From: "James Fischer" <[log in to unmask]>

> Dave Green said:

> > Please note that Paul Cherubini is not speaking as a beekeeper. He is an
> > enthusiastic pesticide salesman. You can run a search of his past posts
for
> > more info. Need I say more?
>
James Fischer responded
> Yes, you need to apologize to Mr. Cherubini and the list for tarring him
with a
> brushfull of argumentum ad hominem.

   I don't think so. There's nothing wrong with noting Mr. Cherubini's
agenda.

   I grew up on a farm, and we were besieged with "enthusiastic pesticide
salesmen."  We bought it and used it, saw short term gains, but began to see
long term losses.

   Later, I managed a fruit farm and the owner wisely told me, "Don't get
your pesticide recommendations from pesticide salesmen."  That was a good
caution, but I eventually came to the conclusion that many of the supposedly
impartial advisors, including the extension service, were also pesticide
salesmen. The system linked them together so that even if one human link had
doubts, once could not extricate oneself. The chemical companies got a lock
on the whole system of pest control. It was lucrative. Only when problems
became blatant and out of control, did they back off and seek alternatives.

   Malathion on cotton is one of these issues. The losses both of domestic
honeybees and wild pollinators has so far been pretty easy to keep under
wraps, so it can be ignored. A few bankrupt beekeepers, and some farmers who
have had to quit with a variety of crops that need bees, and focus once
again on corn and cotton monoculture, don't seen like an issue to the
pesticide people or the extension system that they have bought. The more
pesticides are used, the more they are needed. It is an endless circle, with
an ever more sterile environment and ever increasing profits for pesticide
manufacturers.

   The losses of pollinators from the use of malathion and other
insecticides on cotton, or for mosquito control, been called to Mr.
Chrubini's attention several times, without any change in his tune. If you
haven't seen it, you can see one good example of (illegal but officially
sanctioned) malathion use that killed pollinators at
http://members.aol.com/gardenbees/

   I have never been 100% organic in my philosophy, but we have soaked our
environment with a pervasive mix of pesticide that often come back to haunt
us in unexpected ways. I have been extremely cautious in my own use. I had
bees alongside the orchard throughout the season, and did not hurt them,
because I was careful to comply with the label directions.   Do you think
the boll weevil extermination program complied with the bee protection label
directions?  Not a chance!

   (It should also be noted that there are some entomologists who believe
that the boll weevil eradication program is taking credit for extermination
by predatory fire ants. I don't know if this is true, but it's an
interesting thought. I think fire ants have also damaged ground nesting
solitary bees.)

   Here's an interesting current pesticide story, not directly related to
bees, but a correlating example of widespread routine abuse of a pesticide
and how it bites back.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/134394100_compost22m0.html

    I don't know how some specific situations could be dealt with without
pesticides, but "organic" is looking better every year that I observe. I'm
already convinced that, if pesticide users were to become competent in
understanding the pests, usage could be cut 90%. What I see is that there is
now little incentive to do so, despite all the shibboleths of the industry.

Dave Green     SC  USA
The Pollination Home Page: http://pollinator.com