APIS Volume 6, Number 5, May 1988
In this issue
- Movement Quarantine Removed: Historical Information
- Alchemy of Greed: Pesticide Application
- Specifics on Providing Water for Bees
NATIONAL MOVEMENT QUARANTINE REVOKED
[Editor's Note: Included for historical reasons only]
One month after publication in the National Register, the national movement quarantine is no more. Those closest to USDA APHIS are not optimistic that another will be proposed. For the time being, the issue appears to be dead in the water, although there exists extensive opposition from the regulatory community.
What this means on a practical basis is that each state must now develop its own regulations concerning bee movement. Some will allow bees in from infested areas (Florida and a dozen or so other states) after being treated by Apistan® plastic strips. Others are expected to be much more hardnosed about the subject. According to the State Apiarist, Mr. Laurence Cutts, he and his inspectors will continue to assist beekeepers in getting the necessary certificates to move. However, the hodgepodge of regulations that are expected to crop up will more than likely cause delays.
The quarantine was revoked for a number of reasons, but principally due to "administrative difficulties and questions about timing and effectiveness of treatment," according to the latest issue of the American Beekeeping Federation's Newsletter. Informally, I have also been told that APHIS officials and others perceived that enforcement was almost impossible.
ALCHEMY OF GREED
Occasionally I receive a magazine in the mail called Agrichemical Age. In the past, I saw the publication as little more than propaganda, financed by the agrichemical industry to tell a biased story. I glanced at it smugly and only in passing. After all, none of that stuff applied to me. I perceived most agrichemicals as the bad guys, the manufacturers/marketers/promoters of these products being responsible for killing untold numbers of honey bees each year.
The worm has turned. In December of last year, I wrote almost in a state of shock on the topic "Pesticide Use Inside Bee Colonies?" At that time, I added a question mark. Now I realize that the survival of large-scale beekeeping from now on may well rest on judicious use of agrichemicals inside colonies to control Varroa. Application of fluvalinate for which there is an emergency label has already begun in earnest. And if we can believe the history of this parasite in other areas of the world, beekeeping in this country appears headed for a turn on what has been called the "pesticide treadmill."
So, I pay more attention to Agrichemical Age these days. And much of what the editor, Len Richardson, says applies to beekeeping now and in the past. His May editorial, "Alchemy of Greed," is of special significance. It begins with a description of what he has seen happen in the "pits" at the Chicago Board of Trade and Merchantile Exchange. These, he said, are a perfect laboratory for culturing three motivators: fear, greed and wishful thinking. It appears to him that "decisions hinge as much, perhaps more, on how one reacts to these emotions as on the amount of knowledge one brings to a decision."
"The alchemy of greed," he goes on, "has more to do with the agrichemical industry, and the perception of problems we face, than most of us would like to admit." Mr. Richardson says that the result of using more than a dash of wishful thinking results in scientific illiteracy, an intoxicating brew brimming with assurance that if everyone understood science in the same way the agrichemical industry did, the perception (by the general public) problems would undergo a transmutation and the base metal of the industry would be solid gold.
As Mr. Richardson concludes: "Let's face the truth: It was not scientific illiteracy which brought us the public's reactions to Bhopal, Chernobyl, Rhine River or the Temik® watermelon scare. These had more to do with some form of business greed, with a dash of wishful thinking, rather than fear of science. And yes, I know it was a blatant misuse of Temik and not a label or other manufacturer problem that resulted in the watermelon scare. But those particular farmers, like so many other businessmen, made their decisions out of greed."
Right now, honey enjoys what the agrichemical industry would so dearly like to have: a "solid gold" reputation in the public's eye. However, loose and sometimes threatening talk plus examples of chemical use in the past, present and future by beekeepers is scary. The scientific answers are not in concerning agrichemical use in Varroa control. Therefore, the beekeeper should assiduously guard against too much wishful thinking when applying chemicals inside beehives. This practice could lead to a backlash of public sentiment, should an incident occur perceived as an outgrowth of the alchemy of greed, rather than informed decision making.
Mr. Richardson suggests the agrichemical industry adopt a product stewardship program. If it doesn't, he says, the government will give the industry one. He also suggests that an obligation of each person in the industry is to develop a high degree of professionalism and modify and use products or practices to minimize or eliminate negative side effects with no thought to market share or profitability.
That makes a lot of sense for the honey industry as well. And some strides have and are being taken. The industry did face facts concerning infant botulism, and the National Honey Board is apparently looking at possible options to steward this most "natural" of products. The bottom line remains, however, that no allowable residues of any pesticides/herbicides/chemicals are allowed in honey.
Communications from consumers are clear, according to Mr. Richardson; sooner or later the customer, or the general public, is going to respond to greed by talking back. To hear that message, however, one first has to listen, he says, and then sometimes change. As Mr. Richardson concludes in his editorial: "Scientific illiteracy is not our problem. Greed generates so much noise that we can't or we refuse to listen."
SPECIFICS ON PROVIDING WATER
It's been brought to my attention that although I discussed the importance in principle of providing water for bee colonies in the March issue of APIS, I did not discuss any of the specifics about how to go about it. Dr. Jaycox's article from which I extensively quoted said we needed more innovative, modestly priced ways to keep water in or near the apiary. In other words, the answers are not all in yet on the issue.
Locating bees near accessible water if possible is the best way to provide a continuous supply. By "accessible" I mean where bees won't forage at your neighbors' swimming pools, bird baths and leaking water faucets. You should also ensure that the water supply is not contaminated. Providing water in the apiary is possible, but requires a good deal of planning and thought. A glance at the bee literature reveals numerous ways to provide water. Fifty- five gallon barrels or other containers can be filled with water and layered on top with wood floats to keep the bees from drowning. A problem with this kind of device is stagnation. Stagnant water has been implicated in spreading nosema disease. Probably the best device is one that trickles water down a old board or drips onto an absorbent material. All that's required is to keep the surface of the watering device damp.
Finally, water may be provided inside a colony. This has been pioneered in dry areas and also has been found to protect bees from pesticide poisoning. Basically, a feeder inside the colony filled with water has been used successfully. A specific in-hive watering device was pioneered by Moffett, Stoner and Wardecker. They called it the "Wardecker Waterer." I would appreciate knowing from others out there what they are using to creatively provide water for their colonies.
Sincerely,
Malcolm T. Sanford
Bldg 970, Box 110620
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611-0620
Phone (352) 392-1801, Ext. 143 FAX: (352)-392-0190
http://www.ifas.ufl.edu/~mts/apishtm/apis.htm
INTERNET Address: MTS@GNV.IFAS.UFL.EDU
©1988 M.T. Sanford "All Rights Reserved
