[will_brown]

Where are you getting your global numbers? Because the USDA Honey Production Survey data tells a different tale.

In 1989-1990 US honey Bee colonies were at about 3.5M. Neonicotinoids were introduced in the 1990's and since then the US Bee colonies declined to an all time low in 2012 (below 2.5M colonies). Since 2012 there was a small but steady uptick to just above 2.5M colonies; however, that is still down 1M and nearly 33% total since the introduction of Neonicotinoids.

In fact, the biggest decline was from 1990-1996 when the number basically dropped from 3.5M to 2.5M. My understanding is Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) wasn't even acknowledged by the Government until 2006, which is odd because the decrease from 1996-2006 may have only been 2.5M to ~2.35M. Then again in 2006 our Government was championing the strength and stability of the housing market, so maybe they are just not the most proficient at interpreting numbers and data.

As to wild/ferral honey bees, they may be endangered but I assure you they do exist in the US. In fact my parents just has a wild hive removed from their property resulting in 80lbs of honey (including the comb). You can check out Willy the Bee Man, he runs the largest wild bee removal business in South Florida and his website includes some videos of the removals.

[tptacek]

You're citing the time period corresponding to the varroa mite epidemic.

[will_brown]

Is the time period for Neonicotinoids not accurate? I mean you completely glossed over my point just to say the time line I gave was consistent with the mites, I know the mites have had a devastating impact, but if their timeline is consistent with Neonicotinoids as I say, how do you just gloss over that, it would be on par with responding that the time period I cite corresponds with the introduction of rap/hip hop music. I was asking about your data in good faith because I know you are referencing global numbers and I am referencing US numbers, so I was genuinely interested, because if what you say is true about the introduction of Neonicotinoids in other countries having no impact on colonies in those countries that could obviously be very significant.

Nevertheless, your position is bee colonies have increased since the introduction of Neonicotinoids, which again may be true globally and in specific areas like Canada which you cite, but US data shows that is not true and we are at a net negative 1M (managed) colonies since their introduction.

Whether or not that is coincidence is beyond my point, as I said we know the mites have had a devastating impact on honey bees in the US, so we are left with the question why would the trend have reversed course (in the US) if entirely attributable to the mites? At least there is a theory I am aware of for the colonies reversing course despite the continued use of Neonicotinoids.

Moreover, there are studies that suggest of the 4,000 honey bee species in the US, only some were susceptible to Neonicotinoids while other species resistant, hence the major decline in the first 6 years since the introduction of Neonicotinoids and a slow taper off over the next 12 years until those susceptible species are gone leaving the resistant species which are now growing.

All things being equal, if the decline were solely attributable to mites, then what is your take on the US pattern for the initial huge decline followed by a slow decline and then the recent turn around? I know there has been some genetic modifications of both the mites and bees to address the issue, but that is more recent and wouldn't explain the big taper off in decline from 1996-2008 and it is not like they have been eradicated.

[JoeAltmaier]

The answer to complex problems is usually "all of the above" in some degree. Weakened bees can succumb to things they normally would weather ok. Each different assault weakens them. Which is the 'real problem'? I'm thinking, all of them together.

[will_brown]

If it is not clear, that is exactly what I suggest.

Specifically, I acknowledge the devastating impact of the mites, but believe because the patterns (I am aware of) suggest more.

I am thoroughly interested in the global data if it suggests the U.S. Honey Production Survey data is an anomaly in terms of net negative colonies after introduction Neonicotinoids.

[tptacek]

Respectfully: come on. Once again, these aren't hard numbers to get. The varroa mite outbreak began in 1987. Feral honeybees were probably effectively eradicated by the end of the 1990s. Now, look up the introduction and adoption dates for neonicotinoids.

I know approximately fuck-all about beekeeping. It should not be this easy for me to rebut arguments about neonic toxicity, but I appear to be holding my own on approximately 3 Google searches per day.

[will_brown]

Honestly, I don't expect a response, but getting the Global numbers and Canada's numbers on colonies by year isn't a simple Google Search.

I am not a beekeeper either but for a time I did sell honey, up to 65,000 units per order and so I am familiar with USDA annual reports and USDA Honey Production Survey.

In fairness I seem to be one of the only people in the thread not challenging you about the impact of the mites; however, USDA reports has guided my limits on the losses attributed to mites. Not to provoke you but the Honey Production Survey shows colony growth from 1987 when you say the mites were introduced until 1990, thereafter the numbers began declining sharply.

>Now, look up the introduction and adoption dates for neonicotinoids.

By all accounts I see development in late 80's and adoption in early 90's, coinciding with the time period honey bee (managed) colonies saw nearly 33% decline, but essentially during the same period as mites were introduced sans those few years of growth after the introduction of the mites.

Just so you understand where I am coming from the USDA 2015 annual attributes under 20% of loses to mites, and only 5% to pesticides, but 15% to "other" and over 20% (more the mites) to unknown.

Maybe my Google skills are subpar, but I could not find a straight forward graph of honey bee colony number by year for Canada or globally, which is readily available with a US bee population by year Google Search. What I did see is Canada territories in 2008 on the low end losing 20% of colonies and 48% on the high end (but 1 year snap shot is not helpful), and this year a 3.8% growth which they said was record growth over the last decade. I eventually found a standalone statement that Canadian Government which attributed the majority of loses to mites, which supports what you are saying, whereas the USDA 2015 report attributes only 20% of loses to mites and 40% between pesticides/other/unknown.

[jly]

The BBC article deals with the nearly 20k species of bee that are NOT honeybees and are NOT affected in nearly the same way by varroa, showing a clear neonicotinoid link to reducing numbers. Linking honeybee losses to this study is not accurate.