Being I am a first year beekeeper, and having built up to 7 hives, and being the area in which I live, (close to the Mississippi Delta), where much cotton and soybeans are grown, what am I facing in accordance with the threat of neonicotinoids? My first summer was primarily used to gather the bees and equipment, striving to get a good establishment for these hives here at my home, which is far enough from the delta area to be safe. I realize that I must first get the colonies through the winter alive. According to the report from Mississippi State University, between the benefit of both cotton and soybeans, both show, on their chart, that a surplus of honey can be expected between these two crops, making it possibly beneficial for me to relocate my hives in early summer to take advantage of these long season bloomers. But as per the subject heading, I am concerned about the Neonicotinoids.. Has anyone, or does anyone deal with this type of situation? Or for that matter is there anyone that doesn't deal with this type of situation, that might happen to be informed enough to give some good sound advice on this subject?
Thanks, Phillip Hall "Ben Framed"
I am in the same "quandary" you are in. A friend that raises lots of cotton wants me to put bees on his cotton. There is a new Facebook forum named Texas Cotton Honey Producers Guild. I joined yesterday. My main concern is Neonicotinoids. Some of my club members are going to meet with him in the next week or two and ask about these concerns. Since I first wrote this the name of the cotton group changed the name to "Texas Cotton Honey Guild".
Quote from: paus on November 27, 2018, 09:34:09 AM
I am in the same "quandary" you are in. A friend that's raises lots of cotton wants me to put bees on his cotton. There is a new Facebook forum named Texas Cotton Honey Producers Guild. I joined yesterday. My main concern is Neonicotinoids. Some of my club members are going to meet with him in the next week or two and ask about these concerns. Since I first wrote this the name of the cotton group changed the name to "Texas Cotton Honey Guild".
Thanks for your reply, I know little, (next to nothing) about Neonicotinoids. I am thinking they are placed into the seeds, themselves? Seems I read this somewhere. I am wondering if the Neonicotinoids within the seeds are enough to harm our bees? Also, when Neonicotinoids are used in the spray form, I am thinking they will defiantly cause damage or harm. But wouldn't that be true for any pesticide used on cotton or soybeans? There are beehives that are in plain sight throughout the delta region. So, there are sure to be ways to protect bees form the spray? Do beekeepers enclose their hives during times of spraying? Do they cover their hives also during this time? And if so, how long, or how many days until it is safe to free the bees to go back to work? I have many more questions but this is probably a good enough start for now..
Thanks, Phillip
I'm sure someone will come on here and talk about it. I remember reading a while back about there being one type of cotton that was treated and could possibly be bad for bees. Personally, I have had dozens of hives on cotton for the last 6 years, and my bees do well with it. The honey is very light and will crystalize rather quickly, but it is very tasty. Cotton works in my area and operation because it is one of the few things blooming at that time of summer. Without it, the bees would be eating honey I want to harvest. Instead, they keep storing away, and I get a good extraction at the end of the summer.
Quote from: chux on November 27, 2018, 12:12:07 PM
I'm sure someone will come on here and talk about it. I remember reading a while back about there being one type of cotton that was treated and could possibly be bad for bees. Personally, I have had dozens of hives on cotton for the last 6 years, and my bees do well with it. The honey is very light and will crystalize rather quickly, but it is very tasty. Cotton works in my area and operation because it is one of the few things blooming at that time of summer. Without it, the bees would be eating honey I want to harvest. Instead, they keep storing away, and I get a good extraction at the end of the summer.
Thanks chux, that sounds good to me. Thanks for responding with your six years of cotton experience. I would guess that areas where cotton is grown that is low on pest will probably not have to be sprayed, or sprayed as often?? Is this what you have enjoyed, low or no spray? In other words, do you know if the Cotton has been sprayed since you have been keeping bees there? And if yes, do you know if the farmer used Neonicotinoids? I just want to tell you that I really appreciate you sharing your experience with cotton and the type of honey that you enjoy from it. Your post has really lifted my hopes.
Thanks, Phillip
Sorry, I'm yet another person who doesn't know a whole lot about neonicotinoids, and I don't have to deal with farm spraying in my area (which I am SO thankful for). So if anyone has better info than me, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. I did do some research on neonicotinoids when I was looking to purchase some pollinator plants for around my house, and I found it was virtually impossible to find plants at major stores like Lowes and Home Depot that are not treated with them. Lowes has committed to phasing them out by some time next year I believe, but who knows what they'll be replaced with. As you mentioned, Ben, many times the seeds of the plants are treated with the neonicotinoids, and the chemical is systemic, meaning all the plant's tissues that develop from the seed then contain the insecticide, including of course the pollen and the nectar. According to something I read in the spring, which I can't seem to find again on the internet, the next generation of seeds does contain less of the chemical. Studies have shown that it can affect honeybee colonies, but it is exponentially more damaging to native bee populations. Xerces Society has a great article about general information on the neonicotinoids issue entitled "How Neonicotinoids Can Kill Bees: Executive Summary". Maybe that could help answer your questions.
Neonicotinoids are systemic poisons that they coat the seed with. As the plant grows it absorbs the poison into the plant. This poison then kills any bug that tries to eat it. This means that the neonicotinoid is in the stem, leaves, pollen, nectar and the fruit (cotton). It kills in parts per billion, not million, billion. I think it is deadly to the bugs at 7 parts per billion. When the bees collect the nectar and dehydrate it from 82% water to 18% water it concentrates the neonicotinoids. This makes it even more toxic.
As far as I know almost all cotton, corn and soybeans seeds are treated.
Jim
Quote from: sawdstmakr on November 27, 2018, 02:31:52 PM
Neonicotinoids are systemic poisons that they coat the seed with. As the plant grows it absorbs the poison into the plant. This poison then kills any bug that tries to eat it. This means that the neonicotinoid is in the stem, leaves, pollen, nectar and the fruit (cotton). It kills in parts per billion, not million, billion. I think it is deadly to the bugs at 7 parts per billion. When the bees collect the nectar and dehydrate it from 82% water to 18% water it concentrates the neonicotinoids. This makes it even more toxic.
As far as I know almost all cotton, corn and soybeans seeds are treated.
Jim
Thanks 15thmember and Jim also, for your replies. Member I intend to read the full article tonight. This is really scary, like something form a horror fiction!! Is neonicotinoids the only sure solution to pest in the bean and cotton fields? I was excited about the prospect of moving my bees there but now I am very hesitant to say the least! What will the honey do to the people eating it? Goodness!
My biggest objection to Neonicotinoids is its use on food. Monsanto certainly has its sights on any crop that is mass produced. Anyone or company making profit from its use will claim it is safe. Safe for WHO? It is a known fact that chemicals have their greatest impact on fetuses and young children because their systems are developing. It is illegal to test the toxicity of anything on a child so there is no way of proving it is safe until it is proven it is unsafe by fatalities and birth defects.
Ace{It is illegal to test the toxicity of anything on a child so there is no way of proving it is safe until it is proven it is unsafe by fatalities and birth defects.}
Ace, as you correctly implied, a developing fetus is most difficult to determine effects of an agent although as stated below we can grow the cells in a lab.
Yes Sir Ace we cannot test children however we can test umbilical cord tissue and tissue from a young child. These tissues are grown in flask and can provide us with data. Now, I am not saying all human tissues can be grown in a flask. Nerve cells for example are difficult if not completely impossible to grow in a laboratory.,circa 2005, er uh, before 2005. A developing fetus proves most difficult to determine detrimental effects so companies, {big brother} always places exclusions in the fine print.
I believe the nicotinoids are banned in Europe, at least some Neonicotinoids are banned as there are many types. The ban was due to negative effects on honey bees by specific types of the pesticide. Humans are reportedly not harmed by Neonicotinoids but that is what is always stated by big brother. I have read bonafied research that indicates Neonicotinoids are easily detoxified by the human liver.
Personally I am not for or against the Neonicotinoids as I have not conducted detailed studies, only occasionally reading the research so understand I am not an expert to condone or condemn.
Jim and Member stated the basic facts, very accurately I might add.
Blessings
Stinger {I believe the nicotinoids are banned in Europe, at least some Neonicotinoids are banned as there are many types. The ban was due to negative effects on honey bees by specific types of the pesticide. Humans are reportedly not harmed by Neonicotinoids but that is what is always stated by big brother. I have read bonafied research that indicates Neonicotinoids are easily detoxified by the human liver.
Personally I am not for or against the Neonicotinoids as I have not conducted detailed studies, only occasionally reading the research so understand I am not an expert to condone or condemn.}
Mr Stinger, I hope the studies are right about the research that indicates Neonicotinoids are easily detoxified by the human liver. This makes me feel a little better. I just got home and hope to read the article suggested by 15thMember before I retire for the night. Thank you for enlightening us about the study!
Blessings back to you,
Phillip
Quote from: Stinger13 on November 27, 2018, 07:20:39 PM
Ace we cannot test children however we can test umbilical cord tissue and tissue from a young child. These tissues are grown in flask and can provide us with data.
Better than doing nothing I suppose but the real test is years of use.
Quote"Warning: Cigarette Smoking Is Dangerous to Health and May Cause Death from Cancer and Other Diseases." ..
The controversy surrounding nicotinoids reminds me of the studies concerning DDT back in the 60's. DDT was proven to be relatively non toxic to humans but deadly to the environment as it was concentrated in the food chain. It seems we have the same type of situation now.
Except this time we are mainly using it in our food. Eventually we will find out it is affecting us.
Jim
I was directed to an article from Randy Olliver addressing the neonics issue. Here's the link if anyone else would like to peruse it.
http://scientificbeekeeping.com/the-neonicotinoids-an-objective-assessment/
Quote from: The15thMember on December 01, 2018, 02:52:00 PM
I was directed to an article from Randy Olliver addressing the neonics issue. Here's the link if anyone else would like to peruse it.
http://scientificbeekeeping.com/the-neonicotinoids-an-objective-assessment/
Thanks The15thMember
The following is just a sample of the article by Randy Oliver that you suggested in your above reply. Very interesting and enlightening article. Thanks for posting.
Effects Of Neonics On Bees
Neonics are ideally applied as seed treatments, where the amount per seed can be carefully controlled, so that by the time that a plant produces nectar and pollen, the residues are too diluted to harm pollinators.
Unfortunately, during the introduction of the neonics, there were some serious incidents of inadvertent bee kills when the seed coating rubbed off in pneumatic seed planters, and the dust killed bees. In most countries, this issue has now been resolved.
This leaves the question of neonic residues in nectar and pollen. In general, the residues in the nectar and pollen of properly-treated agricultural crops (typically less than 3 ppb) do not appear to cause significant adverse effects on honey bee colonies. I?ve personally visited beekeepers in corn, soy, and canola growing areas, and they report that since the Bt genetically-engineered crops and the neonic seed treatments, that the pesticide issues that they suffered from in the 1960?s and ?70?s have largely gone away. That said?
The Neonics Are Not Without Problems
Insecticides by definition are designed to kill insects. No insecticide is environmentally harmless, and as we learn more about unintended effects, our regulators must revise the approved allowable applications.
We have now found that the honey bee colony is a special case, and is able to ?buffer? the sublethal effects of the neonics on the colony. So although properly-applied neonics appear to generally cause minimal measureable adverse effects on honey bee colonies, they may have more deleterious effects upon bumblebees and solitary native bees. This is a serious concern, of which the EPA is well aware.
Quote from: paus on November 27, 2018, 09:34:09 AM
I am in the same "quandary" you are in. A friend that raises lots of cotton wants me to put bees on his cotton. There is a new Facebook forum named Texas Cotton Honey Producers Guild. I joined yesterday. My main concern is Neonicotinoids. Some of my club members are going to meet with him in the next week or two and ask about these concerns. Since I first wrote this the name of the cotton group changed the name to "Texas Cotton Honey Guild".
paus "Some of my club members are going to meet with him in the next week or two and ask about these concerns."
Hello Paus, How did the meeting turn out? What did the folks at the Texas Cotton Honey Guild tell y'all? Reassuring, and I hope, good Stuff?
Thanks, Phillip
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neonicotinoid
Eine im November 2015 ver?ffentlichte und von INRA-Wissenschaftlern geleitete Feldstudie zeigte, dass einzelne Honigbienen in unmittelbarer N?he zu Ackerfl?chen, auf denen Thiamethoxam eingesetzt wurde, in st?rkerem Ausma? verschwanden. Gleichzeitig stellte die Studie fest, dass Populationsgr??e und Honigproduktion von Bienenst?cken nicht beeintr?chtigt wurden, da die meisten betroffenen Bienenst?cke ihre reproduktive Strategie dahingehend ver?nderten, dass sie weniger Drohnen und mehr Arbeiterinnen produzierten.[35]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neonicotinoid
A field study published in November 2015 and led by INRA scientists showed that individual honeybees disappeared to a greater extent in close proximity to arable land where thiamethoxam was used. At the same time, the study found that population size and honey production of hives were not compromised, as most hives affected their reproductive strategies by producing fewer drones and more female workers. [35]
If you can get podcasts, check this out. http://traffic.libsyn.com/beekeepingtodaypodcast/Tom_Theobald_-_Neonicotinoids.mp3?dest-id=715151
Quote from: yes2matt on January 10, 2019, 05:05:19 PM
If you can get podcasts, check this out. http://traffic.libsyn.com/beekeepingtodaypodcast/Tom_Theobald_-_Neonicotinoids.mp3?dest-id=715151
@ yes2matt
I don't have podcast. Can you type in the heading and maybe I can pull it up on YouTube if it's avaible. Thank you Matt
Phillip Hall
Quote from: Ben Framed on January 10, 2019, 06:13:43 PM
Quote from: yes2matt on January 10, 2019, 05:05:19 PM
If you can get podcasts, check this out. http://traffic.libsyn.com/beekeepingtodaypodcast/Tom_Theobald_-_Neonicotinoids.mp3?dest-id=715151
@ yes2matt
I don't have podcast. Can you type in the heading and maybe I can pull it up on YouTube if it's avaible. Thank you Matt
Phillip Hall
I found a YouTube video that (may) be the subject. Is the Narrator Dan Rather?
The ban and the investigations have arisen because the chemicals were used carelessly.
Bees picked up neonics through water, which contained the treated corn and cereal grains. The contamination was because the seeds were not covered with earth.
thereafter almost all bee colonies died in one area.
The main problem with chemical application in agriculture is the application, which usually does not comply with the regulations. It is the mixtures, too high dosages, the use of wrong or outdated technology, or used at the wrong time, when insects fly. Most farmers are not educated enough about that.
Add to that the problem of groundwater pollution and guttation water taken by the insects.
But it is good that the research is under pressure, good for both sides.
Only 2 of the Neonics were banned, and only until the research was completed.
There are plenty of other neonics on the market.
Another problem is the private or public gardens that are allowed to use these chemicals. Meanwhile, there is more sprayed done than in some agriculture (EU).
Quote from: SiWolKe on January 11, 2019, 02:34:48 AM
The ban and the investigations have arisen because the chemicals were used carelessly.
Bees picked up neonics through water, which contained the treated corn and cereal grains. The contamination was because the seeds were not covered with earth.
thereafter almost all bee colonies died in one area.
The main problem with chemical application in agriculture is the application, which usually does not comply with the regulations. It is the mixtures, too high dosages, the use of wrong or outdated technology, or used at the wrong time, when insects fly. Most farmers are not educated enough about that.
Add to that the problem of groundwater pollution and guttation water taken by the insects.
But it is good that the research is under pressure, good for both sides.
Only 2 of the Neonics were banned, and only until the research was completed.
There are plenty of other neonics on the market.
Another problem is the private or public gardens that are allowed to use these chemicals. Meanwhile, there is more sprayed done than in some agriculture (EU).
So if the products are used and applied properly, their is no reason to be concerned, they are perfectly safe ?
Phillip
I suppose that's what the studies are trying to determine, among other things.
Quote from: Hops Brewster on January 11, 2019, 11:32:03 AM
I suppose that's what the studies are trying to determine, among other things.
:wink:
I just hope it's true
Agriculture will always use chemistry, it is an illusion to believe that there will be no more. I believe even more that the bee treatments stop sometime.
But maybe the enthusiasm for new chemistry will only subside if research on the dangers is required.
Quote from: SiWolKe on January 11, 2019, 02:08:44 PM
Agriculture will always use chemistry, it is an illusion to believe that there will be no more. I believe even more that the bee treatments stop sometime.
But maybe the enthusiasm for new chemistry will only subside if research on the dangers is required.
Research must be done for the good of all, but my question is, are these now proven safe to use if used by direction? If so fantastic.
Quote from: Ben Framed on January 11, 2019, 02:37:18 PM
Research must be done for the good of all, but my question is, are these now proven safe to use if used by direction? If so fantastic.
Proven safe? Is anything done against nature proven safe? I don?t believe you can say that. We will see in 50 or more years and research will change sides then, as always, if so.
But it?s better to direct the use. Lower costs for the farmers, more safety to the environement. Little improvement is better than no improvement at all.
Quote from: SiWolKe on January 11, 2019, 02:48:08 PM
Lower costs for the farmers,
I am not convinced of this. I think the farmer is hog tied once he becomes beholding to the chemical companies. It benefits agriculture. Large corporation as opposed to a farmers.
Quote from: SiWolKe on January 11, 2019, 02:48:08 PM
Quote from: Ben Framed on January 11, 2019, 02:37:18 PM
Research must be done for the good of all, but my question is, are these now proven safe to use if used by direction? If so fantastic.
Proven safe? Is anything done against nature proven safe? I don?t believe you can say that. We will see in 50 or more years and research will change sides then, as always, if so.
But it?s better to direct the use. Lower costs for the farmers, more safety to the environement. Little improvement is better than no improvement at all.
I'm with Ace on this one. Are we expected to be guinea pigs on a 50 year experiment? We the people worldwide? These products are being used worldwide! We have no clue that it will be safe for the environment, it could have the total opposite effect? Possiably destroying our entire ecosystem after 50 years of worldwide use. On the other hand, I appreciate your optimism. I would like to share the same optimism but at this time I must be more reserved. So again I ask What Is the Truth Concerning Neonicotinoids ? Hopefully good things....
Agriculture will change only if consumer behavior changes.
And if there are no food surpluses that are disposed of to keep prices.
A starving world that needs more food production? No, we break the poor parts of the worlds markets and expropriate them.
So it's up to us and how we deal with the farmers, whether we respect their work, spend more on sustainable food, downshift elsewhere, or whether we just want to shop cheaply so we can accumulate even more superfluous items with the spare money.
We let the agrar companies make us their guinea pigs for sure. You can stop this by buying organic.
It?s like the chicken and the egg...which one was first?
Quote from: SiWolKe on January 11, 2019, 03:47:08 PM
Agriculture will change only if consumer behavior changes.
And if there are no food surpluses that are disposed of to keep prices.
A starving world that needs more food production? No, we break the poor parts of the worlds markets and expropriate them.
So it's up to us and how we deal with the farmers, whether we respect their work, spend more on sustainable food, downshift elsewhere, or whether we just want to shop cheaply so we can accumulate even more superfluous items with the spare money.
We let the agrar companies make us their guinea pigs for sure. You can stop this by buying organic.
It?s like the chicken and the egg...which one was first?
I was driving through the Mississippi Delta just last week. I drove for hours. Farmland as far as the eye can see. I don't know how many miles wide or how many miles deep it runs. I was thinking, how in the world do they pump enough oil and refine enough diesel fuel to prepare all this farmland and reap the crops. It was once said, many years ago, that there was enough farm land in the Mississippi Delta alone to to feed the entire world. We were taught this in schools. Mississippi is only one of many farm states in America.
Quote from: SiWolKe on January 11, 2019, 03:47:08 PM
Agriculture will change only if consumer behavior changes.
And if there are no food surpluses that are disposed of to keep prices.
A starving world that needs more food production? No, we break the poor parts of the worlds markets and expropriate them.
So it's up to us and how we deal with the farmers, whether we respect their work, spend more on sustainable food, downshift elsewhere, or whether we just want to shop cheaply so we can accumulate even more superfluous items with the spare money.
We let the agrar companies make us their guinea pigs for sure. You can stop this by buying organic.
It?s like the chicken and the egg...which one was first?
Theres a lot of truth in what you say. - the consumer must drive the change ...
In our home, 1st we got the land (16 yrs ago). Then we saved for 8 yrs to get the well. Then the tractor with implements.
The I planted orchards, installed 5000+ linear ft of drip irrigation lines. Then the overhead sprinklers for vegetable gardens.
As the orchards matured without much fruit, I got the bees. That solved that problem.
Now we sell organic eggs, apples, cherries, pears, plums, pomegranates, (and many more fruit), avocado's, honey, etc. This yr I planted the citrus orchard. ... but most importantly, we talk with everyone who buys.
We tell them "why" it's better to buy from people like us - for their health, for the future.
Educating people is the key to changing the future. ... and people love it. They want to learn, and they appreciate what they are getting.
... but it's a lot of work. It can't be done from a rocking chair.
CoolBees, I am glad that you posted the prior post describing your family farm. That is the way things use to be here before my time as I have heard from my older relatives.. It's good to know that your way of life still exists and works here in America. Thank you for your hard work and dedication to your family and farm. So refreshing to hear. The cattle industry has changed also. What use to be done on horse back and wirh dogs, is now done in more modern ways. Progress? I'm not so sure... My mothers family were farmers, My daddy's family were cattlemen. I'm getting off track and away from the subject so I will back off. Again I enjoied reading your post.
Thanks,
Phillip
Thank you kindly Phillip. I've enjoyed your many contributions here as well.
I live and work in the Silicon Valley, but my goal was to re-create the old ways, so as to pass them down to my children as they grew (and expose their friends also). I was raised in the "old ways" - small farms, my grandfather's cows would each answer to their name individually when he called, etc.
Young people don't need to learn every detail of the "old ways" as they grow - they just need to see "what is possible" (which isn't taught by any teacher in any classroom in America anymore, that I'm aware of) - they are smart enough to fill in the blanks on their own later.
Back to SiWolKes point - the children will become the consumers of tomorrow, and can change the future ... if they have the knowledge and understanding of "what is possible". That's why I built what I did here. What I've seen though, is also a thirsting of many in the adult population for healthy alternatives as well.
It is interesting [to me] to watch the evolution in people's thoughts processes. .... the "Pendulum" always swings. We may be able to get back to healthier growing processes as this new generation comes of age, ... and rebels against the generation currently in power (as is the nature of young people) .... IF we pass along the knowledge.
Those were my thoughts.
Thanks for the great contributions.
:smile:
I gave a lecture in December, the main content of which was how to promote insects in the private garden and why beekeeping today is so heavily affected by treatments.
For this I showed a picture by beamer from a shelf in a garden shop, which sells chemicals.
The people sat there very embarrassed, many recognized their careless behaviours..and told me that afterwards they have some problems with health because of that, they never did use protection gear.
Many simply do not realize how the world has changed in 100 years. In the past,many hobbyist gardeners used plants for spraying and fertilizing, like nettle ferment, like it is still done today in an organic enterprise.
People tell me they can not afford organic food. But if in the shopping cart are mainly alcohol, sweets, chips, I do not think so.
You do not need to buy everything in organic, a part is enough.
For the environment it would be wonderful if less meat was eaten. How was it nice when the Sunday roast was special? Today you eat sausages and meat 3 times a day and you need a lot of plants for the production.
I know people who spent 1000? or more to purchase a barbecue grill but buy the cheapest meat. I do it opposite. A fire, a roast grill, a dutch oven, that?s the best. And a good piece of meat when the animal slaughtered has had a good life.
It?s just food is no status symbol like a car. But it will change. I the cities the young people are fed up with working only media. They want to get their hands dirty on gardening and long to feel a part of nature again. It?s an education process. Paleo, it?s a trend. Sustainability too.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00218839.2018.1494889
Here is an extract from an article.
Quote from: Ben Framed on January 10, 2019, 06:13:43 PM
Quote from: yes2matt on January 10, 2019, 05:05:19 PM
If you can get podcasts, check this out. http://traffic.libsyn.com/beekeepingtodaypodcast/Tom_Theobald_-_Neonicotinoids.mp3?dest-id=715151
@ yes2matt
I don't have podcast. Can you type in the heading and maybe I can pull it up on YouTube if it's avaible. Thank you Matt
Phillip Hall
Sorry for the delay in response. If you right-click the link, you can direct "Save link as..." or similar and download the mp3 audio to whatever device you're using. If you left-click (normal) the link it will play the audio.
It is Tom Theobold, talking with Kim Flottum.
Quote from: SiWolKe on January 12, 2019, 10:02:43 AM
I know people who spent 1000? or more to purchase a barbecue grill but buy the cheapest meat.
Never try to make sense out a human want vs. need.
Quote from: CoolBees on January 11, 2019, 10:52:55 PM
The I planted orchards,
Amazing you started with fruit. Fruit is the food item that has the highest application of pesticides and chemicals. How do you keep it to a minimum?
Ace you nailed it. I think some of the problems we have today stems from what a company or individual wants, rather than their needs.
Quote from: Acebird on January 21, 2019, 11:02:22 AM
Quote from: CoolBees on January 11, 2019, 10:52:55 PM
The I planted orchards,
Amazing you started with fruit. Fruit is the food item that has the highest application of pesticides and chemicals. How do you keep it to a minimum?
Well Ace - I'm not sure what you mean. Maybe you could explain further.
Heres what I do know - There are no pesticides, chemicals, etc used in my orchards. It's a slow process. Pure Bond method. It took me 7 yrs to admit that Peaches (6 varieties) weren't going to grow here. The apples (7 varietals) slow, but solid and healthy. Cherries (utah, bing, and tartarian) are going crazy. Pomegranates also crazy. Plums struggling - some are surviving. I could go on ...
As far as fertilizer - the local news channel provides plenty, but I can't stand the smell ... so I shovel out the chicken coop and provide that to the trees. Seems to be working so far.
Cheers!
Good for you to try organic with fruit.
My experience:
We got a couple of peach trees that were engineered for zone 5 out of western NY. They went crazy with the best peaches I have ever tasted. After about 4 years they struggled. Our weather was horrible for fruit in those years so I don't know if it is zone related or global warming.
What I have been told:
Our plums have always gone nuts but the tree gets this parasite that looks like black fungus. This parasite can affect all your other fruit trees so it is imperative to cut this out of the plumb tree and burn it as we were told. As the tree got bigger it was harder to keep up with.
Fertilizer can curtail blooming. Apparently trees have to struggle a little so they will bloom. All we did is plant comfry (sp) near the trunk of the apple trees which brings up minerals from down deep.
Good luck.
You found customers that don't mind the spots?