Older readers may recall the heatwave that hit much of Europe, but especially France, during August 2003. Inevitably, perhaps, studies concluded that the influence of humankind was probably behind the event, or at least made events such as that heatwave more likely. See, for example, Stott, Stone & Allen (2004)i. The abstract makes it clear that:
“It is an ill-posed question whether the 2003 heatwave was caused, in a simple deterministic sense, by a modification of the external influences on climate—for example, increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere—because almost any such weather event might have occurred by chance in an unmodified climate.”
Having said that, they nevertheless find:
Using a threshold for mean summer temperature that was exceeded in 2003, but in no other year since the start of the instrumental record in 1851, we estimate it is very likely (confidence level >90%) that human influence has at least doubled the risk of a heatwave exceeding this threshold magnitude.
By 2019, when western Europe (and particularly France) had experienced another heatwave (in June of that year) attribution studies had moved on. CarbonBriefii was quick to tell us that:
The record-breaking heatwave that struck France last week was made at “least five times more likely” by climate change, according to a new quick-fire assessmentiii.
They went on to explain that there were uncertainties, although it seems that uncertainties only operate in one direction:
However, they note that there are “large uncertainties” in their analysis and the true influence of climate change could be higher.
So far so apparently certain, and indeed the Wikipedia entry for “Climate change in France”iv tells us that:
Climate change is expected to bring longer, warmer summers and less precipitation to France, which will severely affect many of the crops used in agriculture. Due to the warmer weather, the evaporation will be higher and less rain is expected. As most crops currently grown in France are to some extent sensitive to drought, there will likely be a higher need for irrigation, leading to a higher cost of crop production. Extreme weather events and droughts can also eliminate crop yields for some years. The warm weather…will prolong the growing season.
Bees
What has all this got to do with bees? Well, on 20th October 2021 an article appeared in the Guardianv with the headline “‘Climate change is hitting us’: French beekeepers expect worst honey harvest in half a century”
It appeared that all those warnings of long hot dry summers brought about by man-made greenhouse gas emissions were justified. But wait. What’s this? The secondary heading to the Guardian article expanded on and clarified the contents of the main headline, thus:
“Bad weather hits production across Europe as flowering seasons become earlier and shorter”
What do they mean by “bad weather”? Most of us, at least those of us who live in fairly cool, wet locations and who are grateful for a bit of sun and warmth, assume that by bad weather they mean things like cold and rain, maybe even frost and snow. And sure enough, this is what the Guardian tells us, when we read on:
French beekeepers expect their worst harvest in decades as unseasonably cold and wet weather due to climate change has prevented bees from producing honey….
…Beekeepers association UNAF said …2021 will be a disastrous year for honey as, with the exception of a few rare areas in France, conditions have been very difficult for bees in spring and summer, with long periods of frost, cold, rain and northerly winds…
…Due to late frost and rains, there will be virtually no acacia honey this year, for the second year in a row, while rosemary, thyme and heather honey production, as well as chestnut and sunflower honey harvests, have been poor to virtually zero.
Forest, mountain and pine honey harvests have also been disappointing as the flowering season was too short…
…“Little by little, climate change is hurting our business. At this rate, there will be less and less French honey,” he said.
So it’s our old friend (or enemy) climate change again. But not climate change as we’d been led to believe. It seems any unusual weather (hot, cold, wet, dry) qualifies as climate change, even if it’s not the type of climate change we had been told to expect. I have no doubt that extreme weather of all kinds might be less than helpful to bees and their keepers, but is it right to blame an all-embracing climate change on variable weather? Might some other factor be at play?
Pesticides
On 4th August 2021, an articlevi appeared on the France 24 website, headed “Pesticide threat to bees likely ‘underestimated’: study”. It provides a detailed explanation of a very real and substantial threat to French bees, and concludes that the main problems are habitat loss and pesticide use (no mention of climate change):
“Exposure to a cocktail of agrochemicals significantly increases bee mortality, according to research Wednesday that said regulators may be underestimating the dangers of pesticides in combination.
Bees and other pollinators are crucial for crops and wild habitats and evidence of steep drops in insect populations worldwide has prompted fears of dire consequences for food security and natural ecosystems.
A new meta-analysis of dozens of published studies over the last 20 years looked at the interaction between agrochemicals, parasites and malnutrition on bee behaviours — such as foraging, memory, colony reproduction — and health.
Researchers found that when these different stressors interacted they had a negative effect on bees, greatly increasing the likelihood of death.
The study published in Nature also found that pesticide interaction was likely to be “synergistic”, meaning that their combined impact was greater than the sum of their individual effects.
…In a commentary also published in Nature, Adam Vanbergen of France’s National Research Institute for Agriculture, Food and Environment said that pollinating insects face threats from intensive agriculture, including chemicals like fungicides and pesticides, as well as a reduction of pollen and nectar from wild flowers.
The industrial-scale use of managed honey bees also increases pollinator exposure to parasites and diseases.
…The main drivers of pollinator extinction are thought to be habitat loss and pesticide use.”
Bearing in mind that this appeared just two and a half months before the Guardian article bemoaning the supposed effect of climate change on French bees, one might have expected it to be considered relevant to the issue, and reference to have been made to it by the Guardian. All the more so since on 9th September 2021 the Guardian’s website included an articlevii with the heading “France threatened with legal action over use of pesticides
Widespread use of chemicals that can harm wildlife means French state has failed to protect the country’s flora and fauna, say NGOS”. Even more than that, the heading to the article was followed by a photograph of lots of placards with pictures of angry-looking cartoon bees raising one fist, with the sub-heading: “A campaign in Paris earlier this year highlighting the threat of neonicotonoids on bees”. Indeed, in this article, even the Guardian said:
Scientists have repeatedly shown a link between the widespread use of pesticides on agricultural land and the loss of pollinators, which are essential to so many food chains. This is believed to be a leading cause of insect losses worldwide – along with the destruction of wild areas. Last year, a global study showed insect numbers had dropped by almost 25% in the last 30 years.
EU members banned neonicotinoids on crops in 2018 because of the damage they do to bees, but some countries have subsequently allowed them to be used in specific situations.
The whole article was about threatened Court action against the French government by two NGOs, in respect of the French government’s alleged failure to meet its obligations to protect nature by authorising the use of neonicotinoids under specific conditions in France despite the EU ban. The entire article makes no mention of climate change.
Conclusion
Adverse weather conditions undoubtedly cause all sorts of problems to bees and beekeepers in France. However, cold summers and shortened flowering seasons are the exact opposite of all the usual climate change warnings that have been made by alarmists about French weather, especially summer weather, where almost the entire focus has been on how CAGW is making heat-waves more likely. To blame cold, wet shortened summers on climate change without more ado is all just a bit too glib and easy. To blame the problems of French bees on climate change in an article that doesn’t mention pesticides and habitat loss is unworthy, in my opinion, especially when the Guardian is well aware of those issues.
Endnotes
i https://www.nature.com/articles/nature03089
ii https://www.carbonbrief.org/frances-record-breaking-heatwave-made-at-least-five-times-more-likely-by-climate-change
iii https://www.worldweatherattribution.org/human-contribution-to-record-breaking-june-2019-heatwave-in-france/
iv https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_in_France
v https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/20/france-honey-worst-harvest-climate-change
vi https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20210804-pesticide-threat-to-bees-likely-underestimated-study
vii https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/09/campaigners-threaten-france-with-legal-action-over-use-of-pesticides-aoe
Climate Scepticism 
” …. climate change warnings that have been made by alarmists about French weather,”
It’s not only weather that enviro-alarmists in France exaggerate.
This headline in ‘European Scientist’ takes some beating:
“Air pollution: 38,000 deaths per year worldwide, including 48,000 in France…”
https://www.europeanscientist.com/en/features/air-pollution-38000-deaths-per-year/
LikeLiked by 2 people
Perhaps rather than bee carnage the poor weather might have affected the flowering season for the “single origin” honeys. That might have either led to poor flowering or poor foraging in the critical period, quite short for single species of flower. Dunno. But that wouldn’t be the case for the “forest” honey, which is collected from aphid honeydew in conifer woods. [This says nothing about blaming “climate” over weather.]
I have been a neonicotinoid sceptic, but have been told recently that the neonicotinoids in a seed coat can affect bees later foraging on flowers (i.e. months later). This seems extraordinary to me. Another thing to read more about.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Of course “Climate Change” literally means change in either direction, but the IPCC early in its career officially redefined it to mean “man-made climate change” (though presumably still in either direction.) Meanwhile the term “global warming” (considered passé and usually replaced by “climate change”) has been replaced officially by the Guardian by “global heating,”, (a term now in common use, according to a recent press release by the Oxford Dictionary) despite the fact that “heating” normally mean “a method of keeping warm” (as in “underfloor heating,” “heating engineer” etc.) and so is also by definition man-made. So global heating is what we do when we make the world hotter. Climate change is what we do when we make the world hotter or colder. Everything else is just weather.
It’s difficult to comment without going into the entire history and politics of French agriculture. It’s almost impossible to criticise farmers in France, since many of them are small family businesses struggling to survive, and everyone in France has nostalgic memories of holidays down on their grandparents’ farm. Half France’s farmers live on less than 300 euros a month, according to a statistic I saw. Yet the blokes dumping lorry loads of manure outside the Prefecture during their regular protests look well-fed enough.
Yet there are also regular stories of parents keeping their kids home from school during the spraying season, and the countryside seems unnaturally devoid of insects and wild flowers. The wildlife that the French peasant likes to preserve is the kind it can shoot at.
Banning glyphosate (Round Up) was last year’s big ecological campaign. It was supposed to come into effect this year, I think, but it’s been quietly delayed until after next year’s election. There’s a lot of organic farmers, and of course they are fervently “écolo,” though even among them there are divisions. Organic farmers are supposed to not use a wide range of herbicides and pesticides, but a friend who’s an organic winegrower told us the trick is to have two parcels of land, one designated as organic and the other “normal” one, which is left uncultivated. The authorities only check the books, not the actual land, so if you’re half and half, you’re entitled to continue to buy pesticides, and no-one checks what you do with it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jit and Geoff, you both know far more about these issues than I do – Jit as an ecologist, Geoff as a French resident. Thank you both for your comments. I’d be interested to learn more. My point in bringing these issues to the attention of readers here was partly in the hope of stimulating a debate among those who know more than me; and partly also to draw attention, yet again, to the appalling nature of the Guardian’s one-sided reporting when it comes to climate change.
LikeLiked by 2 people
O/T I’ll post this here as a reminder to people that this is the kind of tip we post on the Open Mic Thread.
Here we see a tweet from a Disinformation operation called BBC Trending
this is an ambush name cos it rarely features stuff that is actually trending
but rather stuff that BBC/Guardian land people WISH was trending.
As usual projection is a libmob characteristic
whatever they accuse others of
is what they themselves are actually doing.
Here the accuse Skeptics of being the guys that are misleading.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So, Michael Mann is coming out against doomism. Who said there were no silver linings? 😉
Thanks Stew, this BBC demonisation push deserves our sober attention. Nasty.
LikeLike
Mann has been coming out against (some) doomism for a while now. Here he is on Bendell in 2019:
LikeLiked by 1 person
Vinny, interesting link. I followed it and found Mann also saying:
“The concept of “uncontrollable levels of climate change” is both unscientific and nonsensical…”. Which is also interesting.
LikeLike
sorry to go o/t Mark – thanks for the link Stew – 1st min from Mann was enough – partial quote’s from the audio “it was my sabbatical in Australia 2019/20…. where I first came face to face with climate change…unprecedented heat & drought led to bush fires that blanketed the Australian continent…it was dangerous to go outside some days.”
by the way later in the audio Mann says he was attached/on line because he was Jewish & part of a cabal etc… ?
Will listen to more later – but as Stew says – Trending for the Trendy green BBC & trusted factchecker.
LikeLike
it’s a win/win narrative that seems to invade every climate related story,they just want to scare the children into meltdown (and achieve it)
LikeLike
dfhunter, no worries. For me the only things that are O/T on my threads are unpleasantness and libel, otherwise I’m happy for discussions to meander where they will. So, please feel free to meander pleasantly where you like.
LikeLike
This new low from the BBC deserves an article in its own right. Unfortunately to write one I would first have to listen to the programme/series, and I don’t know whether I could stand that. Well, we have been firmly out-grouped by that most inclusive of broadcasters. Disappointing.
LikeLike
Jit, full quote from that BBC piece:
“1. The ‘d-words’ v the planet
Trending The Denial Files
How much do disinformation and new forms of climate change denial threaten the fight to save the planet?
In the first episode of a special new series running around the COP26 climate conference, BBC Trending speaks to a leading scientist who says the battle to prevent catastrophe may depend on winning the information war.
Professor Michael Mann first made headlines in 1998 when he published the pioneering “hockeystick graph” which showed how carbon emissions caused by human activity are harming the planet.
Since then mounting evidence has made it harder for the fossil fuel industry and its allies to deny the existence of man-made climate change.
The overwhelming majority of scientists agree that we are now at a turning point where only urgent and dramatic action can save humanity.
In November world leaders will gather at in Scotland to agree targets for cutting admissions. Many observers regard it as our last best chance to avert disaster.
Professor Mann argues that in the face of this reality, what he calls “the forces of inaction” have developed new strategies to try to prevent humanity from kicking its addiction to oil, gas and coal.
So does the future of life on earth depend on understanding the playbook of these new climate war tactics?”
Yes, I think we can safely say that any pretence of balance has well and truly gone out of the window – the BBC is a full-on campaigning organisation now.
LikeLike
In a similar tone Fullfact have been deployed
“Here’s a FactCheck Farage was wrong on wind”
… that is the weapon the anti-Faragers have wanted so they are running off with it.
Which side is actually wrong ? the so called fact-check is full of flaws from the outset
… Anyways at the time there was a pro-wind expert in the studio so there was already a voice putting their side..and the guy mostly accepted Farages points
So aside from making a hit-piece there was no need for a fact-check.
LikeLike
Mark/Stew that blurb from the BBC is so wrong it is alarming. Where are the checks? Is it now permissible to write any old rubbish about climate change so long as it is in the direction of exaggeration? So it would seem.
There is no impending catastrophe.
We lost that a decade ago.
Not the adjective I would choose.
It showed no such thing.
It is the catastrophe element of this that I deny.
That is a lie.
No.
Get real.
[Edit: unexpected WordPress behaviour. I tried to paste in a quote with ctrl-v and it submitted the comment instead. Curious.]
LikeLiked by 1 person
“2021 will be a disastrous year for honey as, with the exception of a few rare areas in France, conditions have been very difficult for bees in spring and summer, with long periods of frost, cold, rain and northerly winds…”
And yet, supposedly:
“Europe’s record summer ‘impossible’ without global heating
Cop26 countries must take action to stop record heat becoming an annual event, say experts”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/03/europe-record-summer-global-heating-cop26
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/03/europe-record-summer-global-heating-cop26
Hmmm.
LikeLike
Neighbour is bringing some free honey soon, as she has too much on her farm up the road.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s not just honey, it seems:
“Warning over ‘extremely low’ wine production in Europe due to bad weather
Industry body head warns there is ‘no vaccine’ against climate change and winemakers must adapt with ‘urgent necessity’”
https://www.theguardian.com/food/2021/nov/05/warning-over-extremely-low-wine-production-in-europe-due-to-bad-weather
“World wine production is expected to fall to one of its lowest levels on record after harsh weather battered vineyards in Europe’s major wine-producing regions.
The conditions “severely impacted” production in Italy, Spain and France, resulting in “extremely low” production volumes, an international wine body has said.
In the midst of the shortage, demand is expected to recover to near levels seen before the coronavirus pandemic, the International Organisation of Vine and Wine (OIV) said in a statement on Thursday.
Based on information collected from 28 countries, which represent 85% of the world production in 2020, the OIV pegged world production for 2021 at between 247.1 and 253.5 million hectoliters (mhl), with a mid-range estimate at 250.3 mhl.
This would mark a third consecutive year of below-average output and approach the 2017 level of 248 mhl, the smallest in six decades, according to the OIV. One hectolitre is the equivalent of 133 standard bottles.
A drop in production in Italy, Spain and France, the world’s largest wine producers, would outweigh what is forecast to be the highest-ever volume in the southern hemisphere, the OIV said.
Vineyards in western Europe were hit by spring frosts, while French producers also endured heavy rain, hail and mildew disease….
…In the European Union, production was forecast to fall to 145 mhl, down 13% from last year, it said.
In the southern hemisphere, favourable weather should allow high output in major producing countries, except for New Zealand, the OIV said. Total output for the southern hemisphere was projected at a record 59 mhl, up 19% from last year.
US production was forecast to rise 6% from last year to 24.1 mhl, although summer drought in some regions was expected to keep the volume below the five-year average….”.
It’s all such loaded reporting. Europe’s summers were supposed to be much hotter because of climate change, and indeed the Guardian has had lots of reports banging on about Europe’s 2021 heatwave summer, which is supposed to have been the cause of wild fires left, right and centre. And yet cold wet weather has simultaneously caused huge damage to honey and wine production in those places too. Whatever the weather, it seems it’s climate change (if the consequences are bad). Meanwhile, “favourable weather” (presumably nothing to do with climate change, since the consequences are positive – the highest-ever volume of wine production) in the southern hemisphere is tucked well away in the article, and we don’t get a headline shrieking “Climate change results in highest-ever volume of wine produced in the southern hemisphere”.
LikeLike
“Bees may take generations to recover from one exposure to insecticides
Study shows reduced reproduction and other negative impacts on performance of species”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/22/bees-generations-recover-exposure-insecticides
“It may take bees multiple generations to recover from being exposed to insecticides even just once, research shows.
Although studies have long shown the damaging effects of pesticides for the biodiverse environment, little is known about how much they affect insects in the long term.
This new research shows that even a single exposure to insecticides in a bee’s first year of life affects offspring production, and since the effects of the pesticides are cumulative, this results in an overall decrease in the bee population.
Clara Stuligross, a PhD candidate in ecology at the University of California in Davis and lead author of this study, said: “Especially in agricultural areas, pesticides are often used multiple times a year and multiple years in a row. So this really shows us what that can actually mean for bee populations.”
To show to what extent the environmental damage of insecticides bridges generations, also known as “the carryover effect”, the scientists carried out a two-year experiment in the field. They analysed how blue orchard bees, a solitary, wild pollinator species tinted blue and not black and yellow like honeybees, reacted to exposure to pesticides.
They used the insecticide imidacloprid, which is known to be acutely toxic to bees, and tried out all the combinations of exposure – exposing the bees in their first year, in their first and second year, just in their second year. Use of this type of pesticide, neonicotinoids, is banned in the EU but production is not, and large quantities are exported each year.”
LikeLike
“Defra may approve ‘devastating’ bee-killing pesticide, campaigners fear
Department sources say emergency authorisation of neonicotinoid Cruiser SB likely to be announced”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/07/defra-may-approve-devastating-bee-killing-pesticide-campaigners-fear
“The UK government may be about to approve the use of a controversial bee-killing pesticide, wildlife groups fear.
Sources inside the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) say that, after pressure from the sugar beet industry, an emergency authorisation of the neonicotinoid Cruiser SB is likely to be announced in the coming weeks.
The pesticide, which is lethal to bees and other insects, is prohibited under European Union law except in extreme circumstances. The insecticides act by binding strongly to receptors in the central nervous system of insects, causing overstimulation of their nerve cells, paralysis and death.
The sugar beet industry says it needs the pesticide to protect seeds from a disease called virus yellows, which reduces yield and sugar content. In 2017, Michael Gove, the then environment secretary, welcomed the EU ban, and promised that “unless the scientific evidence changes, the government will maintain these increased restrictions post-Brexit”.
Campaigners claim that if the authorisation does go ahead, it could be in breach of the recently passed Environment Act.”
For once it’s nice to be on the side of campaigners. It’s good for campaigners to be campaigning out something that has the potential to be a real threat to ecology. I have two worries:
1. The approval may go ahead; and
2. If and when it does, and it adversely affects the bee population, their demise will be blamed on climate change.
LikeLike
“Defra may approve ‘devastating’ bee-killing pesticide, campaigners fear
Department sources say emergency authorisation of neonicotinoid Cruiser SB likely to be announced”
Can someone explain the mechanism here?
As I understand it, neonicotinoids are used as seed dressings. Bees feed on nectar produced in flowers.
Therefore if this insecticide was affecting pollinators of seed crops, then the yields from these crops would fall and no one would want to use them.
LikeLike
Bill, the issue is obviously complex, and given the critical importance of bees to pollination, and therefore crop-growing generally, this is an area where we should be extremely careful. However, the Government has made the point you raise:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/neonicotinoid-product-as-seed-treatment-for-sugar-beet-emergency-authorisation-application/statement-on-the-decision-to-issue-with-strict-conditions-emergency-authorisation-to-use-a-product-containing-a-neonicotinoid-to-treat-sugar-beet
“Risks to bees
Sugar beet is a non-flowering crop and the risks to bees from the sugar beet crop itself were assessed to be acceptable. The applicant recognised that risks could be posed to bees from flowering weeds in and around the crop and proposed to address this with the use of industry-recommended herbicide programmes to minimise the number of flowering weeds in treated sugar beet crops. This was considered to be acceptable. The applicant recognised that the persistence and mobility of neonicotinoids in soils could result in residues with the potential to cause unacceptable effects to bees in following crops. Measures were proposed to mitigate the identified risks through the exclusion of flowering crops in subsequent cultivations.
The Secretary of State is satisfied there is sufficient evidence to indicate that residues of thiamethoxam and its metabolite deteriorate over time, and that with mitigation measures in place the risks are considered to be acceptably low enough that the benefits outweigh them. Conditions are attached to the emergency authorisation to ensure that no flowering crops are planted as following crops for a period of at least 22 months, with an extended period of exclusion for oilseed rape (of 32 months), to minimise the risk to bees.”
LikeLike
“Solar parks could be used to boost bumblebee numbers, study suggests
Lancaster University researchers say sowing wildflowers alongside panels would have benefits for farmers who rely on pollinators”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/13/solar-parks-could-be-used-to-boost-bumblebee-numbers-study-suggests
“Solar parks could provide habitats for wildlife – and particularly bumblebees – to flourish, if managed in the right way, benefiting farmers and nature, new research suggests.
There are already 14,000 hectares (35,000 acres) of solar parks in the UK, in which arrays of solar panels are installed over a large area, and an estimated 90,000 hectares will be needed. Yet the parks have attracted controversy over claims they are ugly, blight productive land and harm nature.”
Yes, that’s true. I think must be close to the first time the Guardian acknowledges the problem. Then we get this:
“If solar park owners were encouraged to use the land to sow wildflowers alongside the solar panels, they could become valuable habitats for pollinators, research from Lancaster University has found. Managing them in this way would boost bumblebee numbers beyond the borders of the parks, to about 1km (0.6 miles) away, benefiting farmers who rely on bees to pollinate their crops.
One simulation run by the study group found four times as many bees in a solar park managed as a wildflower meadow than in one based on turf grass.
Hollie Blaydes, a researcher at Lancaster University who will present the findings at a conference, said: “Our research suggests that the management of vegetation within the solar parks is really important. Solar parks managed as a meadow act as bumblebee habitat that is rich in flowering plants. Management to create floral-rich bumblebee habitat could be one of the simplest ways to support bumblebees on solar parks.””
Which is very interesting. But it rather undermines the oft-repeated claims that solar panels aren’t in effect destroying agricultural land, by preventing its use for growing crops. It may be that turning them in to wild flower meadows is the best that can be done with them in terms of giving something back to the environment that they’re blighting, but if this is how they are to go forward, then the claim that they can still be used for food crops will go by the board.
LikeLike
“Climate crisis could lead to rise of smaller bees, study finds
Danger looms for larger species such as bumblebees, which have lower heat tolerance, leading to ‘cascading effects’ on ecosystems”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/apr/21/climate-crisis-smaller-bees-bumblebees-study
Tucked away at the end of the article is this nugget:
“One in six species of bees have gone regionally extinct somewhere in the world.
The main drivers of extinction are thought to be habitat loss and pesticide use.”
LikeLike
That would mean – or imply – that the larger bumblebees like it cold and the smaller ones like it hot. Someone called Bergmann said a long time ago that animals were larger the further away from the equator they lived – can’t remember what kind of animals are said to prove the rule – I was going to say bears, but although the polar bear is bigger than the others, that isn’t great evidence since there are so few kinds. Anyway, do bumblebees follow Bergmann’s rule?
[from Ramirez-Delgado et al 2016 “The converse to Bergmann’s rule in bumblebees, a phylogenetic approach”, which you find a pdf of via Google Scholar if you’ve a mind to.]
Quite a cloud there, but the largest few are firmly equatorial. So small size has no advantage when it’s hot – at least for bumblebees. Body size is complicated. There are costs and benefits to large size – difficulty in losing heat is one cost, but so is difficulty in warming up. Development takes longer if you are larger, given the same temperature: so that is a disadvantage of large size in not very hot places. Larger sizes might mean better dessication resistance. Etc.
LikeLike
Jit, thanks for your input. This is far more your area than mine, and your comment offers valuable insights.
My simple brain got little further than wondering why people are obsessed with climate change and its impact on bees, when apparently: “The main drivers of extinction are thought to be habitat loss and pesticide use.” None of the usual suspects seem to be too upset by this, yet I find it far more worrying. Another example of environmentalists and ecologists giving up on the environment and ecology unless it has something to do with climate change.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mark, I have seen hot weather cause serious mortality in bumblebees. Not far from us there is a field. A few years ago, the weather was hot, and the field was full of white clover, and the clover was humming with bumblebees. Along came a large mower. It drove up and down until every flower was decapitated. Then it left.
Two days later the billiard-table of a field was now littered with dead bumblebees. Two reasons: first, unlike honeybees, bumblebees only store a thimble’s worth of honey back at base. Deprived of nectar sources, they soon run out of fuel. Second: also unlike honeybees – which you might have seen diving into your garden pond in hot weather – bumblebees only take on water via the nectar they drink. So as you can imagine, they soon dessicate in hot weather… in the sudden absence of the food and water resource they had been relying on for a fortnight.
The lesson is: if local authorities want to save bumblebees, the answer is very simple. Don’t mow the grass until the flowers have finished. As the resource dries up the bees will search further afield and find other sources of nectar. But if you cut it all at once, they will die before they can locate alternatives. For obvious reasons, hot weather exacerbates the situation.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jit I hope you have conveyed this valuable information to the local authorities and regional newspaper. Bumblebees are an aeronautical marvel that commonly cause smiles.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Alan, to my shame I did not. I gave up trying to influence the city council a long time ago. On occasions, having obtained agreement that certain places were not going to be mown between certain dates, I would stroll past said place only to be confronted with the usual billiard table. Excuses abounded. The staff just went out and cut stuff in rotation. There was a breakdown in communication. The best reply ran along these lines:
Jit: I want you to cut this place less frequently. If you leave it say between Easter and the summer holidays, then all the flowers will be able to complete their life cycle.
City Council: I am sorry. We can’t cut the grass less frequently, because it will cost more.
Jit: ???
City Council: It is because we will have to issue a separate job for the places we want to go on a different cutting regime.
==
Thwarted for years, I now just grind my teeth in fury. There is no penetrating the bureaucracy.
LikeLike
Perhaps the EDP is the route to go. Start up a “Love a Bumble” campaign.
Part of our current garden is a bumblebee paradise, unmown and clover covered. Our part of town also has wide grass verges, some are sculpted into billiard tables, others left to grow wild and similarly clover covered. A former neighbour incessantly mows his lawns but is proud of having bee hotels. I had not made the link between lawn mowing and frequency of bees in the late spring, I’m sure other potential bumblaphiles haven’t either. The EDP could well be persuaded to run with a campaign. Combined with smile-inducing photographs like that fronting Mark’s article it could be a winner.
LikeLike
Serf axiom:
Tryin’ ter solve problems is what some peeple do.
Tryin’ ter seek profit from problem ‘ídentification’ is
what most bureaucrats do.
LikeLike
JIT. Reading again through your discussion today of Bergmann’s rule and follow up about problems of animal size, I was struck by the clear evidence it yields about the great pleasure you undoubtedly have in your chosen science. I can tell you that as you age, details may slip away, but that underlying rapture remains. I never regretted choosing geology (although I also read Zoology and could easily have chosen that route).
LikeLike
Alan, the good thing about ecology – I don’t know if geology is like this too – is that it’s mostly common sense. It does however seem as if some ecologists forget their “basic ecology” and start to believe incredible things re: climate change. As for insects themselves, I have been known to rescue individuals drowning in puddles after a rain squall. I also save exhausted bumblebees, if I meet with them. Here’s one from a couple of years ago charging up on a scrap of honey with a bit of added water:
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jit, we too (my wife and I) save exhausted bees like that when we encounter them. I may be unfair, but I wonder how many climate alarmists would think to do it?
LikeLike
JIT. I don’t think much of science is common sense, well not initially. Once you have learned some, and especially if you have practiced it, science thinking can become second nature. If you have tried teaching science you will commonly have found that what seems second nature to you is difficult (and perhaps even illogical) to those you would instruct. It is now more than nine years since I have practiced science, but I find myself thinking in the same patterns to reach conclusions. “She who must be listened to” commonly berates me for doing so.
LikeLike
I’ve read somewhere that you shouldn’t use ordinary kitchen sugar to revive bumblebees. It must be honey. This is because… Can’t remember.
I used brown kitchen sugar and a bit of water to revive one last year. The thing took ages to wake up and when it it did it flew straight into the path of a passing car.
Perhaps honey provides some sort of radar.
LikeLike
bumblebees are loving my Forest Flame (10ft high) at the moment.
after reading the comments above, I will donate a drop from my next bottle of Bud to the little fella who needs it 🙂
LikeLike
Following on from JIT and Alan’s discussion:
“Mow problem: gardeners encouraged not to cut lawns in May
No Mow May scheme promotes letting wild plants thrive to provide nectar for insects”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/apr/29/no-mow-may-gardeners-not-to-cut-lawns-wild-plants-insects
“Plants considered weeds should be welcomed in lawns in summer, the charity added, especially those such as dandelions, which provide important nectar for pollinators. Despite being outnumbered by daisies 85 to one on a typical 2021 lawn, they produced 9% of its pollen and 37% of its nectar sugar. Plantlife said just eight dandelion flowers may produce enough nectar sugar to meet an adult bumblebee’s baseline energy needs.
One 100 sq metre area of unmowed lawn, according to their plant study, would produce enough pollen to stock up six mining bee brood cells and enough nectar sugar to meet the needs of six bumblebees a day.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mark, Jit & others
I had a exhausted bumblebee/bee on my patio the other hot day & was trying to remember what advice you guys gave on this thread – which I have eventually found again.
it has walking in erratic circles & trying to fly, but obviously no energy to get airborne.
tried to give it water, but it just walked thru it without stopping.
all we had was ordinary kitchen sugar, and as Vinney noted above & per Jit’s Honey comment I wasn’t sure whether to use it.
I suppose in the wild this happens all the time ? but when the bee is found dead the next day I feel I should have tried something.
any advice ?
LikeLike
Dfhunter, I am no expert, and would always defer to Jit on topics such as this. All I know is that we have found a little honey to work in reviving bees.
We are lucky in having local honey in shops in town, made by bees from hives very near to where we live. I don’t know if it helps that the honey we use in these cases is local to the exhausted bees but I speculate that it might.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, what Mark said. Mix a tiny amount of honey with a tiny amount of water and show the drop of honey/water to the bee. As I may have mentioned in this or another thread, bumblebees do not drink water but rely on nectar for hydration. Therefore inappropriate mowing can do for them in next to no time, if coupled with hot weather.
Plant nice things in your garden and you can simply place the bee on a flower. However, it does get more complicated because different bumblebees have different tongue lengths and prefer different kinds of flowers as a consequence. Clovers are good, as are thyme, Michaelmas daisies and many others. Possibly lavender takes the prize.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We planted lavender on either side of the path leading to our front door. Now we run the gauntlet of bees. But no need to worry, bees are so intent on gathering nectar, they never even notice us brushing past. And the flowers last so long: a constant source of what those bees treasure most.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for the feedback Mark.
no honey in our house, plus the bee was walking in erratic circles, so no way we could feed it without trapping it somehow & that may have killed/shocked it anyway.
you can only try your best I suppose.
ps – I caught a cat toying with a field mouse on the patio once. the cat was just sitting staring at the frozen mouse until I chased it.
the mouse was frozen for another 5 mts, then scampered. felt good saving the little guy.
next day a dying field mouse was on the patio, probably bitten by the same cat, and not even eaten.
such is life.
LikeLike
thanks for the tips all 🙂
LikeLike
“US honeybees suffer second deadliest season on record
Nearly 50% of US bee colonies died off last year, although efforts have helped the overall bee population remain ‘relatively stable’”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jun/23/us-honeybees-second-deadliest-season
Climate change is in the sights of the Guardian, of course:
However, it seems there’s much more to it than that:
LikeLike
“Bumblebee nests are overheating to fatal levels, study finds
More frequent heatwaves mean bees are unable to thermoregulate their hives – further endangering a species already in decline”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/may/04/bumblebees-overheating-threat-global-heating-temperatures-aoe
Bumblebee nests may be overheating, killing off broods and placing one of the Earth’s critical pollinators in decline as temperatures rise, new research has found.
Around the world, many species of Bombus, or bumblebee, have suffered population declines due to global heating, the research said. Bumblebee colonies are known for their ability to thermoregulate: in hot conditions, worker bees gather to beat their wings and fan the hive, cooling it down. But as the climate crisis pushes average temperatures up and generates heatwaves, bumblebees will struggle to keep their homes habitable.
Most bumblebee broods would not survive at temperatures above 36C, the paper, published in Frontiers in Bee Science, concluded. The research team reviewed 180 years of literature, and found that for all bumblebee species studied the optimum temperature range for incubating nests was between 28C and 32C.
Peter Kevan, the lead author of the study, told the Guardian: “If [bumblebees] can’t keep temperatures below what is probably a lethal limit of about 35C, when the brood may die, that could explain why we are losing so many bumblebees around the world, especially in North America and Europe.”
I have no ability to critique this. After all, what do I know about bees? But I would remind readers that the crisis in bee numbers in 2021 reported by the Guardian was caused by bad (i.e. cold) weather. The report in this latest Guardian article can be found here:
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frbee.2024.1351616/full
The summary includes a few caveats and more cautious language than are noted by the Guardian. For instance:
…The complex interactions of the mechanisms at the root of the declines are poorly understood. Among the numerous factors, we posit that heat stress in the nests could play a key role in the decline of bumblebee species...
...The Thermal Neutral Zone (TNZ), temperatures over which metabolic expenditure is minimal to maintain uniform nest temperatures, has not been studied in Bombus and may differ between species and biogeographic conditions….
…The TPC [Thermal Performance Curve Relationship] has not been studied in eusocial bees except Apis dorsata but may differ between species and biogeographic conditions. The importance of the TPC and the TNZ indicates that environmental temperatures in and around bumblebee nests (which have been rarely studied especially in the contexts of nest architecture and substrate thermal characteristics) are factors central to understanding the adverse effects of heat stress and climatic warming on bumblebee populations, health, and biogeographical decline.
LikeLike
Mark; I’ve read a bit about bumblebees and I try to encourage them in my garden, along with solitary bees. In my amateur opinion this is highly speculative as there are so many factors which affect nesting success that attributing anything to the very slight increase in average temps is probably impossible. Further, a balanced report would look at the effect of lower temps as well which, as with many creatures, are far more problematic.
There is also the common-sense test. Our present bee species survived the little ice age as well as the higher temps of the Holocene Optimum. Beyond that they have survived various ice ages and then re-populated the glaciated areas remarkably quickly. In my view tend to under-estimate the resilience of flora and fauna to climatic variances: they’ve seen it all before, many times.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mike,
You make a good point, and one that I’ve often mulled over without reaching a conclusion. The same could be true of – for instance – coral, and for much flora and fauna that has been around for millions of years. If its species has survived much colder and much hotter times than now, then why is it assumed that it won’t survive a bit of extra heat now? I suspect humankind is causing all sorts of problems, not least destruction of vital habitat (in some cases, ironically, via renewable energy industrialisation of hitherto wild places), but that CAGW is way down the problems list.
LikeLike
I suspect that an answer to this puzzle involves the existence of variants. At any given time a species will be represented by individuals that exhibit a variation in their responses to environmental variables, like some bumblebees able to thrive in warmer than usual conditions. As an environment changes different variants increase or decrease according to their responses to that environmental variable. Thus during past warm episodes, warm tolerant variants will have thrived but as cooler conditions prevailed would have reduced in frequency. Extinction would occur when the frequency of variants tolerant of the new conditions reaches very low levels.
Thus the concern about heat-stressed bumblebees might be that the frequency of warm-tolerant variants might now be so low that local extinction of the entire species might be occurring. I doubt if this degree of information is currently available.
I must admit that in the past few weeks, during sunny episodes I have had to dodge errant bumblebees flying erratically only minutes later finding them dead on the ground. Temperatures weren’t particularly warm, but perhaps they hadn’t found required amounts of nectar, they certainly didn’t seem to be carrying much pollen.
I do so hope garden buzz bombers survive. I always wonder how they can get off the ground. Miracles can happen.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Bumblebee Conservation Trust, though it mentions climate change, points out that the major contributor to the decline of bumble bees is loss of habitat:
https://www.bumblebeeconservation.org/why-bees-need-our-help/
This is yet another case of climate change cultists hijacking a real environmental problem and co-opting it to promote their own narrative, whilst diverting attention from the real issue and thus making it harder for genuine conservationists to do their job. Climate change propagandists at the Guardian and elsewhere are a bloody menace.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Jaime; thanks for that summary from the BCT – those factors are far more influential than some very slight warming. Most bumblebees nest underground in old rodent holes and the like which, I would guess makes them less vulnerable to minor variations in air temperatures.
Furthermore the abstract that Mark referenced makes no mention of any field work or lab experiments. The excellent books by Dave Goulson include entertaining accounts of studying bees and their nests in laboratories so appropriate studies would be possible. No doubt incorporating “climate change” into the parameters of the study helped with getting grants.
Alan; you may well be right about variants proving to be better-adapted to changing conditions. Mobility must be another factor. For example, the Tree Bumblebee is a recent arrival in the UK, spreading from France. Also, returning to my earlier comment, nature can obviously move fast considering the huge areas which were under ice until 10-12,000 years ago which now have fully-developed ecosystems.
LikeLiked by 3 people
As probably the only entomologist in town, I ought to comment. I was reluctant to without having read the paper, but…. here goes. My comments number exactly 2.
i) The impossibility of the contrary. I want you lie back, kick off your shoes, put on some soothing music, maybe crack open a Bordeaux… and imagine a paper declaring that climate change promised no harm to the humble bumblebee. How did you do? I could not quite manage it, and I invent fantasy stories.
ii) One of the most common bumblebees in UK back gardens is the “buff-tailed” bumblebee, or Bombus terrestris as acolytes of Linnaeus call it. It has two yellow-orange stripes and a whitish buffish tail (there is also a “white-tailed” bumblebee which is similar, but much less common). I present to you the distribution of this bumblebee in Europe.
Source: AtlasHymenoptera.net
The industrialisation of farming has greatly reduced the availability of nectar and pollen resources. This has led to great losses in range of many insects.
LikeLiked by 1 person
JIT, interesting map which raises several questions:
How on earth did Bombus get onto Atlantic and Mediterranean islands? Given their aerodynamic problems I very much doubt if they flew. If the distribution is temperature controlled why would I search in vain for that bumblebee species over the volcanic heated fields of Iceland? That species seems to have extended far to the North in Russia.
Also why the high degree of speciation of Bombus (7 different species in the U.K.). Do they all have different lifestyles?
LikeLike
Alan, this is a difficult topic to summarise in a few sentences, but here goes. There are more than 7 species in the UK – maybe there are only 7 in the subgenus Bombus. Yes they do specialise, although often in the garden this takes the form of different species preferring different flowers, based on the length of their tongues. Bombus terrestris has a relatively short tongue, but also has the skill of biting a hole into long flowers to access the nectar “through the back door”. Of course this results in the plant not getting the pollination “service” from the bee.
Another common bumblebee, the “garden” bumblebee, has a longer tongue.
There are UK bumblebees that are restricted to the north of the country & a more rational case could be made for them to suffer under climate change than bumblebees in general.
As to their distribution on Mediterranean islands, there are 2 options: one that it is natural, with islands colonised by founding queens or that they were there before the end of the Med’s salinity crisis. The other is that someone put them there:
LikeLike
Further to Jit’s comments, I suspect that, in most cases, the bees’ presence in remote places is down to human intervention. Dave Goulson’s first book (A Sting in the Tail) covers his attempts to trace Short-haired Bumblebees in Tasmania, where they were introduced from the UK in the 19th century, with a view to re-introducing them here.
From what I have read, bumblebees’ flying abilities are much better than the apochryphal tales claim. One of Goulson’s experiments involved releasing bees at various distances from their nest and logging how many made it home and how long they took to return (having tagged them with dots of nail varnish!). Those released a kilometre away got back faster than he did in his car. Some even made it from 10 km.
Fascinating creatures.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is what I appreciate so very much about CliScep, take a subject (like bumblebees) and you are met with posts full of fascinating facts (in this case thefinancial value imparted by bumblebees to the tomato growing industry, bumblebees capable of travelling faster than a car).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Alan; I doubt the bees were that fast – they had the advantage of taking a direct line rather than following roads.
I fully agree with you about this site!
LikeLike
Mike, I did recognize that Bombus might take a more direct route, but then this itself is extraordinary given their somewhat erratic flight in my garden. Your explanation also implies the ‘umble bumble has precise location skills. And as to relocating their nest from 10 km, that is almost unbelievable given that at that distance the bee would have no reference points (surely).
LikeLike
Alan; I admit to writing that from memory. It does seem remarkable, on reflection. I’ll try to find and re-read the relevant section of whichever Goulson book it was.
On navigation generally, it has often struck me how small birds, for example, find their way around territories which are huge relative to their body size. Then there are fast flyers, like Swallows, which can cover kilometres in no time but find their way back to their nests (let alone their migrations). It reminds me of the quote from a pilot of the SR-71 Blackbird who said: “getting lost has a whole new meaning when it happens at Mach 3”!
LikeLike
Alan; I dug out Dave Goulson’s “A Sting in the Tail” which has a chapter on his experiments on bees’ navigation abilities.
Basically he set up 5 bumblebee nests in a shed, equivalent to a pigeon coop. Once the bees were settled, he started trapping them as they left the nest, sticking a small, numbered tag on the back of each one, popping them into pill boxes and then driving to various release points.
Nearly all of those released nearby – one kilometre away – made it back very quickly. At greater distances, the number returning fell and the time taken increased. When it got to 10 km only one bee made it back and it took a few days.
Watching the bees’ behaviour when the nests were installed, he formed the view that they first learnt the immediate locality of the nest and then ventured out in widening loops, learning the territory. He theorised that the bees released away from home circled until they found a landmark which they recognised.
In a further experiment they managed to fit tiny radar transponders to some bees which let them track the bees, albeit only those that were in line-of-sight. They clocked the bees at up to 25 kph. One was oddly slow and erratic because it had a foxglove flower stuck on the radar antenna! The radar also showed that the bees would travel surprising distances to a known source of nectar/pollen – 3 km in one case.
The books are both highly informative and entertaining for anyone interested in wildlife.
LikeLike
Climate change Down Under apparently is not killing enough bees so the NZ and Australian governments have taken it upon themselves to burn them out. I haven’t verified these reports yet, but if it turns out that governments are systematically destroying hives in order to control an ‘infection’ or ‘infestation’, without even bothering to test beforehand, this is very worrying indeed:
https://x.com/BGatesIsaPyscho/status/1791495192001839364
https://x.com/OffTopicShow2/status/1791455542348505398
LikeLike
‘Testing’ is happening, but this looks like gross overkill to me:
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2024/05/north-canterbury-beekeeper-calls-for-different-approach-to-american-foulbrood-after-burning-2m-of-bee-hives.html
LikeLike
“Laboratory using bees to track climate change”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyl9vevgx9o
A laboratory has been using bees to track how the environment is changing.
Scientists at the UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (UKCEH) in Wallingford, Oxfordshire, use pollen DNA in the insects’ honey to measure the plant species present near hives across the south.
From that, they can infer environmental conditions and track how conditions are changing.
Ecological entomologist Dr Ben Woodcock said the bees were a “critical resource”, allowing scientists to track large-scale changes in a relatively low-cost way….
Which is very interesting, very clever, and (as the article says) low-cost, all of which has to be good. But “to track climate change”? What they are doing is tracking changing plant species, which can be down to habitat loss as much as anything:
…The honey is then analysed for pollen grains to help scientists build a picture of plant species present around the hives, which change with the environmental conditions….
“Environmental factors” can cover a multitude of sins, of which climate change might well be just one of many factors. Of course, although it’s mentioned only once in the article (hardly thereby justifying the headline) the article gets in the necessary genuflection:
…He said that understanding how the climate is changing on a “large scale” was crucial to managing it….
LikeLike
“Bumblebees winter nest-building ‘due to climate'”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckg17mwnx73o
Bumblebees have been found to be starting nests in the depths of winter due to climate change, say conservationists.
The charity Buglife said active worker bumblebees, which do most of the work in a nest, were spotted in Aberdeen during mild weather over the Christmas break.
It said a previous survey had recorded bumblebees and honeybees between Christmas and New Year at locations across the UK, including the Highlands.
Buglife said the nests were at a “high risk” of failing because of the shortage of flowers for the bees to collect nectar and pollen from, and the risk of a return to colder weather.…
Surely, when the weather turned cold again, the bees will have returned to hibernation? I haven’t seen any bees here in Cumbria this winter.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Mr Hetherington said: “This means that they are still potentially active and the period around 28 December was relatively warm for the time of year, a likely consequence of climate change is increased periods of tick activity in the same way that bumblebees have been spotted on the wing across Scotland this December.”
“climate change” link, tick.
LikeLike
dfhunter, I’m sure the ability to insert the climate change angle is the only reason the BBC bothered to make it a story on its website.
LikeLike
I suppose it’s time to note my comment from back in May showing the distribution of one of the commonest bumblebees. It’s found from the top of Britain to the bottom, and throughout Europe including the Med and Scandinavia – except the extreme north – Turkey, and into North Africa.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“UK bumblebee numbers fell to lowest on record in 2024, shows data
Bumblebees declined by almost a quarter compared with the 2010-2023 average, according to conservation charity”
https://www.theguardian.com/global/2025/feb/27/uk-bumblebee-numbers-fell-to-lowest-on-record-in-2024-shows-data
Figures show 2024 was the worst year for bumblebees in the UK since records began.
Bumblebee numbers declined by almost a quarter compared with the 2010-2023 average, according to data from the Bumblebee Conservation Trust. The researchers said the drop was probably due to the cold and wet conditions in the UK last spring.
According to the Met Office, many areas of the country experienced more than double, and in some cases triple, the usual amount of rainfall for the time of year in March, April and May.
The poor spring and early summer weather severely affected many species in their most vulnerable period, the colony establishment stage, where queen bumblebees function as single mothers and must feed themselves and their growing larvae while also incubating the nest….
…As weather conditions improved in July and August, bumblebees were able to stage a partial recovery but 2024 still had the second-worst July and August counts since the trust’s records began in 2011.…
…Comont said individuals could play a part in supporting the bees: “The key thing is having big populations because big populations are resilient populations. All of the stuff you see about planting flowers in your garden, letting wildflowers grow, not using pesticides; all of that standard advice around increasing pollinator populations, not just bumblebees, that will allow us to have larger populations of pollinators.”
It seems it’s habitat loss, it’s pesticides, and it’s cold, wet weather (the weather we’re told we won’t have , because of climate change) that pose the greatest problems for bees.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I woke up this morning to discover a swarm of wild honey bees investigating the roof area of the canopy over my house’s front door, apparently with a view to setting up home there. It’s north facing, but early in the morning at this time of year the sun was on it, so perhaps it seemed attractive to them. It has been in the shade most of the day, and they seemed to lose interest, but not before I contacted the local bee-keepers’ association to see if the wild honey bees were of interest to them. They were, and they sent someone round to investigate. Unfortunately by then, the bees were already losing interest, and he calculated that he wouldn’t be able to acquire them by moving them to a hive in his own garden.
However, he did say that only yesterday he attended on three separate reports of swarms of honey bees, two of which had successfully relocated to his garden, where they seem to be very happy. He is the second bee-keeper to tell me that so far this year the bees are doing very well, unlike last year. The difference? Spring this year has been very pleasant – sunny, warm and dry -whereas last year it was much cooler and wetter. So much for climate-change driven heat being bad for bees.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Bees face new threats from wars, street lights and microplastics, scientists warn
University of Reading report says conflicts including war in Ukraine among 12 most pressing threats to pollinator”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/may/20/bees-threats-war-microplastics
War zones, microplastics and street lights are among the emerging threats to the bee population, according to scientists.
Bee experts have drawn up a list of the 12 most pressing threats to the pollinator over the next decade, published in a report, Emerging Threats and Opportunities for Conservation of Global Pollinators, by the University of Reading.
Increasing war and conflict around the world is harming bees, the scientists warn. This includes the war in Ukraine, which has forced countries to grow fewer crop types, leaving pollinators without diverse food throughout the season.
The researchers found microplastic particles were contaminating beehives across Europe, with testing from 315 honey bee colonies revealing synthetic materials such as PET plastic in most hives. Artificial light from street lamps has been found to reduce flower visits by nocturnal pollinators by 62%, and air pollution has been found to affect their survival, reproduction and growth.
Antibiotics, used in agriculture, have made their way into beehives and honey. They have also been found to affect the behaviour of pollinators including reducing their foraging and visits to flowers. Pesticide “cocktails” also play a significant and emerging role; although some pesticides are now regulated to be kept below “safe” limits for bees and other wildlife, research has found they can interact with other chemicals and cause dangerous effects….
Not a mention of climate change.
LikeLiked by 1 person
See ch5 has – The Secret Life of Bees on tonight. Maybe worth a watch!!!
Steve Backshall takes a fascinating look at the 270 bee species of the UK – from the industrious honeybee to the bold bumble bee – as we probe their history, science and habitats. (Ep1/2).
LikeLike
“Bee species get lifeline through habitat project”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn43j1el9w3o
As so often, it’s about habitat, not climate:
Four threatened bee species will benefit from new coastal habitats created by volunteers and conservationists in East Sussex.
The project, in Hastings and St Leonards, has established wildflower meadows, hedgerows and specialised nesting sites to support several species, including the tormentil mining bee and long-horned bee.
Natural England said the species have suffered severe population declines due to habitat loss across England….
LikeLiked by 1 person
Suddenly, the Guardian has it in for honey bees.
“The island that banned hives: can honeybees actually harm nature?
On a tiny Italian island, scientists conducted a radical experiment to see if the bees were causing their wild cousins to decline”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/sep/18/hives-honeybee-boom-tuscan-island-italy-aoe
and
“Why saving the honeybee could be bad news for other bees
In this week’s newsletter: a conservation success story has a sting in its tail as wild pollinators pay the price”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/sep/18/why-saving-the-honeybee-could-be-bad-news-for-other-bees
It’s barely five minutes since the Guardian was bemoaning the fate of US honey bees and pinning at least part of the blame on climate change:
“‘Could become a death spiral’: scientists discover what’s driving record die-offs of US honeybees”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jul/08/record-us-bee-colony-dieoffs-climate-stress-pesticides-silent-spring-aoe
…A combination of factors is likely to be causing successive colony deaths among US bees, including the changing climate, exposure to pesticides, and less food in the form of pollen and nectar as monocrop farming proliferates. …
LikeLike
“Habitat improvement helps rare bumblebees”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp8j7144y5vo
Conservationists in Kent say there are signs that rare bumblebees are making a comeback, thanks to work improving their habitat.
For two years running, the Bumblebee Conservation Trust has recorded sightings of one of Britain’s rarest bees, the shrill carder, in an area south east of the county where it had not been seen for over a decade.
Dr Nikki Gammans from the trust said: “By creating more of the habitat that they like, the flower rich habitat, we can hopefully see some more.”
She added that she thought the trust’s habitat advice had been “key” to helping this species as well as other rare ones.…
Not climate change, then.
LikeLike
“Number of wild bee species at risk of extinction in Europe doubles in 10 years
Number of endangered butterfly species also surging amid habitat destruction and global heating, finds study”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/oct/11/number-of-wild-bee-species-at-risk-of-extinction-in-europe-doubles-in-10-years
The number of wild bee species in Europe at risk of extinction has more than doubled over the past decade, while the number of endangered butterfly species has almost doubled.
The jeopardy facing crucial pollinators was revealed by scientific studies for the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) red list of threatened species, which found that at least 172 bee species out of 1,928 were at risk of extinction in Europe.
The number of butterflies threatened with extinction in Europe has increased from 37 to 65 since the last study, conducted 14 years ago. One species, the Madeiran large white (Pieris wollastoni) has now been declared extinct….
But why? Yet again we find there are lots of reasons, and climate change is thrown is as usual, but without any sensible attempt to assess the relative importance of the different causes (and the alleged cause that is climate change):
…The causes of the rapid recent declines are the continuing destruction or damage of habitats caused by agricultural intensification and land abandonment, draining wetlands, overgrazing by livestock, and the use of fertilisers and pesticides including neonicotinoids. The fragmentation of pollinator-friendly habitat greatly increases the risk of local extinctions.…
So far so clear, but wait!
…Global heating is also revealed to be a major threat: 52% of all endangered butterflies in Europe are imperilled by the climate crisis – approximately twice as many as a decade ago.…
At the end of the day, though, it appears that climate change is at best a subordinate factor (if that):
…“The biggest habitat for all these pollinators is flower-rich grassland and that is disappearing very fast across Europe because of all these factors,” said Martin Warren, one of the lead coordinators of the butterflies assessment.…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Butterflies and bees like it hot, but not when the Guardian gets involved. Then hot is bad.
Both types of insect rely on a sequence of different flowers throughout the seasons, butterflies for nectar, and bees for nectar and pollen. Such flowers have dwindled with agricultural intensification. There is also the entirely avoidable problem of municipal authorities cutting informal areas of grass with a zealotry bordering on pathological. In one particular instance that I might have noted already in these pages, a local field was humming with bumblebees one day, and covered with dead bumblebees a couple of days later when the clover had been mowed. Yes, it was hot. But the men on their mechanicals were unaware that bumblebees only drink from flowers. If you take their flowers away in hot weather…
… they die.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jit; my local council (Surrey Heath) has the same hostile attitude to nature. Last week I drove along a length of dual carriageway which had the outside lane on each side coned off so a team could attack the vegetation on the central reservation – a motley collection of small shrubs and bushes with ground cover of grasses and wildflowers/”weeds”.
As I drove past I saw the various stages of treatment. First the bushes were hacked to almost nothing with a mechanical flail. Then the remaining vegetation was mown to a few inches. Lastly the ground was sprayed – with weedkiller, presumably.
Were I to check, I’m sure the council website will proudly proclaim its support for wildlife trusts, etc with nauseating hypocrisy. The ultimate irony is that the team vandalising the vegetation are probably counted as “green jobs”.
LikeLiked by 1 person