Stephen Buchmann has co-authored a persuasive book about pollination that
has seized the interest (and opinions and dollars) of a wide audience. As one
reviewer said, “…although written by credible scientists, [it] launches the
reader on a much more poetic voyage into the complex interactions between
animals and the plants they feed on.” (Bloomsbury Review). That vision turns
dark when it focuses on honey bees, which, according to the book, are “on a
trajectory of ecological conquest,” “literally taking the food right out of
the mouths of babes,” and encourages the reader to “wonder how many beasts it
has eliminated in its wake.”
   It is good news to hear that, moving forward, the Forgotten Pollinators
Campaign will not continue to denounce honey bees. Better to hear that
pollination biologists with lobbying savvy and money will put their shoulders
into raising all boats in the pollination community.
   However, beekeepers will still need to articulate a response to “The
Forgotten Pollinators.” While the subscribers to this list get to hear a
clarification of your views, the larger community will not. When a scientist
who is billed in the publisher's press release to the media as “one of the
world’s leading authorities on bees and pollination” calls honey bees an
“exotic invader”—with all the regulatory and public policy implications that
brings—a response is necessary.
   And that response begins by acknowledging that honey bees are not alone as
the only non-native pollinating insect on the landscape. Garden and field and
full of alien leaf cutter bees, bumblebees outside their range (55 species,
but only a few are sold commercially), Orchard Mason bees outside their
range, Japanese horn-faced bees, etc. No regulatory effort can be proposed—or
campaign to discourage—without addressing the presence and uses of these
other insects being introduced by pollination biologists or raised and sold
by biological supply companies. The best response to the “exotic invader”
theory is education. Whenever a beekeeper talks somewhere in front of a class
or a group of people, be sure to mention that the honey bee is just one of
many insects of immigrant ancestry working hard alongside the natives to
ensure our food supply. Off by itself, the honey bee is an easy target.
   If I seem to belabor an obvious point, its because this book, which may be
the first some people read about pollination, presents a dichotomy: an
exclusive focus on one non-native pollinator (honey bees) and its
sometimes-studied, sometimes-speculated effects upon indigenous New World
species. No mention is made of alternative non-native pollinators and our
knowledge—or lack thereof—of their "scramble competition" with true natives.
When non-native alternative pollinators are mentioned elsewhere, their
non-native status is omitted.
   You present an intriguing vision of reform for the beekeeping industry.
Beekeepers evolve to become “pollination service providers” presenting a wide
variety of pollinating insects offering superior pollination tailored to indiv
idual crops.
  If realized, this reform will probably collapse the specialized businesses
that support the honey bee industry, such as the equipment supply companies,
queen breeders, and others. There is a certain critical mass of customer
demand that is necessary to sustain an industry, and hobbyists alone won't
provide it. If the honey bee’s role in the pollination business is minimized,
that critical mass could be lost. Along the way we stand to lose honey bee
research, new treatments and medications, and other forms of assistance and
support.
   I’m also leery of predictions that diminish the role of honey production
in the future of beekeeping. It dispenses with the one undebatably unique
aspect of keeping bees over other pollinators, and weighs heavily in favor of
pollination biologists who want to convince beekeepers to diversify their
holdings of pollinating insects.
   Once a problem has been identified, a solution should be proposed. I
propose this: Authors have the opportunity to modify or revise a text between
reprintings. If you are truly an ally of beekeepers, why don’t you change
your chapter on honey bees to reflect your recent post to this list?
Otherwise, regardless of what you say to beekeepers, what you have written
will continue to be a poison pill influencing public opinion and policy on
beekeeping.
John Mitchell