Yellow Legged Hornets

[Erichalfbee]

Yes and no... A method of slaughter is either humane or it isn't. One might argue that of the inhumane methods, some are more humane than others. However, they are still inhumane.

I agree the fipronil strategy seems like the most effective and appropriate approach should we end up with an endemic issue.

Whilst the fipronil method may be arguably humane for destroying a nest by killing the queen thus meaning reproduction stops and it dies out, rather than killing everything in it outright (as I understand it, that's the aim of this method), it's still not a nice way for any individual hornet to die so could still be considered an inhumane death for the queen and those workers which also succumb to the poison, whilst being humane from the whole nest perspective.

A little whataboutery
What about the humane saving of the predated honey bee colony?

 

[Karol]

But I understand this form of prescription by a veterinarian to refer to an irreversible disease/process for which in point a there is no approved drug or b and c to euthanize the animal with a product that exists b or with a pharmacological formula upon request.
In my opinion it has the following weak points:
to. Vv is an ecological enemy of a bee and could hardly be classified as a veterinary problem since it would open the way for a systemic application to other species.
b. A nest and an individual are not the same range when it comes to euthanasia despite considering the vv species as an "invasive exotic species"
Curiously, this process could be invoked by a veterinarian for the treatment of varroa with products or formulations not approved in the United Kingdom.

It's not curious. Varroa is an infestation of an animal so it's the honeybee that is being treated and therefore the product qualifies as a veterinary medicinal product and must comply with the VMR which places additional obligations on the treatment of food producing animals. That's why using non medicinal oxalic acid by comparison is illegal.

Outside of the WCA there's no legal difference between velutina flying around in a field and a green bottle flying around inside a house. Both can be exterminated by a non medicinal pesticide.

Fipronil is available as an AVM-GSL and can be purchased legally from any authorised reseller without a veterinary prescription. If is then used as a medicinal product on an animal it must be used in accordance with its label otherwise the use becomes off label and that requires the intervention of a vet under the VMR.

There is nothing in law preventing the purchase of an AVM-GSL and using it for a non medicinal purpose.

Again, all the same disclaimers apply. This opinion is being shared as a matter of conversation to help beekeepers prepare in advance should conditions change in the UK. At present I am not advocating the use of fipronil custard in the UK.

 

[Wilco]

It's not curious. Varroa is an infestation of an animal so it's the honeybee that is being treated and therefore the product qualifies as a veterinary medicinal product and must comply with the VMR which places additional obligations on the treatment of food producing animals. That's why using non medicinal oxalic acid by comparison is illegal.

Outside of the WCA there's no legal difference between velutina flying around in a field and a green bottle flying around inside a house. Both can be exterminated by a non medicinal pesticide.

Fipronil is available as an AVM-GSL and can be purchased legally from any authorised reseller without a veterinary prescription. If is then used as a medicinal product on an animal it must be used in accordance with its label otherwise the use becomes off label and that requires the intervention of a vet under the VMR.

There is nothing in law preventing the purchase of an AVM-GSL and using it for a non medicinal purpose.

Again, all the same disclaimers apply. This opinion is being shared as a matter of conversation to help beekeepers prepare in advance should conditions change in the UK. At present I am not advocating the use of fipronil custard in the UK.

In this case, applying it to an AH is using it for a medicinal purpose.

 

[fian]

It's not curious. Varroa is an infestation of an animal so it's the honeybee that is being treated and therefore the product qualifies as a veterinary medicinal product and must comply with the VMR which places additional obligations on the treatment of food producing animals. That's why using non medicinal oxalic acid by comparison is illegal.

Outside of the WCA there's no legal difference between velutina flying around in a field and a green bottle flying around inside a house. Both can be exterminated by a non medicinal pesticide.

Fipronil is available as an AVM-GSL and can be purchased legally from any authorised reseller without a veterinary prescription. If is then used as a medicinal product on an animal it must be used in accordance with its label otherwise the use becomes off label and that requires the intervention of a vet under the VMR.

There is nothing in law preventing the purchase of an AVM-GSL and using it for a non medicinal purpose.

Again, all the same disclaimers apply. This opinion is being shared as a matter of conversation to help beekeepers prepare in advance should conditions change in the UK. At present I am not advocating the use of fipronil custard in the UK.

It would not only be fipronil but any other formulation to eliminate/euthanasia vespa velutina. If the NBU considered that the procedure was covered by the legislation in any of its prescriptions, why use it?
Regarding varroa and the "The Cascade" system, it is crystal clear that the person who would administer the product would be the veterinarian or someone authorized by him (the beekeeper) but under the responsibility of the veterinarian, so the procedure would be completely legal.

 

[fian]

In this case, applying it to an AH is using it for a medicinal purpose.

And what is the disease or irreversible process that the poor hornet suffers from that the veterinarian deduces that it should be treated/euthanized?
It is also assumed that the problem affects the entire nest and not just the Vv workers.

 

[Wilco]

And what is the disease or irreversible process that the poor hornet suffers from that the veterinarian deduces that it should be treated/euthanized?
It is also assumed that the problem affects the entire nest and not just the Vv workers.

It's being used to protect bees by killing a pest of them. Unfortunately bees are covered by the VMR.

 

[Wilco]

A little whataboutery
What about the humane saving of the predated honey bee colony?

That may be a humane purpose but does not make the killing humane in and of itself. The method of killing itself is what determines that.

 

[Wilco]

Sorry Wilco. What do you consider to be a humane way to kill hornets?

In terms of individual hornets, probability some form of very rapid death, potentially squashing done over a fraction of a second although even this needs to be faster than any nociceptive signals would be processed. Stunning with the electric racket then squashing whilst stunned would probably be optimum.

Please note my objection here is how the term 'humane' is being applied, not to object to the use of less humane methods as other factors come into play.

 

[Karol]

In this case, applying it to an AH is using it for a medicinal purpose.

Sorry Wilco, but you are wrong. Velutina outside of a hive is not an infestation of the hive or honeybee.

 

[Wilco]

Sorry Wilco, but you are wrong. Velutina outside of a hive is not an infestation of the hive or honeybee.

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.

 

[Karol]

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.

Correct but only if you are using it for a medicinal purpose to treat an animal. That is not the case here.

It is not being administered to a bee or to a hive and it is not being used as a medicinal product. It falls outside of the scope of the VMRs.

 

[Wilco]

I

Correct but only if you are using it for a medicinal purpose to treat an animal. That is not the case here.

It is not being administered to a bee or to a hive and it is not being used as a medicinal product. It falls outside of the scope of the VMRs.

It's being used for protection of bee health, applied to an animal to achieve a therapeutic effect (death of the colony of AH). As it's bee health it's under VMR. If it was for wildlife protection there might be more wiggle room.

 

[fian]

I

It's being used for protection of bee health, applied to an animal to achieve a therapeutic effect (death of the colony of AH). As it's bee health it's under VMR. If it was for wildlife protection there might be more wiggle room.

I agree with Karol, under that concept any vespula or vespa crabo could also be the object of application, even in other dualities such as mosquitoes/EBB and cattle.

 

[roche]

In this case, applying it to an AH is using it for a medicinal purpose.

I think that is dancing on the head of a pin. AH is an invasive species which will upset local ecological balances in a similar way to grey squirrels - no medicine involved. Simply preservation of local ecosystems.

 

[Karol]

I

It's being used for protection of bee health, applied to an animal to achieve a therapeutic effect (death of the colony of AH). As it's bee health it's under VMR. If it was for wildlife protection there might be more wiggle room.

Again sorry Wilco, but you are clutching at straws.

There's no 'therapeutic' effect on the honeybee. It's being used as a biocide (not a medicinal product) directly on a pest that is not directly infesting an animal. The biocide directive applies but not the VMRs.

As far as I can see, speaking as a pharmacist with 35 years specialising in the manufacture and supply of unlicensed medicines the use of fipronil custard is not lawful in this specific example but it is also not unlawful in this specific example. It's not lawful because there is no law prescribing its use. It's not unlawful because there is no applicable law prohibiting its use by a beekeeper as an end user in this one very specific instance.

The biocide directive prohibits pest controllers from using fipronil off label when providing a professional service.

Again, I re-iterate the same disclaimers. I am not advocating its use in the UK. This is only for the purpose of conversation. Any person attempting to use fipronil custard should seek specialist legal advice and should they use fipronil custard they do so at their own personal jeopardy.

 

[fian]

Again sorry Wilco, but you are clutching at straws.

There's no 'therapeutic' effect on the honeybee. It's being used as a biocide (not a medicinal product) directly on a pest that is not directly infesting an animal. The biocide directive applies but not the VMRs.

As far as I can see, speaking as a pharmacist with 35 years specialising in the manufacture and supply of unlicensed medicines the use of fipronil custard is not lawful in this specific example but it is also not unlawful in this specific example. It's not lawful because there is no law prescribing its use. It's not unlawful because there is no applicable law prohibiting its use by a beekeeper as an end user in this one very specific instance.

The biocide directive prohibits pest controllers from using fipronil off label when providing a professional service.

Again, I re-iterate the same disclaimers. I am not advocating its use in the UK. This is only for the purpose of conversation. Any person attempting to use fipronil custard should seek specialist legal advice and should they use fipronil custard they do so at their own personal jeopardy.

Karol let me tell you that you play a Jekyll/Hyde version with fipronil custard or any other medication that you intend to use as a biocide for Vv.

 

[Xander]

I'm a bit late to this party and I've skimmed through the previous posts but what is fipronil custard?
I know fipronil is used as a spot on for flea control in cats and dogs but the custard bit I'm lost on?

 

[ericbeaumont]

what is fipronil custard?

Post 254 in thread 'Asian Hornets': Asian Hornets

 

[fian]

I'm a bit late to this party and I've skimmed through the previous posts but what is fipronil custard?
I know fipronil is used as a spot on for flea control in cats and dogs but the custard bit I'm lost on?

It is mixed with egg yolk forming a semi-liquid paste and applied to the thorax of a velutina worker with the aim that when it reaches the nest it spreads the fipronil throughout the nest.
In this case, fipronil acts in a similar way because it is as toxic to ticks as it is to velutinas or any other hymenoptera/insect.

 

[Wilco]

Again sorry Wilco, but you are clutching at straws.

There's no 'therapeutic' effect on the honeybee. It's being used as a biocide (not a medicinal product) directly on a pest that is not directly infesting an animal. The biocide directive applies but not the VMRs.

As far as I can see, speaking as a pharmacist with 35 years specialising in the manufacture and supply of unlicensed medicines the use of fipronil custard is not lawful in this specific example but it is also not unlawful in this specific example. It's not lawful because there is no law prescribing its use. It's not unlawful because there is no applicable law prohibiting its use by a beekeeper as an end user in this one very specific instance.

The biocide directive prohibits pest controllers from using fipronil off label when providing a professional service.

Again, I re-iterate the same disclaimers. I am not advocating its use in the UK. This is only for the purpose of conversation. Any person attempting to use fipronil custard should seek specialist legal advice and should they use fipronil custard they do so at their own personal jeopardy.

Hence why, under the VMR, specifically the Cascade, a vet could lawfully prescribe it... So if you want to do it lawfully, that is the way to do it.

@roche completely agree. However, what I'm trying to suggest is that this looks like a way to do it lawfully. Using products off licence is unlawful.