New bee decree: the planned end of arboriculture and market gardening in France

[Rajqawee]

...
You know that the world, trees, fruits, vegetables ... existed (and survived) BEFORE pesticides !!
...

And you know that for centuries, the serfs and then the farm workers exhausted themselves to maintain them, for a miserable retribution?

All modern techniques were adopted because they made people's lives easier. Find out a little about the old life you want the peasants to return to.

Sounds a bit of a false dichotomy, isn't it? Either we have "broad spectrum" pesticides, or we have a shitty life of a sweaty worker in the field.

Maybe it is possible to make the most of mechanization, moderate chemistry, and quality life? All without genociding the browsers ...

[Exnihiloest]

@Rajqawee

It might be possible. But until now the so-called ecological measures are imposed without your relevant question being answered, and without any alternative being provided.
If the dichotomy is false, we must present us the alternatives.

[Exnihiloest]

... After having sacrificed industry, only tourism will remain in France?

Absolutely, but this time it will be with the blessing of the ecologists, always counterproductive.

We are talking about the re-industrialization of France today, because the bobos of the 80s, which at the time only spoke of tertiary services and vilified industry, destroyed it.
And after the same ailments, now those of ecologism, have done the same damage in agriculture, we will have to talk in a few decades of re-agriculturization of France.

People who do not know anything are always those who want and impose stupid measures against the actors in the field. Obviously, if they themselves worked in the sectors they want to regiment, they would understand the stupidity of their measures. And if they were productive, they wouldn't have time to piss off those who really work!

[izentrop]

ps: I do not understand the concept of 5 hours a day ... it all depends on the surfaces to be treated and the methods or means of treatment !! On average 5 hours a day is HUGE in terms of treatment time it seems to me ...

It all depends on the area exploited and other specific constraints ...
Does it seem like a work schedule problem?

If the product is authorized for use in flowering, the treatment should be carried out within 2 hours of sunset and within 3 hours of sunset. https://www.vitisphere.com/actualite-94 ... voiles.htm

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

(And the old fool of Blédina to get us out - without laughing - that if we no longer have industries in France, it's the fault of the bobos and not the industrialists who have relocated to make even more money. . I don't know what it works for, but I don't want it)

[Rajqawee]

@Rajqawee

It might be possible. But until now the so-called ecological measures are imposed without your relevant question being answered, and without any alternative being provided.
If the dichotomy is false, we must present us the alternatives.

There are still embryos of answers, incomplete of course, but a label like organic has brought some interesting things (there are others, nature and progress that I have heard about .... none is neither perfect nor devoid of marketing, it goes without saying!). Without falling into a return to bondage, yields have not collapsed, the price has not been multiplied by 5 either (although lettuce should see ), and yet behind the volumes of pesticides used (when they are) are much more reasonable than "conventional".

Like what the compromise is possible to find, if we want to put a little more expensive (me, if only to avoid that the farmer finds himself at 800 € / month, I want to pay more. that I do!), accept a variability in the harvests, accept a seasonality too.

[Exnihiloest]

@Rajqawee

"if we want to pay a little more": this is the condition that prevents operational solutions. We must not forget that it is always the buyer who makes the price. Consumers, facing the price tag, will buy, or not. There are threshold effects, and even without threshold effects, the price effect can be seen statistically.

On these questions, the art is to answer them by ensuring a service at least equal, for not more expensive. If it did, there would be no reluctance to change. Even a more expensive service, but for the better, will wipe out the world.

[Rajqawee]

@Rajqawee

"if we want to pay a little more": this is the condition that prevents operational solutions. We must not forget that it is always the buyer who makes the price. Consumers, facing the price tag, will buy, or not. There are threshold effects, and even without threshold effects, the price effect can be seen statistically.

On these questions, the art is to answer them by ensuring a service at least equal, for not more expensive. If it did, there would be no reluctance to change. Even a more expensive service, but for the better, will wipe out the world.

I understand the logic of the market, but it is not perfect, an apple not being equal to another for example (in flavor, in nutrients, in concentration of pesticides etc). When consumers are better informed, I think they are less reluctant to pay the price.

That said, this is already happening (marketing impact included, of course) since the BIO label is constantly growing: it is therefore good that people value it. How far, and what proportion of the population will that end up touching, is another question.

[Janic]

Rajqawee »23/06/21, 09:03

I understand the logic of the market, but it is not perfect, an apple not being equal to another for example (in flavor, in nutrients, in concentration of pesticides etc). When consumers are better informed, I think they are less reluctant to pay the price.

I do not doubt your good intentions, but compromise between two parties and compromise between two systems, do not have the same human and political scope.

That said, this is already happening (marketing impact included, of course) since the BIO label is constantly growing: it is therefore good that people value it. How far, and what proportion of the population will that end up touching, is another question.

indeed no one knows the future, but it is a question of survival of all that lives and not only humans. Bees (all pollinators for that matter) are indicators of the good functioning of nature and therefore of the health and survival of its inhabitants.
However, nature does not compromise because either we respect our rules (however harsh they appear to be) and everything is balanced or the human parasite is added to the others, but without rules, and that is the inevitable catastrophe that we can see especially since the middle of the 20th century.

[Exnihiloest]

...
I understand the logic of the market, but it is not perfect, an apple not being equal to another for example (in flavor, in nutrients, in concentration of pesticides etc). When consumers are better informed, I think they are less reluctant to pay the price.

That said, this is already happening (marketing impact included, of course) since the BIO label is constantly growing: it is therefore good that people value it. How far, and what proportion of the population will that end up touching, is another question.

I had anticipated the objection of your first part by writing "Even a more expensive service, but for better, will eliminate from the world". Of course you are ready to pay more for better, but not necessarily. You may lack the means, or find that the difference in price is not worth the difference in the" better ".

The BIO label is constantly growing because that is where consumers are going. Producers and traders therefore follow the movement of society. I am like you in anticipation of what will remain of the "old system". Possible that it collapses, and that we will also see the drawbacks of the new system, as well as a trivialization with undoubtedly a lesser degree of requirement.