[04:28
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:27
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:27
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:26
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:25
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:19
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:18
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:18
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:17
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:17
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:16
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:07
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:07
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:06
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:06
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:05
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:05
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:04
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:04
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:04
|
0
komentarze
]
[04:03
|
0
komentarze
]
- Hippotherapy
- Therapeutic Riding
- Riding for Rehabilitation
- Equinefacilitated Psychotherapy
- Equine Experiential Learning
[04:01
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:50
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:50
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:49
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:48
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:48
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:47
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:39
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:39
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:38
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:37
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:36
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:35
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:34
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:34
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:27
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:26
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:25
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:24
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:23
|
0
komentarze
]
[03:21
|
0
komentarze
]
[05:40
|
0
komentarze
]
The free market.The possibility to export in principle turns the whole world into a market. The western countries have a much stronger market position compared to the Third World countries.
This position is consolidated by the WTO-related trade negotiations. There, trade restrictions are continuously reduced on ethical grounds. In the recent past, the Netherlands have had a negative influence on animal welfare in its own as well as other countries because of the scale of factory farming and the export of these products (70%) and this way of farm management. Living animals are transported to far away countries, sometimes suffering from extreme neglect.
The low price of animal products in combination with too large a number of producers.
All desired changes will result in a higher price for animal products. In principle, livestock farmers do not object to higher prices, but hardly any one of them is prepared to stop producing him/herself or to make animal-friendly investments as long as marketing possibilities are still uncertain. A lot of money can still be made in an arguable manner, while government control lags behind.
Many years of consumer indoctrination.
In Holland, people have grown up with the idea that animal products are healthy and necessary. They are also proud of their country's high production level, but without realizing that this goes at the expense of animal welfare. Giving these wrongs some serious thought would lead to some unpleasant conclusions in the short term: one has let oneself be misled for years in a row; one should change one's eating and purchasing behavior, and it will also cost more money. The consumer is still, wrongly, insufficiently convinced whether this will bring enough benefits.
Protest against factory farming depends on volunteers.
The number of paid campaigners is low (about ten against tens of thousands working on the promotion of animal products). Furthermore, the animal rights movement is not always fully operative or operates illegally.
Inconsistent government policies.
The government does not tax the stock farmer with the disadvantages of his/her farm management but instead has the taxpayer pay for smoothing over the harmful consequences for, for instance, the environment, the price of clean water, damage to the countryside, etc.
Persistent faith in technological solutions and economic growth.
After the Second World War, technology and the economy have brought our society so many benefits that one has somehow come to think that its disadvantages such as damage to the environment and reduced animal welfare have to be solved by even more technological and economic development and growth.
Lack of ethical awareness within science.
Because of financing from trade and industry, it chooses short-term goals instead of solving problems in the long term. Medication is tested on animals, and alternative methods are insufficiently looked for; animals are used for organ transplants; dairy products are "functionally enriched" by adding nutrients, whereas enriching vegetable food and making it more attractive and tasty would solve a lot more problems.
The stock farmer's mentality.
Many stock farmers do not think their animals have that bad a life, after all, they take good care of them. The animals are fed on time in order to have them ready for slaughter as soon as possible. These farmers do not realize anymore that they are not treating their animals properly. A change in mentality is not very likely. Motivating these farmers on economic grounds, thus slightly yet clearly pressing them towards more responsible farm management, will be more effective.
Practically everyone is responsible for the present situation in some way and to some extent: producers, government and consumers all have an interest in not addressing each other about the consequences for animal welfare in factory farming. The animals' interests are not financially profitable. The animals are as it were born to lose.
These factors can be partly found at macro level and it will take a lot of effort to attain the ideal situation. The individual consumer has reasons of his/her own for indifference towards the position of farm animals. See also non-valid arguments pro factory farming and pro and contra animal rights.
[05:29
|
0
komentarze
]
In 1979 the Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC), an independent advisory organ of the European Committee, determined that animals in cattle farming have a right to the following 5 "freedoms":
- Freedom from hunger and thirst - by ready access to fresh water and a diet to maintain full health and vigour.
- Freedom from discomfort - by providing an appropriate environment including shelter and a comfortable resting area.
- Freedom from pain, injury or disease - by prevention or rapid diagnosis and treatment.
- Freedom to express normal behavior - by providing sufficient space, proper facilities and company of the animal's own kind.
- Freedom from fear and distress - by ensuring conditions and treatment which avoid mental suffering.
Pigs
With pigs these rights are not met when:
- they have to live in the dark almost 24 hours a day (and only get an hour of light around nine a.m. for instance);
- they are castrated without anesthetics;
- they are jammed between two bars so they cannot turn over or groom themselves;
- they cannot root among the ground;
- they have no resting areas covered with straw, but a grated floor
- they have to live in the ammonia stench of their own manure;
- they are transported to the slaughterhouse under stressful and violent conditions in trucks.
The site of the Dutch Ministry says:
In total 80% of the pig farms and 58% of the meat pig farms violate one or more aspects of the pig decree.There has been a lot of evidence on violations of the ban on:
- sow standing space shorter than 2 meters (non-conformance is 61%)
- too little floor space for piglets
- less than two thirds of a boar stable closed off
- lacking an adequate sick bay (non-conformation 10%)
- keeping pigs in the dark or under insufficient lighting (non-conformance 13%)
- lacking an alarm installation for mechanical ventilation (non-conformance 32%)
- lacking diversion material (non-conformance 25%)
With cows these rights are not met when:
- calves are taken away from their mothers directly after birth to be fattened elsewhere. Calves have served their purpose by being born. The cow's milk is used for human consumption.
- they have no opportunity to go outside (into a pasture);
- they are tied down for entire winters.
Laying hens
With battery-hens the 5 (basic) animals rights are not met, when:
- their beaks are docked;
- chickens cannot roost during their sleep and are forced to live in a disrupted day/night rhythm so they will lay more eggs
- are forced to permanently live near members of their species they want to avoid (pecking order);
- cannot free-range (outside), dig around or take dust baths;
- are pushed violently into crates for transport, risking fracture, and transported to the slaughterhouse in trucks under stressful conditions.
[05:24
|
0
komentarze
]
1. Ethics and animal welfare
Freedom is a basic right for humans and animals. If severely restricting the freedom of animals to behave naturally diminishes this basic right, then the welfare of the animal will be damaged.
2. Public Health
Because of excessive use of antibiotics in the fodder used in industrial farming, we risk the creation of resistant strains of bacteria in factory farm animals. When meat from these animals is consumed by humans the information about antibiotic resistance is passed on to similar bacteria in the human body which then also become resistant to the same antibiotics that were used in the animal fodder. This poses problems when treating human bacteriological illnesses such as pneumonia.
Other dangers are salmonella and BSE (video). See also: The European Commission on BSE;
and: Concentrated Swine Feeding Operations and Public Health: A Review of Occupational and Community Health Effects
3. World food production
Agricultural areas in the Third World are being used to produce fodder for animals in our industrial farming system instead of producing food for local populations. This distorts the local economy.
4. Enjoying your neighborhood
The stench and noise of industrial farming (sometimes with open waste basins) makes living in the vicinity unpleasant and blights the properties in the area.
5. Landscape and bio-diversity
Large industrial farmers crowd out small farmers. Because of the creation of monocultures (grass and maize for fodder), the release (depositing) of heavy metals contained within the fertilizers into the soil and nutrient overkill generally, wildlife and landscape will deteriorate.
The following passage expands in detail on the shortcomings of industrial farming and industrial fishing.
Principal animal health and welfare arguments against the use of industrial animal husbandry systems presented to the world bank by the organization Compassion In World Farming.
What is wrong in factory farming?
One of the most important objections to industrial farming is of an ethical nature. Even if all the environmental problems could be solved, and even if all the energy and mineral accounts of the farmers were balanced, then still the manner in which the industrial farming industry treats animals is unacceptable.
Because the meat has to arrive on the shelves of the supermarkets as cheap as possible, the animals are allowed just enough room to stand and stay alive. Male pigs are castrated without anesthetics as soon as possible after birth. If someone does that to his or her cat, he will get a substantial fine for animal abuse. But animals that are bred for slaughter fall under a different set of regulations. Chickens to be fattened before they are slaughtered live in 23-hour daylight conditions. That makes a chicken believe that he has to keep eating. The light only goes out for one hour each day, in which the chicken is allowed to rest.
With pigs the light is off as much as possible. Two times a day for a half an hour the light is turned on (so the farmer can check on his animals) and the rest of the time it is dark.
Keeping as many animals as possible in a small space, without freedom of movement or the ability to express natural behavior can not be done other than in an animal unfriendly way. Not withstanding the changes to the law and regulation in the area of animal welfare and, even when taking into account the intrinsic value of the animal, it is not possible to guarantee the basic right to freedom for animals while industrial farming methods continue to be used.
Animals have no right in a legal sense, but they are legal objects: comparable to cars that can change owners and can be rented out. Contrary to humans, animals are not legal subjects: in our system of law, it cannot be a carrier of rights and obligations. When the animal in the industrial farming industry is denied the right to express natural or even chosen behavior, then this means animal abuse, despite the good care it receives.
What is wrong in the fishing industry?
On the face of it, there would seem to be no objection to the consumption of fish. Unless one is ethically against the killing of living creatures. Nevertheless, the objections mentioned above concerning the consumption of meat are also valid where the consumption of fish is concerned.
Without starting a discussion on whether fish have a sense of pain or not, it can be said that the current fishing industry uses animal unfriendly catching techniques. For those that are not impressed with the short suffering of fish during the act of being caught, we point to the side catch of mammals such as dolphins in nets meant for tuna. Dolphins are trapped and ensnared in the kilometer-long nets and can do nothing more than wait for death by drowning.
Another objection is that when trawl nets are used, not only the targeted species of the correct size are caught but also 70% of the catch is thrown back overboard. This is because either the fish are too small, the landing of which is prohibited by law, or because the permitted quota had already been reached, or because the species of fish caught happens to be commercially uninteresting. The 70% of the catch that is dumped back into the sea is by then crushed to death, suffocated or otherwise dead (see videofragment).
Also for the environment this method of fishing is detrimental, if not to say disastrous. The trawl nets ruin the bottom of the sea, which cause the total disruption and destruction of the ecological system for a long time.
The seas and oceans are fished empty and left barren.
Fish are not only caught, but also farmed. Some salmon, for example, are kept in enormous floating tanks, comparable to industrial farming units. Finally, there are some health objections attached to the consumption of fish. In the seventies, the high level of mercury (quicksilver) present in fish was a hot item.
Because of oil pollution, and the dumping of all sorts of waste, including nuclear, in the ocean, the health of fish is poor, and the fish contains hazardous materials.
[05:13
|
0
komentarze
]
Several factors have contributed to the development of the factory farming industry .
First of all you have the cattle feed industry in whose interest it is to produce as much cattle feed as possible at the lowest cost. With the present size of the pig and chicken fattening units
the cattle feed trucks can drive relatively efficient. The cattle feed industry made it easy for the farmer to start an intensive livestock farm (financing the factory unit often organizing the building and the necessary licenses etc.). The only thing the farmer needed to do was to sign on the dotted line.
The banks are always more than willing to lend money for the farmers business. It concerns very large amounts of money, very often up to 750,000 dollars. The banks get fat on the interest.
For a farmer it's further important to raise as many animals as possible in a short period of time.The higher his profit the sooner he can pay off his loan. It seems that all parties involved have the same target, "big"business, low profile and clean and efficient production. Only the animals, who are being "produced" in large quantities suffer and also the environment, if the farmer dumps as much manure on his land as it can handle and often even more.
It may be clear that because of the large number of animals, which stay for a relatively short period, the farmer does not grow attached to them. He could not care less. The animals become products and their well being is minimized to the point where suffering is not quite visible to the outsider and without affecting the cost price.
The role of the Government is ambiguous. On the one hand the export of pork and poultry products raises the gross national product, on the other hand it's up to the Government to minimalize the damage to the environment.
The influence of the consumer is limited. Even if consumers were to support the ecological livestock farming in large numbers, by buying the more expensive free-range eggs or free-range meat, there's still the export trade, which will keep the factory farming industry profitable.Twice as many consumers of meat exported by the Dutch factory farming industry live abroad. They have no idea how much the animals suffer in the Dutch factory units.
A pig farmer is inspected for animal welfare on average once every 17 years while at the same time the majority of pig farmers contravene several aspects of the pig farming regulations.
Are fast food chains like McDonalds responsible for animal suffering?
Everyone who eats meat from the factory farming industry is responsible for animal abuse in the factory farms. The same applies for persons and supermarkets that sell meat which comes from the factory farming industry. The responsibility increases when they encourage people to eat more meat by keeping the price down, extending the sales points or targeting children in advertising.
In this respect McDonalds and other fast food chains are more responsible than other suppliers because they increase the consumption of meat from the factory farming industry. It would be a good idea to oblige fast food chains to buy home produced meat.
Can factory farming be stopped?
Lack of protest from the public allows the factory farming industry to flourish. Why are we afraid to draw the line? Perhaps one of the explanations is the romantic image of the farmer built up in our youth. Many of the older generation have played on a farm in their youth and retain an image of a farmer with very few animals which he all knew by name: the smell of drawn hay, helping the farmer to feed the animals. Who would dare to tie these hard working people down with more restrictions, who would deny them a good income.
The younger generation has hardly ever been to a real farm. Their idea of a farm is probably the model-farm visited on a school trip. In primary school we learnt that our little Holland could produce dairy products more efficiently than in any other country.
It would also be a good idea for the Netherlands to relinquish their leading position in the export market and to concentrate on a more desirable and responsible branch of industry. By putting a stop to the export the factory farming industry will be less viable.
The debts of the farmers can be repaid by introducing a system of pigs and poultry quotas: by not allowing new participants and by gradually decreasing the quota.
With the present numbers of livestock it is impossible to guarantee the well being of the animals. Ideally the number of livestock should be reduced to a level corresponding to the national demand. In the short term it is inevitable that foreign producers will benefit from the shortfall in supply in the market. The Dutch have given the world a bad example and cannot complain if others follow suit. Instead of our present role as promoter of animal unfriendly products we should assume a new role as promoter of animal friendly products. Animal (and animal products) should be excluded from the international free market.
Just as is the case in general with child pornografy, child labour, the slave trade and drugs trade, a country with the most immoral habits cannot be allowed to determine international standards, but should be forced to restrict or preferably abolish the import and export.
In order to protect vulnerable parts of a country, for example animals or nature reservations, a country should be protected against itself by the imposition of a trade restriction. This would mean a small economic "loss", but an enormous moral "profit".
[10:52
|
4
komentarze
]
The benefit of vitamin B12 supplements
A possible vitamin B12 (cyanocobalamine, cobalamine, hydroxycobalamine) deficiency is without doubt an important issue in connection with the health of vegetarians and vegans. For vegans though, it’s recommended without hesitation, to use vitamin B12 supplements.
What does vitamin B12 do?
Vitamin B12 is a water soluble vitamin which plays a key role in many different processes in our body. B12 is essential for a normal digestion and absorption of nutrients, for a good carbohydrates- and fat metabolism and for the synthesis of new protein. Also, vitamin B12 plays a role in other processes, like sleep- and eating disorders, mental functioning, immunity, emotional balance, the reproduction and for the development in children.
How do you get vitamin B12 ?
Micro-organisms, mainly bacteria, are the only organisms that we know of, that can produce B12 . Our alimentary canal is accommodated by an estimation of four- to five-hundred different kinds of bacteria. Among them are the vitamin B12 generating bacteria. It is assumed that bacteria in our intestines make a variable amount of biological active (usable) forms of vitamin B12 . However, these vitamin B12 generating bacteria are only found in the last part of the intestinal canal, not high enough to be absorbed.
B12 in green products?
Some others have suggested that active B12 could be found in certain seaweeds, yet, there hasn’t been a conclusive outcome of research on this claim. Studies that have been carried out with the most reliable test methods, showed that most seaweeds that were thought to contain B12 , in fact contained the inactive, analogue version of B12 . Also tempe, miso and other fermented nutrients are no sources of active B12 , unless this vitamin is added.
From the present day knowledge we have to conclude that (not enriched) vegetables cannot supply us with vitamin B12 .
Absorption of B12
Besides the intake of B12 via the food, the absorption is also of vital importance. For a sufficient absorption of this vitamin enough calcium, folium acid and the so called “intrinsic factor” (a protein secreted by stomach cells, necessary for the intake of B12 in the small intestine) is acquired. However, it doesn’t stop here. Other nutrients have to be present in the ideal proportion within the body. This is to ensure that the vitamin B12 that’s been absorbed then gets transported to the tissues and that the vitamin can be effective in the many enzymatic functions for which it is acquired. A variable food pattern is necessary to get all the sufficient nutrients.
What happens in case of a shortage of vitamin B12 ?
In case of a low intake of B12 there is less secreted and the absorption gets increased. Through this mechanism a shortage of this vitamin can sometimes be delayed for twenty or thirty years. That’s how it can happen that vegans who do not use supplements can live for some years without experiencing any of the symptoms.
People with psychological problems, with eating- or sleeping-disorders, alcoholics and elderly run a chance of suffering from a B12 -shortage. Because it plays a role in many enzymatic processes in our body, it is difficult to list all the symptoms of B12 shortage.
Vitamin B 12 deficiency may give rise to in general: extreme fatigue, digestive problems, low appetite and nausea. More specific symptoms are haematological (anaemia), neurological (paresthesias, neuropathy) and psychiatric manifestations (impaired memory, irritability and depression).
B12 has functions very similar with folium-acid and the shortage of one or both can cause the same symptoms. A massive amount of folium-acid in the food-intake can disguise a B12 shortage.
Testing the B12
The test which determines the amount of MMA (methylmalonic Acid or methylmalonate) in the blood or urine is considered reliable enough to determine whether one has a sufficient amount of active B12 . Most physicians though still use B12 tests for bloodserum (sB12), but this test is not accurate enough to determine which part of the B12 is active and which part inactive.
Supplements in practice
It’s advisable for vegans to eat foods which are enriched with vitamin B12 , or to regularly take supplements to keep the B12 at a descent level. Cyanocobalamine is the most represented form in vitamin-tablets, while hydroxycobalamine is used in B12 injections. Tablets and capsules are available at pharmacists and reform shops. They often contain gelatine. The following required daily intake should be sufficient for vegans.
* 1,5 – 2,5 µg, twice a day, from B12 enriched food
* 10 – 100 µg, once a day, from a supplement
Higher dosages then 1000 µg are of no beneficial use, as they won’t be absorbed. You can safely break a 1000 µg tablet into four pieces. Supplements which contain only B12 are believed to be the most efficient. Besides, you can use products which are enriched with B12 , for example soja-products and breakfast-cereals (check the package).
[10:48
|
0
komentarze
]
Worldwide all cattle is fed 735 billion kilo grain every year. Conveyed in a goods train the transport would require 12,3 million wagons. That train could easily span the equator 6 times.
Most of the western countries use, besides their own farming ground, large grounds of developing countries for the production of their cattle feed. The use of foreign grounds can be up to six times higher than that of private grounds. Countries like Thailand (cassav), Malaysia, Brazil (soy) and Argentina largely contribute to the production of our cattle feed and almost a third is produced by third world countries. 75% of the raw materials for poultry-food and food for swine come from abroad. About a third of which comes from the third world countries.
For example, in order to feed the Dutch people there is, at home and abroad, 1,20 hectare of agricultural land in production, while there is in fact per citizen of the world only 0,2 hectare of agricultural land available (1 hectare equals to 10.000 m²).
Every individual in the world uses an amount of space of planet earth. How much, depends upon one's consumption.
[It would be better if the people in the west were to consume less meat in order that the people in third world countries could eat the vegetable food they grow themselves, instead of selling it to the west for their meat production.]
By means of the Global Footprint it is possible to render this space into an amount, expressed in hectares.
Meat production leads to environmental pollution
In the west, the biggest sources of acid precipitation, affecting forest and heather, are stock farming and traffic. Since fertilizer is one of the great contributors to this, the environment would profit largely from a diminished production.
Meat production costs lives
In the west, people consume much more meat these days than they used to do in the old days. Vegans, who totally abstain from meat consumption and use of animals, save the lives of approximately 6 bovines, 45 pigs en a few hundred chickens (these numbers apply to the Netherlands).
By means of the bio-industry all this meat consumption brings about a lot of animal distress. Thus, lessening the worldwide meat consumption obviously reduces the amount of animal distress.
Meat production is a waste of energy
During the transformation from plant into animal protein a lot of nutritious matter is wasted. 4 Kilo of vegetable protein (cattle feed) on average yields only 1 kilogram of animal protein.
On average, the production of meat costs up to 14,7 times more energy than that of vegetable food. One kilo veal compares to 100 kilo potatoes, as for the amount of energy. A normal pasture field produces approximately 330 kilo meat. The same field yields 40.000 kilo potatoes. Moreover a kilo meat requires 111.250 liter water.
It takes a lot less water to feed a strict vegetarian during a whole year than to feed a meat eater during a single month. A country like Holland uses so much water for the production of bovine meat in a year that the same amount of drinking water could supply almost a third of the world population.
[10:38
|
0
komentarze
]
The Ecological Connection
Animals and plants in natural settings must have minimal living regions in order to have sufficient room within which to live and survive. Because of global warming, it becomes even more important that plants and animals can migrant, otherwise they will die out.
However, if a natural region is too small, than it can be made livable through a connection with another ecosystem or biotope, via a so-called green corridor. Together animals and plants are then offered a chance to survive, beyond which can also initiate a similarly interesting landscape for human recreation. With the “Ecological Connection (EC)” is simply implied - a connection together with other biotopes.
In direct opposition exist the regions wherein intensive factory farming is concentrated.
What comes into existence then, in an Ecological Connection, is a newly created natural area: or natural developing regions. Natural developing regions are regions that must still be developed. There is also a transition form, mainly a region wherein farmers determine how convenants are made for looking after and sparing nature. The water ways hold an important role: the big rivers, but also the small locks alongside arable land.
That nature is to be preserved is not to say that it has become realized or that this will happen in a short amount of time. Much can also happen in between, and as a consequence of economic pressure which is continually placed upon the plans and ultimately placed upon the available room for slowly consumed natural habitats.
It is also important to keep pollution outside of the EC. If the food in the EC becomes scarce or biodiversity decreases, the animals must seek food outside the EHS, whereby the chance becomes greater that they will become wrongly victimized or cause severe damage to crops.
[10:25
|
0
komentarze
]
Jan Piet Frens, a recently retired biology teacher, is one of the 7000 beekeepers in The Netherlands. He has been a passionate beekeeper for 28 years. He lives just outside Culemborg, The Netherlands, where the river Lek flows in front of his house and at the back the area known as the “Betuwe” stretches out with all her orchards. He currently keeps 17 bee colonies in hives behind his garden shed. In Spring he sets the bee colonies free in the neighbouring, well known cherry and apple orchards. In the Summer he moves his bees to an area where there are many lime trees and in the Autumn they are brought to the Veluwezoom , an area where heather blooms profusely in that season. He keeps an average of between 10 and 20 bee colonies. This varies per season. Jan Piet explains that in the Eighties, it was quite commonplace for about 10% of bees not to survive the Winter. He has noticed a definite increase in fatality during recent years; in 2003 and 2004 he even lost 75% of his bees. He blames the parasite the varroa destructor to a large extent for these fatalities. The media often raises the suggestion that there is a new disease among bees, but beekeepers have been aware of this phenomenon for quite some time. Jan Piet suspects that are more causes for the increase in fatality, but they will more than likely be connected with the region and the manner of beekeeping. Degeneration of the natural species diversity also plays a role when the bee is searching for food. Furthermore, he is one of the bee health-coordinators working closely with the Dutch University of Wageningen and he meticulously follows the results of all sorts of scientific studies there.
The Varroa Destructor
Researchers such as Tjeerd Blacquière from the University of Wageningen are concerned with fatality among bees. In recent years, he and his colleagues have conducted extensive research. He considers the Varrao Destructor to be an important cause of the often massive fatalities among bee colonies. The Varrao Destructor is a parasite which comes from the Indian honeybee, Apis cerana. The Indian honeybee is reasonably immune to this parasite, but the European honeybee is not. When the parasite appeared in Europe around 1970 and in the mid-Eighties also in The Netherlands, it caused immense damage. All bee colonies are now contaminated by it. Added to this, the Varrao Destructor carries various viruses.
Jan Piet explains that the Varroa Destructor lives in the beehive, from the honeybee larva. The bees build cells, where the queen bee lays her eggs. A fertilised egg becomes a normal bee, an unfertilized egg becomes a “worker” or a drone. Firstly, a larva comes out of the egg. This larva is closed off in a cell by the bees, so that it has the chance to develop into a drone. The Varroa Destructor crawls into the cell at the moment the cell is closed off. It lives from the developing larva and reproduces in the cell. Some 2 to 5 parasites emerge from a cell and they crawl onto the bee in order to find other cells. The bee itself comes into the world deformed and weakened, with wrinkled wings, for example.
In the early Spring, Jan Piet starts fighting the Varroa Destructor in the hive. As advised by the University of Wageningen, he uses oxalic acid and thymol . These substances can be dissolved in sugared water or can be introduced into the hive by means of evaporation or nebulising. He has the impression that these methods have resulted in a decrease in fatality among his bees in recent years. However, he hastens to add that a very experienced beekeeper in his neighbourhood lost 80% of his bees last Winter, despite his conscientious attacks on the Varroa Destructor. There are obviously more causes of bee fatality.
Massive fatalities in the United States
Tjeerd Blacquière, bee expert at the University of Wageningen says, in an interview with the Dutch Scientific journalist Marcel Hulspas, that the Press gives the impression that the Varroa Destructor is a new American phenomenon. However, 4 or 5 years ago there were massive bee fatalities in Europe, often in particular areas, such as Northern Italy and Bavaria. The following year the situation had recovered. In the United States it looks as if massive fatalities are spread out over much wider areas. According to Blacquière this also had to do with the way beekeepers worked there. Beekeepers work locally in The Netherlands, they have a small number of hives and they remain within a certain area. In the United States beekeepers have thousands of hives. They transport them in trailer trucks throughout the entire country from Florida to California, to all places where farmers or breeders need bees. In this way, contamination can spread rapidly throughout the country. Blacquière is very down to earth about speculations as to the cause of bee fatality, such as the greenhouse effect, or use of new pesticides by farmers or radiation from mobile phones.
Monitoring the health of the Dutch bee
In Blacquière’s opinion, the most important cause of bee fatality is a combination of the Varroa Destructor and various types of viruses. This is also evident from bee health monitoring at 150 Dutch beekeepers, done by himself and his colleagues at the University of Wageningen in collaboration with 35 bee health-coordinators. On 18 October last, the first results were announced during the bee health- day in Wageningen. This monitoring yielded information about potential pathogenic organisms in bee colonies, and not whether certain diseases played an active role.
The monitoring shows the Varroa Destructor to be the greatest pathogenic organism. The specimens taken were also tested for viruses and this part of the research was sent out to the Central Science Laboratory in York, England. Three viruses often linked to massive fatality, in the United States, amongst others, were not found. But three viruses were found which, according to documentation are connected with the Varroa Destructor. Infection by the Deformed Wing Virus was lower than the researchers had expected, the symptoms of which are wrinkled wings and these are familiar to beekeepers. The researchers were surprised that the origin of European foul brood was so often found (in 36% of the specimens). Not so long ago, this disease was considered not to be present in The Netherlands. There are also more and more reports of clinically sick colonies from beekeepers. Further analysis of the monitoring needs to be done. The researchers now want to look into what can be discovered about the spread of pathogens in The Netherlands. Is there a connection between the method of beekeeping, combating the Varroa Destructor and the type of bee?. But just as important for researchers is to see if there is a connection between the various pathogens and whether some pathogens are permanently linked.
Nosema ceranae
Monitoring also shows that in 87 of the bee specimens traces of nosema ceranae were found. This is an intestinal parasite, but the researchers at the University of Wageningen do not consider this to be cause for alarm, because in their opinion the beekeepers can do a lot to prevent this disease by concentrating on keeping the bees in good condition. Romee van der Zee from the Dutch Centre for Bee research has, however, another opinion. In 2006 she came to the conclusion that combating the Varroa Destructor did not provide sufficient explanation for the huge fatality (26%) in the Winter of 2005/2006 and that the real cause still had to be found. In the October edition (2008) of the magazine Beekeeping (Bijenhouden) she writes that the presence of the Nosema ceranae in honeybees was not known in 2006 and she comes to the conclusion that on the basis of the research that was conducted by her Centre in 2007 and 2008 among 409 beekeepers, no reason was found to appoint the Varroa Destructor the main cause of bee fatality in the Winter of 2007/2008. She says that this confirms the observations of the researchers who had published earlier in the journal “Science”. In the September issue of Beekeeping, Van der Zee points to the relationship between Nosema ceranae and massive bee fatality. She comes to the conclusion that this parasite could very well be an important candidate for the pathogen. Her research also shows large regional variances. In the provinces Gelderland and Overijssel, the average fatality in the Winter 2007/2008 was 19.9%, whilst in the are Hollands Midden fatality was as high as 51.4%.
Pesticides
Sjef van der Steen reports in an article on a symposium that was held in Bucharest at the beginning of October on the possible effects of pesticides on bees. There is not enough known about the indirect or long term effects of pesticides or of plant protectors (as these are called nowadays), on bees. During that symposium extensive discussions were held about guidelines for test programmes which newly developed pesticides needed to undergo in order to be approved.
Another possible problem is coating seeds. These seeds from plants visited by bees, such as coleseed and more indirectly, corn and sugar beet are coated nowadays with a layer of pesticide. This sort of pesticide is absorbed in the plant during growth and in this way protects the plant against gluttonous insects. The pesticide Clothianidin, extremely toxic to bees, is used for this purpose. In the Spring of 2008 fatalities occurred in Southern Germany, France and Italy because part of the coating landed on flowering plants when being sown. This practice is also allowed in The Netherlands, because in the normal way, bees and other pollinating insects do not come into contact with Clothianidin. There have been no problems reported here. Other negative effects for bees caused by pesticides are also known. In laboratory conditions it has been observed that some pesticides have a negative effect on bees’ respiratory system, whilst others disturb orientation or cause temporary problems in the central nervous system.
Experts deem it quite possible that pesticides contribute to the increased fatality among honeybee colonies. In Germany a monitoring programme has been under way since 2005 to gain more insight into this influence.
Conclusion
At this time of year beekeepers, such as Jan Piet Frens speak of Winter bees and if all is well, the 17 colonies in the yellow painted hives behind his house have been given a large amount of sugar to come through the Winter. On the advice of the experts from the University of Wageningen, he has started combating the Varroa Destructor at the right moment and in the right way, using the most effective remedies. He hopes that fatality among his bees will remain low during the coming Winter and that Spring will not come too early, because that would mean that there are too few flowering plants and too little pollen, which in turn would have consequences for his bees, because the bee larva would have insufficient food. Such weakening could lead to greater fatality, because the bee would have built up insufficient resistance to all sorts of parasites and viruses. Has it to do then with climate change?
It is clear that much research needs to be done into the causes of massive bee fatalities and into a solution. The bee is an essential link in the ecological system and for growth of a number of plants. The many invasions we as humans make into nature and the environment make it extremely difficult for these hard workers to carry out their most important task.