Attention: Executive Officer
MCSCAN
WA.
Dear Sir/Madam,
Please find the enclosed information to be posted in the forums for your members.
Regards
John Wilson.
SYNTHETIC PYRETHENOID AND MICRO-ENCAPSULATED POISON
I had an interesting conversation with a bee keeper today, and believes it raises some interesting questions regarding labeling of many chemical products. It would appear they do not provide as much information they should to protect the consumer.
Therefore I decoded to post it to
this Articles link for comment.
It not only impacts on the health of the public but also has potential
economical implications to
I was discussing toxic chemicals with the Bee-keeper and he asked me what I knew of synthetic pyrethenoid
I replied nothing but would be interested in what he could tell me
SYNTHETIC PYRETHENOID
He said he only found out about it when he lost approximately $25,000 because of it.
A seed grower had asked him to bring his bees to assist in increasing the pollination of his clover crop.
He took the hives to the site and everything looked wonderful, with a good yield of honey for him and an assured pollination of the crop.
However within a few days he had lost half of his bees and the others would not go near the crop. Whether they died or not cannot be proved. They may have become disorientated and subsequently unable to return to the hives.
He told the grower about it and after a few minutes of thinking the farmer said all that had been done was to spray the crop with this chemical to control cockchafer grub that was in the soil.
He said he had checked it and was informed by the chemical people that it was bee "friendly". I believe it is sold as Maverick Fastac 100. This needs to be confirmed.
This year he had his bees in another grower’s place and the grower asked him when he thought the pollination would be finished as he intended to spray for the "grubs"
The beekeeper advised he did not want to move them yet as the pollination was just nearing its peak and asked that the spraying to be delayed until after his bees were gone.
While the seed grower was not happy, he realized it was in his interest to maximize the pollination so he did not spray until after the crop was harvested.
They received some more rain and were able to get a second harvesting still without spraying.
In the meantime the beekeeper was able to contact one of the original people involved with the development of this chemical.
He queried this person and was told that while the bees were not killed, it was found that the chemical irritated the joints. As a result, the bees, developed, what in layman's terms might be called arthritic joints. I will leave the scientific explanation to the scientists.
Obviously, this would be painful to the bees, as it would be to humans.
The hive quickly learnt that, to go near that plant was a no, no, and would not go near it, even when a later crop was put in the area which was not sprayed.
I cannot be sure where the research person was involved with the development, but he said he had the task of writing up the research.
The beekeeper said “but it did damage the hive”.
My contact spoke with the researcher and was told that, when testing, they used only minute samples of the chemicals for testing. If the samples did not kill the bees, it was considered bee friendly.
Later they found out about this joint irritation and as a result the bees learnt to avoid the crop and the sprayed area.
So as far as their tests, these showed it was bee "friendly", because it did not kill the test specimens.
When asked why this information was not included on the packaging, the reply was that all was required by law was to say whether or not it killed the bees, nothing else!
CONCERNS
This must raise concerns that:-
· If it does this to bees, what does it do the environment?
· What are the long term effects to the soil?
· Does it biodegrade, or accumulate in the soil?
· In the effected bees, does it remain in the body of the bee when it dies and thus goes further along the food chain? E.g. Through the worms and other insects that eat and break down the body of the bee?
· What effect does it have on the higher animal life, including the human body?
· Is it taken up in the plants grown on soils that have been sprayed with this chemical?
· What safety requirements are stated, taking note that it is supposed to be “bee” friendly?
· What safety equipment must be worn if it is being sprayed by hand or from e.g. tractor booms?
o I suspect that there is no special warning on the packets, apart from a very general warning, if it is considered bee “friendly”
· What is the effect if the person spraying gets covered with spray drift, both in the short and the long term?
· If it affects the joints of the bees could/does it also have a similar effect on human or even other animals that might ingest food that has been sprayed with the chemical?
· There is a need for research about this type of supposedly friendly chemical and its potential effect on the environment; the food chain; our waterways and storages; artesian and sub-artesian storages.
· The impact on the health of the nation, etc.
· Also in terms of economical consideration to Australian farmers, be they beekeepers or pastoralists or crop growers, what potential loss in income can result from using this to the individual and the national economy?
I am told; it is believed to be developed by Shell and then sold on. This needs further confirmation.
Your Canadian scientist friend or an Australian researcher might be able to add further to our knowledge.
MICRO-ENCAPSULATED POISON
Another chemical poison discussed, is called Microencapsulated poison under the name of made by Gaucho. I believe this may be a Bayer Product.
No details were given as to the term “poison” was provided, so one might assume it covers a wide range of poisons that are manufactured in this way. Further information is needed on this.
Pollen sized droplets are encapsulated with a plastic material; somewhat after the fashion we cover things with Glad Wrap. Forgive the layperson’s description. The scientists will give an accurate description in scientific terms.
This is a spray designed to kill many types of pests to orchards and market gardens.
If we consider the bee example and because the size is similar to pollen it can be picked up by the bees when they are harvesting pollen, taken to the hive and when ingested by the bees including the larva, finally killing them.
However, as I understand it, it does not stop there. Because it is not bio-degradable, it remains in the bodies of the insects to be taken up further into the food chain.
I am told that if it falls on the
ground and is covered with rain or water it dissolves and sinks into the
ground and remains there in a similar manner e.g. DDT., Dieldrin, etc. and if
regularly used will build up in the soils.
My informant also told me that many people working in the Bacchus Marsh area, which has orchards and market gardens, complain of many different aches and pains and allergies.
Sounds interesting???????????
Questions
Is it also sold to the home garden?
What is the life of this Chemical?
What are the safety requirements for safe handling?
What is to be done about the inadequate labeling of this product?
We need a lot more information so can I suggest we need to refer this to our experts to follow up.
This is interesting in respects to our current labeling laws, showing how in-adequate the requirements are, and they show that they are dismally inadequate to provide any protection for the worker and the public or consumer.
It also highlights the need for more accountability from manufacturers to provide all details on MDS data sheets and our labeling laws and their requirements.
It also might bring some further information if it was posted to the forum, seeking further information from our Australian contacts and also from our International contacts.
