APRIL 2012 –– PAGE A17 THE GROWER
POLLINATION
Separating perceived and real risks to bee pollinators KAREN DAVIDSON The state of the bee nation is not as healthy as apiculturists would like. “In the northern hemisphere, bees are suffering overwintering losses at a rate twice that of normal,” says David Drexler, agrology consultant, Researchman Inc. In a recent talk to delegates of the Canadian Horticultural Council annual general meeting, he put mainstream headlines into context and explained what growers can do to protect pollinators. First, some recent history. Colony collapse disorder or “CCD” has been coined in the U.S. to describe the hive situation of no worker bees, but queen, brood and food stores present.
Under this definition, no CCD has been identified in Canada, but similar levels of colony losses exist. In the last overwintering season of 2010/2011, Canadian bee researchers and extension workers cited several reasons including: higher numbers of weak colonies heading into winter, ineffective Varroa mite control and resistance to existing control measures, inadequate Nosema detection and control, higher than normal rates of queen loss, harsh weather conditions and impacts to foraging capabilities. The Canadian Association of Professional Apiculturists conducted a survey of 418 beekeeping operations across the country in 2009/2010. The sample, representing 14 per cent of Canada’s managed colonies, recorded what beekeepers thought the problems were. Twenty-one per cent fingered weak colonies in the fall, while 20 per cent cited poor queen quality. Ineffective Varroa mite control was identified by 16 per cent while only nine per cent thought Nosema was a culprit. While the survey is useful, Drexler points to the need for research to untangle the confounding effects of several factors. “It’s easy to blame widespread pesticide use and acute poisoning episodes, industrial agriculture and genetically altered crops. But to put things in context, look at the history of hives, honey and beekeepers since World War II.” There have been previous precipitous declines for explainable
reasons. In the 1940s, there was a sugar embargo. In the late 1980s, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency closed the border to the import of U.S. bees, fearing tracheal and Varroa mites. The vast majority of Canadian researchers agree that problems with bees are complex and varied, with pests and diseases at the forefront. With that historical overview, growers should be aware of circumstances which have potential to expose bees to risk. “Risk is a function of toxicity and exposure,” says Drexler, whose science perspective was the backbone of his former career as director of development and licensing for Bayer CropScience. “Pesticide exposure to bees is something which varies with use pattern, and that can be altered
via label directions and use pattern. No exposure, no toxicity.” Perceived risk: pollen grains and nectar. These don’t accumulate sufficient systemic insecticides to kill bees. While residues have been found, they are below a toxic level. Perceived risk: guttation droplets. Not to be confused with dew, these droplets are natural release of moisture from tips of plant leaves. Although dangerous, bees don’t normally consume them. Real risk: abraded dust during seeding which needs stewardship Seed treatment quality, wind, seeder exhaust Real risk: direct spray Be aware that this activity is a real risk for bees, but rarely for colonies Real risk: spray drift on windy days or inversions This is the same risk as other non-targets. In Drexler’s experience, various groups need to understand the difference between perceived and real risks to protect bee pollinators. Several research initiatives are underway through Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Syngenta’s Operation Pollinator and Bayer CropScience’s Bee Care Centers, and the development and launch of Bayer’s new products to control Varroa mite. “I’m convinced that proper stewardship of crop protection products and communication can reduce the already low number of bee poisoning incidents to virtually zero,” Drexler concludes.
BEES FOR POLLINATION
SUPPORT YOUR LOCAL BEES We help to bring you fruit and sweeten your day with honey. The following Ontario Beekeepers offer Honey Bee Pollination Services:
Glen Ackroyd Ackroyd’s Honey Tara 519-934-0006
Dan Davidson Supersweet Honey Ltd. Watford 519-849-5959
Zenon Kohut Zenon -Bee Inc. Lynden 519-647-9796
Michael Sounak Sunny Honey Brantford 519-317-4140
Guy Anderson Anderkin Foods Inc. Kincardine 519-396-3529
Joe DeVillers Bonnie Bee Honey Penetang 705-533-3655
Reg Lumley Honey Do Honey Sarnia 519-355-0119
John VanAlten Dutchman’s Gold Carlisle 905-689-6371
Davis/John Bryans Munro Honey Alvinston 519-847-5333
Jerry Dietrich Beehaven Apiaries Alma 519-846-5839
Bill Minnick Minnick Appiaries Smithville 905-957-3667
Henry Van Lingen Lingenview Farm Belmont 519-269-3923
Jim Coneybeare Coneybeare Honey Fergus 519-843-7328
Chris Frere Bee Baron Honey Wellandport 905-386-1130
Mike Parker Parker Bee Apiaries Ltd. Beamsville 905-563-7285
Roger/Tom Congdon Sun Parlor Honey Ltd. Cottam 519-839-4000
Tim Greer LilleyBee Apiaries St Catharines 905-934-5904
Brian Rowaan B & E Honey Fields Niagara-on-the-Lake 905-262-1864
Please contact the beekeeper nearest you. Sponsored by Ontario Beekeepers’ Association Phone 905-636-0661, fax 905-636-0662 www.ontariobee.com