said it as well as Barbara did.

Ron
Barbara
PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 11:15 pm    Post subject:

Hi Brijay

I'm not sure I understand the purpose of your poll.
Are you asking members what their experience of what is killing their bees is or what the outcome of the documentary will be?

I have to be say that my bees are thriving at the moment and the causes of my colony losses over the years have almost entirely been down to my mistakes and interference, whether that has been poor hive design or bad management through me thinking I knew better than my bees.

I think most of us are not naive enough to believe there is just one factor that is contributing to colony failure worldwide and therefore will be reluctant to vote and opting for "inconclusive" makes us look like we don't believe pesticides or modern monoculture farming are a problem which they are, but neither one is the sole problem.

Also I'm not entirely sure what you mean by modern beekeeping. It could be argued that the new wave of "natural beekeepers" which accounts for most of our forum members are the "modern" trend. I think we might be viewed by many conventional beeks as causing the problem as they see our "lack" of management and treatment as potentially spreading pests and diseases to their bees.
I assume you really mean conventional practices of routinely treating hives with miticides and organic acids and antibiotics and transporting them hundreds/thousands of miles for pollination services and not respecting the integrity of the colony. It very much depends on which side of the coin you are looking from.
Personally I think we are the modern wave and I'm proud to be part of that.

Unfortunately, I don't think your poll is helpful to our cause as it oversimplifies the situation and makes us look narrow minded if we just plump for just one of your options.

Regards

Barbara
Brijay
PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 9:12 pm    Post subject: BBC Documentary What's killing our bees?

I understand there is a documentary on BBC2 on Friday 9th August at 9pm titled, "What's killing our bees?".

It will be presented by TV Newsreader Bill Turnbull, who is a beekeeper himself.

I wonder if the answer to the title question will be; "Modern beekeeping methods".

Powered by php BB © 2001, 2005 php BB Group