thanks  page 38 and 39 on page 39 they said

"we just did not fine neonics in the colonies VanEngelsdor explaind.  THere were some trace residues of neonics in a few samples, but not nearly on par with other compounds. However, its possible we did not test the right matrix - we did not test nectar, for example - or that the product breaks down faster than others in the collection process or that neonics are simply not very prevalent when crops are flowering"  



Ahh I remember that one now......  
Look close at the level of neonics they actually found in the new report. In the sceme of it,  wasn't much.   There are a lot of researchers digging for issues with neonics,  Hundreds of them at least, and we hear about every single trace as if the sky was falling,  yet I know of at least 3 cases her in the Midwest that point the case for problems with the old stuff yet and nothing with neonics,  that were very quietly reported and all follow up was cancelled.


To Dennis credit,  he didn't concur,  but he sure as heck threw in the "qualifier" of  "if we dig more maybe"

Charles

             ***********************************************
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