Country file stat casually thrown out..

[Poly Hive]

Last night a so called bee expert apparently alleged, as she was quoted rather than actually saying it, that there are half the bees in the UK, or did they mean England? That there were in the 1960's.

I felt my jaw drop at that one as where did the numbers come from?

Anyone have any ideas on this?

PH

 

[chycarne]

I think it was total bees including all the bumbles too it did catch me out and some of the comments from Bayer were ... interesting... as were the mutterings from the government (or DEFRA). All in all thought provoking rather that new but at least it, bee decline in all its aspects, is now being talked about openly not just on bee fora...

 

[REDWOOD]

No idea where those figures came from, checked Google and I can't find any reference to the amount of bees in the 1960. It was also said that some bumble bees are now extinct in the UK but did not say they where extinct to the world

 

[VEG]

doesnt extinct mean none left at all anywhere otherwise they are not extinct?

 

[tonybloke]

ooooh, nice bit of pedantry, VEG

 

[itma]

... It was also said that some bumble bees are now extinct in the UK but did not say they where extinct to the world

Example. Short-haired bumblebee, Bombus subterraneous. Declared extinct in the UK, having been last recorded in 1988. Currently a project to re-introduce at Dungeness. Being re-introduced from Sweden (though perhaps not all swedes on-side). Only other European population (Estonia) is endangered.
Failed reintroduction from New Zealand a couple of years ago. Not native there, just introduced there about a hundred years ago, deliberately, from the UK! Turns out to be a very inbred population. (No comment whatsoever.)
April 2012 press release - http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/about_us/news/2012/260412.aspx


ADDED - quotes from that press release
RSPB ecologist Dr Jane Sears said: “We’ve lost 97 per cent of our wild flower meadows in the past 60 years and this has had a devastating impact on our precious native bumblebees.”
The Bumblebee Conservation Trust’s CEO, Dr Ben Darvill said: “In the last 70 years two bumblebee species have become extinct and many more have declined dramatically.

 

[VEG]

Extinction happens when a species of plant or animal dies out completely. Extinction is a permanent state: once a species is extinct, it cannot be revived. Scientists believe that extinction usually occurs when a species cannot adapt to major changes to its environment. (Some species adapt dramatically to such changes, and in doing so they become an entirely new species, meaning the species they evolved from becomes extinct.)

if they still live in any part of the world then they can't be extinct as that word means no longer in existence

 

[Poly Hive]

It's the honey bee numbers that I am curious about.

I have mailed DEFRA so we will see what sort of response there is from that quarter.

PH

 

[VEG]

let us know if you get a reply PH

 

[alanf]

Early on in his piece, at 07:38 on the iplayer version, the reporter Tom Heap says there are half the number of honeybees than there were in the 1960s. Honeybees specifically but no source, no authority and no geographical limits. In context, the article was about bees in the UK and that's the Countryfile broadcast area so presumably applies to the UK as a whole.

BBKA history pages say that the post war beekeeping boom had 80,000 beekeepers and 396,000 hives in 1953. The implication is that was the peak, but it doesn't say so. England and Wales only. Based on BBKA membership or an estimate overall? BBKA membership fell to 9,000 in 2001 but back to 20,000 in 2010. Is the 80,000 in 1953 all members? Could be an estimate and not comparing like with like.

Like so much reporting it's imprecise and infuriating. However, whatever the percentage BBKA membership, around ten years ago beekeeper numbers were low and could have been a quarter of the 1953 peak. Why choose 1960s when numbers were already falling, compare to now when they're rising and state the number of bees as half? Sounds more like struggling for an impressive soundbite rather than revealing what the underlying estimates actually suggest.

Might be worth asking the BBC producers where the figures are from. There was no suggestion they originated with DEFRA or it's predecessors.

 

[Poly Hive]

Thanks for that and it leans further towards what I suspect which is it was a complete piece of utter twaddle, and as such if proven it needs addressing.

PH

 

[Mr greenwood]

Unfortunately most media use terms wrongly for added effect like saying things are extinct in the UK, like saying someones a hero for scoring a goal. Also statements are twisted such as inferring figures for bees as a whole apply to honey bees and visa versa. You either have to judge everything with a cynical approach or end up being bounced all over the place by people who don't really care about what they are talking about and are already onto the next big crisis!

 

[carbon]

Extinction happens when a species of plant or animal dies out completely. Extinction is a permanent state: once a species is extinct, it cannot be revived. Scientists believe that extinction usually occurs when a species cannot adapt to major changes to its environment. (Some species adapt dramatically to such changes, and in doing so they become an entirely new species, meaning the species they evolved from becomes extinct.)

if they still live in any part of the world then they can't be extinct as that word means no longer in existence

I think it's OK to talk about something being locally extinct if the "local" can be identified as a discrete area, such as an island. Conservationists frequently talk of species being "extinct in the wild" meaning the only surviving individuals are held in captivity.

 

[Into the lions den]

Thanks for that and it leans further towards what I suspect which is it was a complete piece of utter twaddle, and as such if proven it needs addressing.

PH

Not twaddle Pete. I am in on meetings addressing this very issue. It is thought that hives did indeed peak at around the 400K to 440K level in the 50's and onward into the early 60's. The reliability of this figure is however in some doubt as, when sugar was rationed, one way to get more was to claim it for bee feeding.

Today the official figure is in the 275K range, but this is widely accepted to be an overestimate too, as our share of the EU pot is determined by how many colonies we have, and the figure has been kept completely static for several years, which is plainly not the case. Recently some work has been done on this by a BFA member, who has come up with a figure of 175 to 185K, contrasting with a figure of 190K actually known about by the NBU.

Bottom line is that there has been a sharp decline. Has it been a drop to half? Maybe not quite, but also not ridiculously far off it.

 

[Poly Hive]

Hmm..

Anything based on the ration is as you say highly suspect as my ex MIL told me that at the time the lies told were blatant to put it mildly!

I have a gut feeling though that the current numbers are well under represented.

PH

 

[REDWOOD]

I think it's OK to talk about something being locally extinct if the "local" can be identified as a discrete area, such as an island. Conservationists frequently talk of species being "extinct in the wild" meaning the only surviving individuals are held in captivity.

It's a wonderful thing the English language

 

[Busy Bee]

I think it would be better if us humans were extinct at least the planet could evolve naturally the way it should. We can not just leave things alone a finger in everywhere. It will utimately mean self destruction in a very short evolutionary time scale, unfortunately we will take everthing else with us.....

The vibes I got from the Bayer speaker was, we dont really care maybe it would be better for our company if bees where extinct then we could control some more... and develope more insecticides etc etc higher share prices more government investment until there is nothing left to spray and all we will have to eat is supplement pills.

Don't worry it may not be in our life time but it will come...

We cannot envolve as a spicies anymore as there is quite alot of preservation of sick people allowed to continually spread defective genes around to cause more sickness and suffering and more humans to experiment on with medical products.

The sooner we are destroyed as a resident species here the better for ourselves and everthing else, just take a look around you and see what we have done and how systematically we are destroying it.


Busy Bee

 

[tonybloke]

I think it would be better if us humans were extinct at least the planet could evolve naturally the way it should. We can not just leave things alone a finger in everywhere. It will utimately mean self destruction in a very short evolutionary time scale, unfortunately we will take everthing else with us.....

The vibes I got from the Bayer speaker was, we dont really care maybe it would be better for our company if bees where extinct then we could control some more... and develope more insecticides etc etc higher share prices more government investment until there is nothing left to spray and all we will have to eat is supplement pills.

Don't worry it may not be in our life time but it will come...

We cannot envolve as a spicies anymore as there is quite alot of preservation of sick people allowed to continually spread defective genes around to cause more sickness and suffering and more humans to experiment on with medical products.

The sooner we are destroyed as a resident species here the better for ourselves and everthing else, just take a look around you and see what we have done and how systematically we are destroying it.

Busy Bee

are you an evolutionary biologist, perchance? if not, how do you know that humans cannot evolve any further?

your rant sounds like you are a eugenicist.

when i look around me, I see trees and plants that I've planted, don't look much like destruction, either systematically or coincidently

 

[REDWOOD]

I think it would be better if us humans were extinct at least the planet could evolve naturally the way it should. We can not just leave things alone a finger in everywhere. It will utimately mean self destruction in a very short evolutionary time scale, unfortunately we will take everthing else with us.....

The vibes I got from the Bayer speaker was, we dont really care maybe it would be better for our company if bees where extinct then we could control some more... and develope more insecticides etc etc higher share prices more government investment until there is nothing left to spray and all we will have to eat is supplement pills.

Don't worry it may not be in our life time but it will come...

We cannot envolve as a spicies anymore as there is quite alot of preservation of sick people allowed to continually spread defective genes around to cause more sickness and suffering and more humans to experiment on with medical products.

The sooner we are destroyed as a resident species here the better for ourselves and everthing else, just take a look around you and see what we have done and how systematically we are destroying it.


Busy Bee

Not all is bad, rivers are now the cleanest for 200 years, we as humans have the power to destroy and to re generate and I think there is a huge number in this country who do a lot for our environment, areas of our country are now supporting wildlife that never existed, well not for a long time.
We contaminated vast amounts of land during the industrial revolution, and now surely and steadily we as compassionate humans can put this right.

 

[Hivemaker.]

and now surely and steadily we as compassionate humans can put this right.

About as effectively as a plague of locusts..lol.