AT: Honeybees
Honeybees are not key to survival
INTERNATIONAL HERALD TRIBUNE 5-2-2007 (http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/05/03/healthscience/NA-SCI-US-Honeybees-Weird.php)
The scientist who wrote the paper, Stefan Kimmel, e-mailed The Associated Press to say that there is "no link between our tiny little study and the CCD-phenomenon ... anything else said or written is a lie." And U.S. Department of Agriculture top bee researcher Jeff Pettis laughs at the idea, because whenever he goes out to investigate dead bees, he cannot get a signal on his cell phone because the hives are in such remote areas. Also on the Internet is a quote attributed to Albert Einstein on how humans would die off in four years if not for honeybees. It is wrong on two counts. First, Einstein probably never said it, according to Alice Calaprice, author of "The Quotable Einstein" and five other books on the physicist. "I've never come across it in anything Einstein has written," Calaprice said. "It could be that someone had made it up and put Einstein's name on it." Second, it is incorrect scientifically, Pettis said. There would be food left for humans because some food is wind-pollinated.
No impact to honeybee dieoff
SMITH 2007 (Heather, Slate, July 13, http://www.slate.com/id/2170305/pagenum/2)
But is CCD such a tragedy? The honeybee may be the only insect ever extended charismatic megafauna status, but it's already gone from the wild (and it wasn't even native to North America to begin with). Sure, it makes honey, but we already get most of that from overseas. What about the $14.6 billion in "free labor"? It's more expensive than ever: In the last three years, the cost to rent a hive during the California almond bloom has tripled, from $50 to $150. Good thing the honeybee isn't the only insect that can pollinate our crops. In the last decade, research labs have gotten serious about cultivating other insects for mass pollination. They aren't at the point yet where they can provide all of the country's pollination needs, but they're getting there. This year the California Almond Board two-timed the honeybee with Osmia lignaria—the blue-orchard bee: Despite CCD, they had a record harvest.*
Impact is empirically denied—massive dieoffs have occurred in past
OLDROYD 2007 (Dr. Benjamin P. Oldroyd is with the Behaviour and Genetics of Social Insects Laboratory, School of Biological Sciences, University of Sydney, PLoS Biology, June, http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1892840)
Some winter losses are normal, and because the proportion of colonies dying varies enormously from year to year, it is difficult to say when a crisis is occurring and when losses are part of the normal continuum. What is clear is that about one year in ten, apiarists suffer unusually heavy colony losses. This has been going on for a long time. In Ireland, there was a “great mortality of bees” in 950, and again in 992 and 1443 [3]. One of the most famous events was in the spring of 1906, when most beekeepers on the Isle of Wight (United Kingdom) lost all of their colonies [4]. American beekeepers also suffer heavy losses periodically. In 1903, in the Cache valley of Utah, 2000 colonies were lost to a mysterious “disappearing disease” following a “hard winter and cold spring” [5]. More recently, there was an incident in 1995 in which Pennsylvania beekeepers lost 53% of colonies [6].
No single factor is key—alt causes exist
GERBER 2007 (Richard, On Health Blog, March 23, http://blog.targethealth.com/?p=58)
The unusual phenomenon was first noticed by eastern beekeepers starting last fall. Researchers, including some connected with the Penn State University College of Agricultural Sciences, have identified some of the possible contributors, but have not yet found a single cause. Initial studies on bee colonies experiencing the die-offs have revealed a large number of disease organisms, with most being “stress-related” diseases but without any one agent as the culprit. Climate chaos and extreme weather seem to be a major factor. It is hard to tell if wild honey bee populations have been affected by the CCD disorder because Varroa mites have “pretty much decimated the wild honey bee population over the past years,” said Maryann Frazier of The Pennsylvania State University Department of Entomology. “This has become a highly significant, yet poorly understood problem that threatens the pollination industry and the production of commercial honey in the United States… Because the number of managed honeybee colonies is less than half of what it was 25 years ago, states such as Pennsylvania can ill afford these heavy losses.” Dennis van Engelsdorp, acting state apiarist with the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture said “Every day, you hear of another operator, It’s just causing so much death so quickly that it’s startling.” Lee Miller, director of the Beaver County extension office, said the deaths appear to be stress-related, but that stress could come from several sources. Dennis van Engelsdorp of the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture said that initial studies found a large number of disease organisms present, with no one disease being identified as the culprit. And while studies and surveys have found a few common management factors among beekeepers with affected hives, no common environmental agents or chemicals have been identified.
AT: Hunger
1. U.S. Agriculture at record harvests
Charles Abbott, Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:11pm IST , UPDATE 2-U.S. growing record soybean crop, No 2 corn – USDA, http://in.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idINN1050724120090710?sp=true)
WASHINGTON, July 10 (Reuters) - U.S. farmers will harvest their largest soybean crop and the second-largest corn crop ever, averting a potential supply squeeze while also leading to softer prices for the commodities, the government said on Friday.The U.S. Agriculture Department said corn farmers face "sharply lower summer price prospects." Good weather and boosted plantings bode for a bumper crop. Crop prices will return to "more normal" levels after last summer's problems in the world's top corn and soy producer helped drive prices to record highs, said Gerald Bange, chairman of the USDA's World Agriculture Outlook Board."The crop conditions are really not bad in most of the places where we're looking," Bange said on USDA's radio service.The government boosted its corn crop forecast to 12.29 billion bushels, the second largest on record due to the second-largest plantings since 1946.New-crop December corn futures CZ9 at the Chicago Board of Trade dropped 3 percent to $3.30 per bushel on Friday, pressured after the USDA said stocks were larger than traders had expected."The old-crop ending stocks (for corn) ballooned up here," said Don Roose, analyst at U.S. Commodities. "In the end, the government took the very conservative road and left the yields unchanged on corn and soybeans."Soybeans SX9 were down 2 percent to $8.96 per bushel and wheat futures WU9 also dropped. Overall, USDA monthly crop data for corn, soybeans and wheat came in near expectations. In its monthly update, USDA projected a soybean crop of 3.26 billion bushels, the largest on record. It would replenish a stockpile forecast to shrink to 110 million bushels, the smallest in three decades and less than a two-week supply." We were looking for a bearish report and we got it," said Jack Scoville, vice president at Price Futures Group. "The soybeans are probably a bit negative and the wheat production was at, or just above, trade expectations." The wheat crop was estimated at 2.112 billion bushels, including 1.53 billion bushels of winter wheat, 81.2 million bushels of durum and 506 million bushels of other spring wheat. U.S. crop prices soared to record levels since 2006 but will moderate in the 2009/10 marketing year, USDA said. It projected an average farm-gate wheat price of $5.30 a bushel, corn $3.75 a bushel and soybeans $9.30 a bushel. By comparison, the farm-gate price for 2008's crops are estimated at a record $6.78 for wheat, $4.05 for corn and $10 for soybeans. USDA lowered its forecast of corn used to make ethanol for this marketing year by 100 million bushels, to 3.65 billion bushels, due to lower U.S. fuel use. (Editing by Marguerita Choy.
2. Hunger being solved for now
Whitney Winer, student participant, "Hunger and Obesity in the United States" August 11, 2005, http://www.worldfoodprize.org/assets/youthinstitute/05proceedings/schaller-crestlandhighschool.pdf
Hunger, on the other hand, has only one sole cause, which is poverty. A person who lives in poverty cannot acquire adequate housing, medical, or meet daily needs. Many parents who do not make enough money for food skip meals, so their own children can eat. On average, children living in poverty receive one meal a day. Hunger in the United States will be solved. Millions of jobs are being created for unemployed people every year, giving them hope that one day they will be able to feed their families and live a life without hunger.
3. Turn – Nuclear war would eliminate the global food supply
Carl Sagan, Director of the Laboratory for planetary studies at Cornell University. 84, Winter. Foreign Affairs. “Nuclear War and Climatic Catastrophe”
The immediate human consequences of nuclear explosions range from vaporization of populations near the hypocenter, to blast-generated trauma (from flying glass, falling beams, collapsing skyscrapers and the like), to burns, radiation sickness, shock and severe psychiatric disorders. But our concern here is with longer-term effects. It is now a commonplace that in the burning of modern tall buildings, more people succumb to toxic gases than to fire. Ignition of many varieties of building materials, insulation and fabrics generates large amounts of such pyrotoxins, including carbon monoxide, cyanides, vinyl chlorides, oxides of nitrogen, ozone, dioxins, and furans. Because of differing practices in the use of such synthetics, the burning of cities in North America and Western Europe will probably generate more pyrotoxins than cities in the Soviet Union, and cities with substantial recent construction more than older, unreconstructed cities. In nuclear war scenarios in which a great many cities are burning, a significant pyrotoxin smog might persist for months. The magnitude of this danger is unknown. The pyrotoxins, low light levels, radioactive fallout, subsequent ultraviolet light, and especially the cold are together likely to destroy almost all of Northern Hemisphere agriculture, even for the more modest Cases 11 and 14. A 12° to 15°C temperature reduction by itself would eliminate wheat and corn production in the United States, even if all civil systems and agricultural technology were intact.' With unavoidable societal disruption, and with the other environmental stresses just mentioned, even a 3,000-megaton "pure" counterforce attack (Case 11) might suffice. Realistically, many fires would be set even in such an attack (see below), and a 3,000-megaton war is likely to wipe out U.S. grain production. This would represent by itself an unprecedented global catastrophe: North American grain is the principal reliable source of export food on the planet, as well as an essential component of U.S. prosperity. Wars just before harvesting of grain and other staples would be incrementally worse than wars after harvesting. For many scenarios, the effects will extend (see Figure 2) into two or more growing seasons. Widespread fires and subsequent runoff of topsoil are among the many additional deleterious consequences extending for years after the war. Something like three-quarters of the U.S. population lives in or near cities. lin the cities themselves there is, on average, only about one week's supply of food. After a nuclear war it is conceivable that enough of present grain storage might survive to maintain, on some level, the present population for more than a year. But with the breakdown of civil order and transportation systems in the cold, the dark and the fallout, these stores would become largely inaccessible. Vast numbers of survivors would soon starve to death.
Share with your friends: |