Thanks Charles for taking the time to write such a thorough and thoughtful post.  AND, it was even polite!!!


"MILLIONS of acres of forage for bees and other pollinators in early spring when they need it!  Most season we make honey for 4-6 weeks on this.  What most have forgotten or don't know,  is 25 years ago this did not exist.  James talk about unintended consequences,  well this one is a huge one in our favor,  brought to you by roundup."

The two ways of looking at this that our discussion has taken so far are:  "Wow this approach is better/cheaper/more productive than what we were doing, and because we have to do things big we have to use chemistry in the field...we're saving the world with our agriculture.  Let's do it until something even better is developed" and the other is "Hold on a minute what are the consequences of the new 'miracle' chemical and is it better than available alternatives?  Are we in fact saving the world when we have food surpluses and yet still see starving millions even here in the USA?"

I'm pretty sure that none of us want to go back thirty and more years to the time when the poisons were more acutely toxic and weeds were destroyed to such an extent that whole ecosystems became threatened.   But I'm also pretty sure that if we could change our practice to reduce or even eliminate the use of these things, all of life would be better off.  In my lifetime I've seen a huge revival of species after the DDT ban was implemented...and that is encouraging.  Even Roger Morse thought DDT was a wonderful solution to the ag problems at the time....but he was WRONG.  I'd like to think we are smart enough, and motivated enough, to aim for less use of damaging chemicals...even the ones that have chronic, not acute, effects.  Chronic effects are less obvious.  I'll never forget some important lessons I've learned about this.  Briefly, when you don't know what things COULD be like, you are content with things as they are...and that might be far less optimal.  It's a slippery slope, and at some point there is "no return".

We are causing problems with our "advanced agriculture".  Here's an interesting article I read just this morning, discussing how modern practice (in this case regarding beef cattle) is causing ecosystem problems, and how going back to more traditional methods of raising cattle would almost completely eliminate the concern.  This is backed up by real data, BTW.

https://tinyurl.com/yczhn2ad

We don't have to give up eating beef, but we could all benefit by eating a little less of it.

Newton said that "all actions cause equal and opposite reactions".  He was talking about physics, but Newton's third law aptly applies to our stewardship of nature, too, I think.  And bees.  Today I put a queen in the wrong hive.  That action caused a big reaction.  And now I'm left with a queenless hive during a honey flow.  Sigh.

Christina


             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html