Pollinator Health Blueprint launched

© AgMedia Inc.

Comments

The Grain Farmers of Ontario (GFO) is still dreaming in technicolour by seeming to not be prepared to admit that neonicotinoids are in any way responsible for bee deaths - and, as such, their blueprint is an exercise in futility as well as a cruel hoax.

In addition, the proposal to create small plots of natural habitat is nothing more than highly-visible tokenism because it:

(A) does nothing to address the damage caused by neonicotinoids on the vast tracts of land elsewhere.
(B) does nothing to reduce the use of neonicotinoids.

GFO is still being obstructionist, but seem to have softened their resolve to be martyrs - unfortunately, they've still got a long way to go to be either responsible or credible.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

Stephen Thompson 100% right The GFO I feel should be taking the lead as this is very big issue among the urban population. The GFO is not acting in a responsible way. The GFO. needs to learn something about PR from 9 years ago at queens park

Still would like someone to explain how supposedly fewer Ontario Bee's in 2014 produced 2 million pounds more honey than in 2013 ? (Statistics Canada)

were the fewer Bee's on steriods ? I am sure the Beekeepers Association has an answer.

Beekeepers are constantly splitting their hives and purchasing packaged bees trying to stay in business. It’s like buying a car that’s a lemon, you’re constantly throwing money at it but eventually it will bankrupt you, so you get rid of it. That’s what is happening with the beekeepers, their yearly losses are not sustainable and they will go out of business, unless you are willing to pay $100 for a pound of honey.

Bill

These farmers are just not getting it, they cannot contain these deadly toxins on their property and end up contaminating rivers and streams none target fields and plants causing all kinds of damage which makes this issue everyone’s problem! There is little choice but to decrease their use by implementing restrictions. They should be glad it’s not a total ban.

Prophylactic is defined as defending or protecting from pests. So, all of a sudden, the precautionary approach has fallen out of favour with anti-pesticide activists ?!?! A prophylactic rule is a carefully-crafted rule that protects crops from damaging pests. The notion of the prophylactic rule is controversial only to pesticide-hating fanatical-activists who have NO expertise, NO training, and NO education in matters concerning crop protection or pest control products. But, these fanatics DO have an over-riding agenda to prohibit pest control products, despite the fact that they have been assessed to be scientifically-safe and have been proven to cause no harm.

“A prophylactic rule is a carefully-crafted rule that protects crops from damaging pests” Wrong! If it was carefully crafted you wouldn’t be treating all the seeds now would you? And if you were to apply the precautionary principle these toxins would be long gone.

Proof with the previous post that prophylatics don't always work !

NORAHG OPPOSES THE ONTARIO PROPOSAL THAT WILL RECKLESSLY PROHIBIT AGAINST IRREPLACEABLE NEONICOTINOID INSECTICIDES ― FANATICAL & ARBITRARY PROHIBITION MUST BE STOPPED, FOREVER !

On November 25th, 2014, Ontario’s government officials proposed a province-wide prohibition against neonicotinoid insecticides desperately needed by the agriculture industry. http://tinyurl.com/o3tf4sv Fanatical officials and activists are falsely alleging that these insecticides, desperately needed by the agriculture industry, are the cause of so-called bee colony collapse disorder ― in fact, bee losses occur because some bee-keepers may be wholly unsuited to be raising bees. Overall, there is NO bee crisis in Ontario because of insecticides, and ANY prohibition is NOT necessary ! Government officials under the Liberal Party, and bee conspiracy terrorists, are NOT credible sources of real scientific information upon which this political decision about prohibition can be made. It is inescapable that the allegations against neonicotinoid insecticides are FALSE ! If we had less conventional neonicotinoid use in Ontario, we would still have bee colony collapse disorder, because many bee-keepers are NOT competent to manage their hives. FORGET ABOUT A #@!!% USELESS POLLINATOR BLUEPRINT ! There is NO other recourse but litigation and complaints ! SUE THE #@!!% SOBs’ BRAINS OUT ! CropLife Canada, Grain Farmers of Ontario, and all agricultural businesses, must sue the neonicotinoid-hating SOBs’ brains out ! They must stop the proposed prohibition in Ontario, whatever the cost may be ! They must demand that the proposed fanatical prohibition be stopped, forever. For more information, go to The Pesticide Truths Web-Site ... http://wp.me/p1jq40-8FZ We are the National Organization Responding Against HUJE that seek to destroy the Green space and other industries ( NORAH G ). We are dedicated to reporting PESTICIDE FREE FAILURES, as well as the work of RESPECTED and HIGHLY RATED EXPERTS who promote ENVIRONMENTAL REALISM and PESTICIDE TRUTHS. Get the latest details at http://pesticidetruths.com/ http://pesticidetruths.com/toc/ http://wp.me/P1jq40-2rr https://www.facebook.com/norah.gfon WILLIAM H GATHERCOLE AND NORAH G

SUE THE #@!!% SOBs’ BRAINS OUT ! ( Blog )

http://pesticidetruths.com/2014/11/28/the-agriculture-industry-is-under-...

A tell-tale sign of a fanatic is that he/she seems compelled to blame the victim, and the above poster does that, and then some, when he wrote - "... many bee keepers are NOT competent to manage their hives." as well as - "In fact, bee losses occur because some bee keepers may be wholly unsuited to be raising bees."

Unfortunately, Mr. Gathercole's strident "blame the victim" rhetoric seems to be all-too-common among pro-neonicotinoid advocates and is exactly why the campaign to keep neonicotinoid use at its present level is doomed to fail and rightfully (as well as thankfully) so.

Finally, while I rail against anonymous postings on this site, the above posting demonstrates exactly why a few postings really should remain anonymous.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

They have the right to their perspective,they are maybe just not as well funded as another fanatic group is,the Sierra Club.

While farmers are overly-quick to claim that the actions of those who support partial restrictions on the use of neonicotinoids are fanatics, that "door swings both ways".

For example, the actions of the Grain Farmers of Ontario (GFO) to date in this matter, while, in the narrowest sense possibly not fanaticism, are, nonetheless, textbook examples of how to bungle a public relations exercise - what with:

(1) urging farmers to boycott the public participation process
(2) issuing a statement claiming they will refuse to have any part of helping government implement a policy which they believe to be fundamentally flawed
(3) running a full-page ad claiming -
(A) "...that we, the 28,000 farm families in Ontario" which ignored the fact
that the combined membership of the OFA, the CFFO and the NFU is about 40,000 farm families, thereby being disengenuous at best about the support they have in the farm community.
(B) trying to infer that since honey bee colony numbers have increased by 60% since 2003, neonicotinoids are safe, but all the while ignoring the scientific truth that any increase (or decrease) in the number of hives has absolutely nothing to do with what goes on inside those hives.

Given that 97% of the submissions received by government appear to favour neonicotinoid restrictions, it appears that GFO's well-financed fearmongering campaign has been a colossal failure and, if anything, it has cost the GFO a tremendous amount of political capital and public goodwill, or to look at it in another way, GFO's well-funded "fanaticism" has cost them both the battle and the war.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

Every one should limit neonicotinoid use until we find out what can be done to reduce bee losses.

Post new comment

To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
Image CAPTCHA
We welcome thoughtful comments and ideas. Comments must be on topic. Cheap shots, unsubstantiated allegations, anonymous attacks or negativity directed against people and organizations will not be published. Comments are modified or deleted at the discretion of the editors. If you wish to be identified by name, which will give your opinion far more weight and provide a far greater chance of being published, leave a telephone number so that identity can be confirmed. The number will not be published.