Asian Hornets

[Ian123]

They are as capable of using it as you are. They haven't because the environmental fall out is unmanageable.

Actually being realistic I don’t think it is, particularly if used early in any incursion on a handful of nests.
There’s enough of the stuff running around on our cats and dogs for a handful of nests to make no difference!

 

[fian]

Ah yes, we are an Island removed from the rest of Europe

Yes, but keep in mind that I live about 80km from the northern border between Spain and Portugal. It is true that you can find videos on YouTube of baits with fipronil but here the legality of the procedure and the viability of the measure as a "final solution" are discussed.

 

[Newbeeneil]

Actually being realistic I don’t think it is, particularly if used early in any incursion on a handful of nests.
There’s enough of the stuff running around on our cats and dogs for a handful of nests to make no difference!

Exactly, the fact the stuff used on our cats and dogs is 40 times stronger (see my earlier post) than the mixture we are discussing does make you think there must be a lot of it around in houses, gardens and hundreds of thousands of domestic animals.

 

[fian]

I do not support any method that includes an environmental risk such as the use of fipronil (one of the most powerful insecticides that have been developed) and which has been shown to be a destroyer of native insect populations.
I don't play Jekyll/Hyde either by extolling a third party recipe and then putting safeguards and disclaimers

So back that up and specify which of the prohibitions in the BPRs apply to this effect?

Some countries clearly more slowly than others. We know that little has been done in mainland Europe legislatively speaking. So there needs to be a fall back position and arguments to force the legislative response. One thing legislators hate is gaps in legislation that create unregulated activities.

.

 

[North End Bees]

Actually being realistic I don’t think it is, particularly if used early in any incursion on a handful of nests.
There’s enough of the stuff running around on our cats and dogs for a handful of nests to make no difference!

I don't use it on my dog!
I used to years ago and then one day he shook himself abruptly just after I'd put it on and it sprayed all over the kitchen cupboard next to him. It took the paint off wherever it touched.
That was a serious reminder how noxious the stuff is. Since then I just make sure his bedding is washed every week and he's not had any problems with fleas. So probably didn't need the stuff to start with.

 

[JamezF]

Exactly, the fact the stuff used on our cats and dogs is 40 times stronger (see my earlier post) than the mixture we are discussing does make you think there must be a lot of it around in houses, gardens and hundreds of thousands of domestic animals.

I'd agree that it does seem a perfectly reasonable assumption to make. That doesn't mean it couldn't be a wrong assumption though (I have no idea. I don't know enough about the stuff.)

James

 

[Karol]

They are as capable of using it as you are. They haven't because the environmental fall out is unmanageable.

You clearly missed the contribution from Mazzamazda. There are other commercial reasons why velutina is still prevalent in these areas. There is no money to be made exterminating velutina so commercially interested parties plug alternatives that fleece beekeepers all the while denouncing fipronil custard as ecologically dangerous.

The environmental fall out of failing to correct human precipitated infestations by the alien species that velutina is is incalculable and you harp on at miniscule quantities of highly targetted pesticide that in any event degrades and ceases to work within a matter of hours.

I think you are allowing your prejudices to cloud objective judgement.

 

[Ian123]

I don't use it on my dog!
I used to years ago and then one day he shook himself abruptly just after I'd put it on and it sprayed all over the kitchen cupboard next to him. It took the paint off wherever it touched.
That was a serious reminder how noxious the stuff is. Since then I just make sure his bedding is washed every week and he's not had any problems with fleas. So probably didn't need the stuff to start with.

I’m not sure that you don’t like it is relevant to any environmental issues, it’s a widely available and used product.
What I was suggesting was any additional use for the destruction of a handful of nests at this point is very likely negligible.

 

[madasafish]

Quite the opposite, now that the parliamentarians are approaching in the eaves (those with the most possibilities of change) they will be eager to take actions that allow them to hold their position. Taking into account that the polls give favorability to Labor with a large margin, it is very likely that between 100-180 ladies and gentlemen find themselves in this situation.
In a number large enough to push for velutina-specific legislation that strengthens the vote of all beekeeping associations and members in the United Kingdom. And although no one wants an accidental death due to anaphylaxis due to a vv bite, what would happen if one occurred in May and parliamentarians were caught without a solution with an nbu/defra in the sensationalist eaves?

People in the UK die from dog attacks regularly. The UK Government does NOTHING proactive to stop them and only reacts slowly after the event. You can report a dangerous dog to the police. If it has attacked no-one they tend to ignore it . One of the recent deaths came from a dog whose owner was warned twice about its behaviour.

 

[Wilco]

Actually being realistic I don’t think it is, particularly if used early in any incursion on a handful of nests.
There’s enough of the stuff running around on our cats and dogs for a handful of nests to make no difference!

Exactly, the fact the stuff used on our cats and dogs is 40 times stronger (see my earlier post) than the mixture we are discussing does make you think there must be a lot of it around in houses, gardens and hundreds of thousands of domestic animals.

Also used in forestry if I recall correctly. I personally believe this might be a more plausible explanation for it being found in remote Scottish streams, as per one publication, than the dog walker hypothesis.

I don't use it on my dog!
I used to years ago and then one day he shook himself abruptly just after I'd put it on and it sprayed all over the kitchen cupboard next to him. It took the paint off wherever it touched.
That was a serious reminder how noxious the stuff is. Since then I just make sure his bedding is washed every week and he's not had any problems with fleas. So probably didn't need the stuff to start with.

That may be the excipient it's mixed in not necessarily the drug itself. However I'd agree, most pets probably don't need regular flea treatments. There are some arguments about worming depending on the parasite (certain are a threat particularly to children, others can be fatal to the animal) but there's virtually no discussion of a test and treat approach in the small animal sector even though that's rightly been the default in the farm sector for years. Practice health plans could very easily cover the cost of testing monthly rather than the cost of treating monthly. However, I am in a minority and also digressing.

 

[North End Bees]

There is no money to be made exterminating velutina so commercially interested parties plug alternatives that fleece beekeepers all the while denouncing fipronil custard as ecologically dangerous.

Governments spend billions every year in subsidies to farmers. Said farmers are as impacted by Vv as are beekeepers. France is a big wine producing country and Vv can and do destroy whole grape harvests.

Presumably governments would legislate for programmes of Fibrinol poisoning if it were the quick fix you proclaim.

 

[Skinfaxi]

Atcthe moment goverment departments are understaffed

Doesn't matter, the fipronil is an AVM - authorised veterinary medicine.

Using it outside it's authorisation means you need the cascade and thus a vet.

Wilco is stating what the official law says.

Jesus wept. We're faced with an invasive species and you're determined to have the last word. I think it's fair to say most beekeepers faced with attack by Asian Hornets WILL use whatever weapons are effective and to hand. As with such situations only the foolish will publicise action and without a means to track the launch point of the treated hornet finding the user will be all but impossible

Sometimes these rules appear ridiculous (I'd say the use of OA for varroa control would be such a case). Sometimes they're really important. The problem is that it's not always possible for the layman to decide which is which. Taking another product that is close to the beekeeper's heart, the use of Bacillus thuringiensis is supposed to be controlled, but it's easily available online and people who don't understand the issues are able to use it incorrectly. As a result there are species that are becoming resistant.

Fipronil could turn out to be an excellent control for AH. However, at an incorrect low dose it might be possible for AH to become resistant, and then we're in an even worse place. An excessive dose on the other hand might hang around in the environment sufficiently long to become harmful to other animals (I think it's fairly indiscriminate where insects are concerned and is also toxic to some fish, amongst others). Those animals might be quite important to us as pollinators or for other reasons. Or it might get into the food chain and generate yet another set of problems.

James

Now i put frontline on my dog and he jumps into open water. Cross contamination. What about that. Now x by thousands of dogs.

 

[Skinfaxi]

Quite the opposite, now that the parliamentarians are approaching in the eaves (those with the most possibilities of change) they will be eager to take actions that allow them to hold their position. Taking into account that the polls give favorability to Labor with a large margin, it is very likely that between 100-180 ladies and gentlemen find themselves in this situation.
In a number large enough to push for velutina-specific legislation that strengthens the vote of all beekeeping associations and members in the United Kingdom. And although no one wants an accidental death due to anaphylaxis due to a vv bite, what would happen if one occurred in May and parliamentarians were caught without a solution with an nbu/defra in the sensationalist eaves?

The media is going to love selling fear and terror, especially to so many peaple really scared of nature or anything thats not wrapped in plastic or sterile..

 

[ericbeaumont]

governments would legislate for programmes of Fibrinol poisoning if it were the quick fix

That is the bridge to cross, but neither the VMD, DEFRA or the NBU have contributed to any broad public debate to explain whether it is under consideration, what would be needed to accept its use, and if not, why not, and so on.

Reluctance of Govt. bodies to engage in wider analysis of strategy and method is disconcerting, esp. knowing how slowly authorities move. In the void of silence it is inevitable that amateurs will go ahead and use whatever method suits, just as an Essex pest controller did years ago, using the Fipronil custard to terminate wasp nests.

 

[fian]

People in the UK die from dog attacks regularly. The UK Government does NOTHING proactive to stop them and only reacts slowly after the event. You can report a dangerous dog to the police. If it has attacked no-one they tend to ignore it . One of the recent deaths came from a dog whose owner was warned twice about its behaviour.

The difference between a dog and a velutina is legal and public consideration.
A dog is a pet and a domestic animal and despite incidents, no one would be calling for a ban on its possession or a generalized extermination, which is not happening with the Vespa Velutina.

 

[fian]

The media is going to love selling fear and terror, especially to so many peaple really scared of nature or anything thats not wrapped in plastic or sterile..

Of course, and politicians will be happy to legislate in favor of these terrified urbanites in exchange for their vote.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

A dog is a pet and a domestic animal and despite incidents, no one would be calling for a ban on its possession

really?

 

[Newbeeneil]

That is the bridge to cross, but neither the VMD, DEFRA or the NBU have contributed to any broad public debate to explain whether it is under consideration, what would be needed to accept its use, and if not, why not, and so on.

Reluctance of Govt. bodies to engage in wider analysis of strategy and method is disconcerting, esp. knowing how slowly authorities move. In the void of silence it is inevitable that amateurs will go ahead and use whatever method suits, just as an Essex pest controller did years ago, using the Fipronil custard to terminate wasp nests.

Interesting last paragraph Eric. What was the upshot? Success or prosecution?

 

[fian]

That is the bridge to cross, but neither the VMD, DEFRA or the NBU have contributed to any broad public debate to explain whether it is under consideration, what would be needed to accept its use, and if not, why not, and so on.

Reluctance of Govt. bodies to engage in wider analysis of strategy and method is disconcerting, esp. knowing how slowly authorities move. In the void of silence it is inevitable that amateurs will go ahead and use whatever method suits, just as an Essex pest controller did years ago, using the Fipronil custard to terminate wasp nests.

And why did that Essex pest controller stop using the method?

 

[madasafish]

The difference between a dog and a velutina is legal and public consideration.
A dog is a pet and a domestic animal and despite incidents, no one would be calling for a ban on its possession or a generalized extermination, which is not happening with the Vespa Velutina.

I have been bitten by an out of control German Sheppard, a Rottweiler, and several smaller dogs during my life: mainly when I was running/walking in the country. My view of dogs is that owners whose dogs attack people should be treated as if they personally committed the attack and are judged accordingly.