The case of the disappearing bees

Much has been made in the news lately of the disappearance of the normally ubiquitous honey bees from much of the United States. Although many people regard these little critters as more of an annoyance than anything else, insects buzzing around irritatingly at picnics, capable of administering a painful sting (which can be fatal to the severely allergic individual), bees are essential for life as we know it. Much of the agricultural produce we eat exists thanks to the pollination work of bees. A complete loss of the bee population would be catastrophic.

MD and I have had a little experience with bees. One of the investments we made (that didn’t particularly pay off – in fact, we’re probably two of the only people who haven’t made money on California real estate) was in a 20 acre avocado orchard mike-md.jpgon a hill overlooking the Pacific Ocean. (This picture of us sitting on the top of this orchard with the Pacific in the background on a kind of foggy day was used in an article about us several years ago in Forbes Small Business.) When we bought the property we discovered all the substantial expenses that went in to growing avocados up to and including losses from avocado rustlers, a major problem. Groups of these thieves can come in at night and clean an orchard out of several tons of fruit. To keep them out requires fences and gates and even a security service.

Avocado trees require pollination to produce fruit, and although this can be done by hand, it is most often done by bees. But you can’t count on the bees you see buzzing around all the colorful flowers all over the place in California, you have to import bees. Why? Because you need a lot of them, and because bees don’t particularly like the taste of avocado nectar. Given the choice, they will take almost anything but avocado nectar. But if you put multiple hives of them in the middle of a large orchard, then they take what they can get without having to fly a long way. Part of our uncounted-on expense was to pay the guy to bring the hives at the appropriate time of the year, tend them, then come pick them up. And bees ain’t cheap.

Now the bee people are bringing their hives, letting the bees loose, and never getting them back. Whereas before the bees would buzz around gathering pollen and bring it back to the hive, now they’re taking a powder. No one knows what’s happening to them. The avocado orchards and almond orchards (almonds are 100 percent dependent on bee pollination) are not knee deep in bee corpses, bees are not lying dead around the hives, they’ve simply disappeared. Experts are calling the situation colony collapse disorder (CCD). There is speculation that the problem could be some kind of bacteria or parasite that infects the bees. Suspicion has also fallen on a particular type of pesticide. But no one really knows what’s going on, they just know that agriculture could be in real trouble if a solution to the problem isn’t found.

The New York Times weighed in on the situation with a long article in the Science section this past Tuesday:

“There are so many of our crops that require pollinators,” said Representative Dennis Cardoza, a California Democrat whose district includes that state’s central agricultural valley, and who presided last month at a Congressional hearing on the bee issue. “We need an urgent call to arms to try to ascertain what is really going on here with the bees, and bring as much science as we possibly can to bear on the problem.”

So far, colony collapse disorder has been found in 27 states, according to Bee Alert Technology Inc., a company monitoring the problem. A recent survey of 13 states by the Apiary Inspectors of America showed that 26 percent of beekeepers had lost half of their bee colonies between September and March.

Honeybees are arguably the insects that are most important to the human food chain. They are the principal pollinators of hundreds of fruits, vegetables, flowers and nuts. The number of bee colonies has been declining since the 1940s, even as the crops that rely on them, such as California almonds, have grown. In October, at about the time that beekeepers were experiencing huge bee losses, a study by the National Academy of Sciences questioned whether American agriculture was relying too heavily on one type of pollinator, the honeybee.

It surprised me that the situation has reached the point that there are even congressional hearings on CCD in Washington, but the sentence that really jumped out at me was this one:

The number of bee colonies has been declining since the 1940s…

It caught my eye because of an something I had just read a couple of days ago. I read an article in the September 1944 issue of Popular Science on one of my favorite blogs. This article discusses all the scientific research taking place in the mid 1940s to improve on nature, which results often accomplish just the opposite. (Think: trans fats)
better-bee.jpg

Here are a few sentences sprinkled throughout the piece:

Amazing new discoveries bring improvement to nature’s masterpiece, enabling the busy little insect to do a better job for war.

…and trying to improve on nature by careful mating of selected queen bees with selected drones.

How do bee breeders help nature to produce better and better bees?

(Click here to read the entire article.)

Makes me wonder if the damn-the-torpedoes-full-speed-ahead efforts of the etymologists of the 1940s to give nature a helping hand has had anything to do with the decline of the bee population since?

As the old commercial says, “It’s not nice to fool Mother Nature.”

22 Responses to “The case of the disappearing bees”

  1. KAZ, May 2, 2007 at 10:28 am

    OK, one more quick comment on this aging thread, then I’ll stop bugging you about it:

    As when I was dismissing the question of whether Einstein said humanity would die out without bees as irrelevant, I actually believe (and therefore assert here) that the arguments of all people are of equal value, at least in regards to their authority on the topic.

    All of the value in someone’s argument, as far as I’m concerned, comes from the argument, itself. If my favorite living economist, Walter Williams, makes a specific argument, or a particularly stupid (and I don’t simply mean uninformed) third grader down the street makes the same point using the same (however more poorly worded) logic, they are identically valid.

    Not because of some kind of irrationalist subjectivism on my part, but because it’s the logic, itself, that matters. This is why argumentum ad vericundiam, or for that matter the opposite and more famous argumentum ad hominem, are fallacies. WHO says a thing is irrelevent to the validity of their logical argument.

    In fact, while I respect your twenty years of effort, learning, and experience in medicine, when I read your medical posts it is purely your reasoning that I am concerned with. If you don’t convince me with your logic and facts, then your documentary authority is irrelevent. Likewise if you post about Bush being a political genius and/or sociopathic threat to American well-being, the value will be in your arguments, not your authority.

    This is probably a good thing not only because (I argue) it is the correct way of examining all knowledge, but also because otherwise you’d be screwed: “Medical experts” (et allum) with far more experience and fancier credentials than you disagree with most of what you would bother blogging about here. Which is why you bother writing it, of course. It’s a good thing I (we) examine their arguments, then yours, and conclude YOU are correct, despite their forty years of medical experience and six PhDs.

    /chuckle

    I refuse to remove the phrase “quick comment” from the top of this post…it shows that even I appear to be fallible.

    I agree that arguments should be based on their merits, not on the credentials of the arguer.  But, I’m more likely ot listen to someone who has mega-credentials than someone who is uneducated on a subject in which the person with the mega-credentials is an expert.  The uneducated person could be right, however, and the mega-credential-er wrong, but I wouldn’t bet it that way.  The uneducated (let’s say self-educated) person has a higher barrier to overcome to get his arguments heard, but if he makes them valid enough, then he’ll be heard, and may even change the world as Einstein did in his annus mirabilis 1905 with his five famous papers.  It’s hard to realize that at the time Einstein burst onto the scene, he was a total unknown, given up by his academic peers as a failure.

    Cheers–

    MRE 

  2. Venus, May 16, 2007 at 5:54 am

    hi,
    this is a little off the point, but i would be so grateful if anyone can answer this and make a reply directly as well as to the comment board.
    my husband and i have recently taken on the running of a fruit farm in the south of Portugal. it mainly consists of 500 avocado and 500 orange trees. I was excited about the prospect of introducing bees, especially with the urgent need for these precious beings at our time in history.
    It was disappointing to read that bees do not like the avocado nector but i wonder if anyone knows anything about the best companion plants for avocado trees. perhaps these plants can provide pollen that the bees like and thus encourage the bees to stay around. if not can anyone point me ina direction that would assist. thank you.
    venus

    Hi Venus–

    I’ll put it out there for anyone to answer.  I don’t know the answer.  We always used bees.  I can tell you that the bees will preferentially go for the orange trees instead of the avocado trees, so you may have to resort to hand pollination.  But don’t take my word for it; I would contact someone knowledgeable and trustworthy in your own area for advice.

    Good luck.

    MRE