Ty Siscoe

The clamor of alarm bells set off by colony collapse disorder this past winter should have been ringing some time ago. Given that the rise in harrowing natural catastrophes and ecological upheaval – and the looming escalation in both their frequency and ferocity – are (finally) bringing an uphill battle against climate change to the fore, a wave of inexplicable carnage probably shouldn’t come as such a shock.

After all, honeybees are hardly the developed world’s first species to suffer a quick, curious demise in their number. The Achilles heel of modernity is that we rarely look before we leap – and we rarely stop leaping until we’ve landed ourselves in some degree of magnificent chaos, usually at another species’ expense.

“We’re the ultimate cause in that we’ve changed the planet to suit our needs. We’re running it to suit our needs and not to the benefit of all the organisms around us,” explained Jeffery Pettic, leader of the USDA’s honeybee research lab, during a salon.com expert’s round table when asked if he thought people were the ultimate cause of CCD. “Honeybees aren’t totally domesticated, but we have tried to domesticate them. We’ve tried to make bees more gentle and make more honey. In enhancing certain traits, we make the bees more susceptible to other things.”

That list of other potential things has become quite bewildering: The encroachment of urbanization, toxicity from pesticides and genetically modified crops, tracheal and Varroa mite infestations, Nosema ceranae and other fungi, African honeybee genes, bacteria from small hive beetles, poor nutrition from fructose-spiked corn syrup, stress from unprecedented migration, immune deficiencies and – as widely misreported – cell phone radiation. Moreover, as another eminent honeybee researcher, Eric Mussen, noted in that same online round table, “you’re going to find that in most cases, there is not going to be one factor that did them in; it’s going to be a combination. This is the perfect storm for honeybees.”

Herein lies the crux of the quandary: our impulse to determine a causal relationship between CCD and something other than our own voraciousness. Perhaps the most disturbing symptom of CCD is its rapid tenacity, but this trait has largely skewed discussion, especially in the conventional media. Lost in the kerfuffle are telltale aspects of the issue such as that offered by two Pennsylvania-based researchers, whose recent paper traces colony collapses “that are reminiscent of the present situation” as far back as 1869.

While close to a third of the US’s 2.4 million colonies have been lost this past winter, about three quarters of those losses are attributable to previously established threats. Far more disconcerting is the fact that the number of managed US honeybee colonies has been gradually cut in half since the early ’70s – or that the North American diet has come to rely so inherently on a pollinator that isn’t even native to the continent.

“The commercial beekeeping industry is just a cog in the big industrial wheel,” says Sharon Labchuk, leader of the provincial Green Party in Prince Edward Island, Canada, and a small-scale organic beekeeper. “The industrial agriculture model has destroyed pollinating insects through its chemicals and through its clear cutting of forests and plowing under the prairies. It’s destroyed habitat for not only insects, but for everything else that would normally live in those kinds of ecosystems. We’ve destroyed the natural world within the area that we’ve killed, and we’ve also destroyed the vicinity through chemical use.”

Labchuk also points to a little known peculiarity that bodes ill for the health of the honeybee: the super-sized wax foundations used in commercial beekeeping operations. Whereas the combs created by natural worker brood are about 4.6 mm in diameter, manufacturers have increased the size of wax foundations – beginning about a century ago, according to Labchuk – to 5.4 mm wide in an effort to create larger honeybees and, in turn, more honey (and, tellingly, more money). Given the way honeybees use their combs to reproduce, the Frankenstein-esque result has been a species that is half as large again as is natural, and an increased vulnerability to mite infestations due to the extra space in the combs themselves.

“You’ve got bees that were made to be bigger the same way we’ve made cows, pigs and chickens bigger, because bigger is better in the industrial model,” quips Labchuk. “We produce everything using an industrial model which is insatiable, which is one in which economic growth is the mantra and in which economic growth is seen as a good thing.”

As an indicator of how potentially overbearing that mantra can be, take the almond farming industry in California’s Central Valley, which supplies 80 percent of the world’s almond crop. The state’s almond acreage has grown by 40 percent in the last two decades, and is projected to grow by another 30 percent by 2010. More than a million hives are required for pollination in February and March of every year, and that number is expected to surge to a point where the entire commercial honeybee population will be needed to do the same job within the next five years. It’s also worth noting that once the almond crop has been dealt with, those same bees embark on a migrate-and-pollinate mission that reaches most of the continental US – all told, the USDA estimates that pollination has improved crop yields and quality to the tune of $20 billion annually.

“Honeybees are in effect six-legged livestock that both manufacture agricultural commodities – honey and wax – and, more importantly, contribute agricultural services – pollination. Close to 100 crop species in the US rely to some degree on pollination services provided by this one species – collectively, these crops make up approximately 1/3 of the US diet, including the majority of high-value crops that contribute to healthy diets,” Dr. May Berenbaum – one of the authors of a National Academy of Sciences report from last October about the declining state of North America’s pollinators – told the US Congress in late March. “It is difficult to think of any other multi-billion-dollar agricultural enterprise that is so casually monitored.”

Beyond shoddy surveillance, the big issue here is the free market’s complicity in not recognizing or respecting the complexity of our natural ecosystems. That we’ve elevated the honeybee to a keystone role in our food chain may yet become the ultimate irony when the world’s greediest consumers begin to truly understand the prospect of colony collapse.

A surprising number of news reports (elite media among them) about CCD relayed a quote attributed to Albert Einstein about the fact that humans would die out in four years if bees were to disappear – an attribution that bears absolutely no evidence. Perhaps, given the potentially greater implications of colony collapse disorder, the verifiable words of Harvard biologist and author E.O. Wilson are a bit closer to the mark: “So important are insects and other land dwelling arthropods, that if all were to disappear, humanity could not last more than a few months.”

_Eric Rumble 

COMMENTS:

Yes, this article is informative. So what if the opinion is wrong, should we error and probably hurt our world and the future? I think NO! We have to do is stop wasting. It is up to us.
bike

I like Dustin's comment... so what are the world's ecological problems? So quick to shut others down for bringing up any specifics in the world, and yet you yourself will not raise awareness, beyond perhaps ensuring that we the people know that we can just shit on people. not to hell, but instead to school with an open mind to anyone who maintains close-minded oppression of humans exploring actual thoughts. i reserve my right to seek any answer to any question i may pose in my life, respectfully, and so should you too, you lethargic disinformant you. smiles and gumdrops.
Dashiell

Gar Hoover delivers a straw man: the article does not blame humans for all the world's ecological problems. Honeybees are not indigenous to N. America, and they support up to 1/3 of the N. American diet. All of the factors surrounding their existence in N. America are anthropogenic. Bee keeping is about human-insect interactions, plain and simple.
RMB Hoffman

But, then again, claiming that an article says that it blames humans for all the world's ecological problems when it actually states that humans through industrial processes are one of the largest factors in climate change is also ridiculous.
J.R. Dobbs

It is totally true, we are destroying all around us and leaving us more vulnerable when we depend only in a little bunch of things, some live another depending on finites resources. The more doom thing is that till exist many people who wish to believe we are not guilty, and so delay the urgent process to a social change that must to be NOW to can keep human beings on the earth in next generations.
fcalabi

Although I generally tend to agree with the content of the article, I must admit there is a fair amount of bias contained. I prefer to read a summary of the data and resulting projections or trends. One thing I want to bring up is what I consider the inappropriate use of the statement "ecological problems." What exactly does this mean, problems for whom, other species, us? What would the solution entail, and as other entries have illustrated, where does the blame lie and how do we hold those accountable? All important questions to consider before we make judgements and take action.
Santiago Velez

Biased reporting means that the writer has an opinion, and a good writer backs up opinion with factual evidence. The facts stated in this article are generally true statements. However, many people are so programmed by the machine they are inclined to think that the destruction cause by mass commercialism and consumerism is not destructive. To blame humans for all the world's ecological problems is to put the blame where it lay. When people destroy the ecosystems of the planet, people are creating the ecological problems of the planet. But the irony is that people are effected by these ecological problems they've created. The Earth will manage just fine with or without us, humans don't fare as well in this respect. Pollute the air with noxious poisons, then say, well don't blame humans for all the respiratory diseases that so mysteriously develop. Wake up!
Revin Floyd

The real reason that there had been so many bee colonies dying out is simple. The hillbilly farmers who kept them took all their honey and didn't leave anything for the poor bees to eat during the winter and they starved to death!
Mike Smith

Just another example of the brick wall humans are about to (at full speed!) crash into.
scott.s

I don't recall the author of this article speaking on all of the world's ecological problems. Seems pretty evident you're simply looking for something to complain about.
Dustin

This article is very informative, but a biased piece. Obviously, humans are contributing to climate change. To blame humans for all the world's ecological problems is egotistic and ridiculous.
Gar Hoover

to Gar Hoover.....so you state that "to blame humans for all the world's ecological problems is egotistic and ridiculous." I am curious to know WHO EXACTLY WOULD YOU BLAME? I'd really like an answer. Thanks.
zoi

'We are the ultimate cause in that we've changed the planet to suit our needs' Bullshit. We've changed the planet because we've lost touch with our needs.
Japo Spesh

Re: comment by Mike Smith about "hillbilly farmers": That is a ridiculous statement and suggests that Mr Smith has never encountered a beehive or a beekeeper in his life.
Matt Z

It must be the bee's fault then. Billions of humans and their continuing encroachment on wild land and associated pollution of the air, land, and water with petrochemical fertilizers and insecticides can't be to blame! Perhaps the bees just don't have a strong enough will to live.
crazy chester

Why do we keep arguing over and over about nonissues?? Who cares if the article is biased or the statistics are not 100% accurate? What are ecological problems? The fact of the matter is that WE ALREADY KNOW what needs to be done, WE ALREADY KNOW that ecological problems exist in every level of our planetary ecosystem. Whatever is good for other species is good for us. It's so damn easy to stop wasting! Reuse, start trading things you don't need instead of throwing them in the garbage. Just buy and use what you need, and no more.
MatM.

I see a trend with the articles and comments. Writers rarely use substantiative facts/numbers/reporting/DATA and readers continually comment on the desire to see this. There'd be a bit more credibility to adbusters.org/the mag. if we saw more data along with the opinion. I'm sure this would broaden the reader base and make a greater impact.
Big Picture ADbusterz

In the end, we're exploiting the natural world so a few thousand people in the world can enjoy lifestyles that totally don't jive with natural law. All on the backs of immigrants, honeybees, trees, hard-working bluecollars, 3rd world countries. I guess it's hard to blame your average consumer when he's so confused by so many different messages be thin, be happy, look cool, take a cruise, get an iPhone, have a Heineken, work hard, you can do it to have even a spare minute to figure out how his actions are connected to the rest of the world. And then you have those superrich motherf$#%s who are like are essentially a cancer to the rest of the world, grow richer, bigger, more exploitative at the expense of bees, peace, and humanity.
jen

cut to the chase and give the info. every body reading this knows we are in deep poo so cut the rant and get to the story. my god your preaching to the choir just lay of the venome SHIT!
david Lee Smith

I'm sure once we have killed off our own bees we will with out a doubt invade other countries and steal their bees. We are disgusting people with no shame and no morality.
Jacob

What can we, consumers, do in this situation? Consume less. Consume only local produce. No packaged food?
himanshu

The thesis Advertising is Brain Damage is solid and is strongly supported by all of the ideas presented. However are there any real statistics about this, or any research done in this field? How do we, as consumers, know that this is just another advertisement telling people to not buy the products of certain companies for other reasons? Do we really get brain damage from these ads? Also, I believe that advertising has become part of our culture. We can't deny it. It's everywhere. Wherever you lay your eyes, there are ads that try to grab your attention. They've got a living to do as we all do. They HAVE to advertise so that their company can survive the competition between themselves and be successful. They try to make it as eyepleasing and appealing; eventually leading them to make catchy phrases and graphic scenes to grab our attention. But ultimately, it is up to us whether we decide to buy these things or not. So you can't really blame the advertisings that are all over the place; IF they DO give us brain damage of course.
s.k

This site in a nutshell: Human's are bad. American's are worse. Why don't you all move to fukin Canada or something if you don't like it here.
the factor

You all have a mute button on the TV use it during the commercials. I routinely educate my son about advertising and consumerism. He knows he isn't going to get laid on an elevator if he chews Dentyne. You and can choose to buy into it or not. At my house we chose not.
Brigitte

Note: To eliminate spam and other abuses, all comments must be manually approved by a moderator before posting. Rarely, this can take up to a couple of days. Legitimate comments may be subject to light editing for the sake of clarity.

To foster open dialogue, pointlessly abusive or threatening comments will be deleted, as will comments that clearly violate hate speech laws in Canada (where Adbusters' servers are located). A note from the moderator will always be posted to indicate that such a comment has been deleted.

If you have any comments or concerns about this process, feel free to email websubmissions[at]adbusters[dot]org.