> In monocultural settings as cranberry (and blueberry) is grown today, it is > the shortage in numbers of pollinating insects that is the limiting > factor. Bumblebee nests may be comprised of a few dozen individuals >while a > cranberry field has millions of flowers. Considering the current >prices for > commercially available bumble bee nests, I question the economics of their > use in a field setting. (Greenhouses is a different matter). Perhaps, > simple enhancement of nesting habitat would be more cost-effective. > > > Paul van Westendorp [log in to unmask] > Provincial Apiarist > British Columbia I was presuming that there was some substantial natural population of bumblebees already present - if that isn't true, then you may well be right, and I admit to being uncertain as to the present cost of commercial bumblebee nests. No doubt there needs to be more detailed work done under circumstances where the native bee population is low, and it might ultimately prove cheaper to use honeybees in cases where *all* the pollinators are introduced; the point is that I think you'd still agree that bumblebees should not be automatically ruled out as a commercially viable alternative? Is Kenna on-line here? Cheers, Doug Yanega Illinois Natural History Survey, 607 E. Peabody Dr. Champaign, IL 61820 USA phone (217) 244-6817, fax (217) 333-4949 "There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82