Bob said:

> I will not provide other contacts as 
> I fear possible reprisals.

Want to clarify?
Do you fear for your own well-being?
If not, who do you fear for?
And who do you fear?

> Beekeepers are having a hard time trying to 
> *prove a negative.*

The claims you are making are claims which would 
be verified by a "positive", such as a consistent
finding of specific pesticide residues in the MaryAnn 
Fraizer pesticide data, at levels above "trace levels"
in something other than random cases, something that
would correlate with a tangible problem.

And the entire idea of "trying to prove" is a big part 
of the problem here.  To "try to prove" is to abandon
the entire premise of "science", perhaps even rationality
as a whole.

The data can speak for itself.  No one needs to TRY to
prove anything - one can simply seek a fair snapshot of
the detectable stuff in each sample analyzed. Anyone
who is "trying to prove" something is falling victim to
the error of advocacy.  Advocacy starts after Science
finds something, not before.

> ...as beekeepers we have got serious concerns...
> I think if both the ABF & AHPA felt...

Who exactly is "we"?  
Are you representing either the AHPA or ABF on this?

> Unlike many of those behind me pushing me to the 
> front armed with complaints...

Again, who is "pushing you to the front?
The leadership of the ABF and AHPA seems to be
taking a far less adversarial stance than yours.

> Some on BEE-L would like to paint Bob Harrison 
> as the only beekeeper which feels the 
> neonicotinoids need independent from Bayer testing.

Before we start testing neonicotinoids all over 
again with the intent to quibble over Bayer's 
numbers, wouldn't be a good idea to find some 
detectable level that correlates to some sort
of problem?  MaryAnn has run a lot of samples from 
a lot of places through the mill, and she just hasn't
found anything in the way of a smoking gun.  More
funding for MaryAnn to "keep looking" is a fine idea, 
but this does not imply that Bayer has provided 
false data about their own pesticides.

MaryAnn's data is the best data possible, as it 
shows us exactly what ends up in the hive, in the
pollen, and in the bees.  What better screening
would you suggest for the detection of any level
of pesticide problem?

> Why... is it that beekeepers in Europe and some 
> researchers are protesting in the streets?

Well, let's take France, just for example:

May 16, 2008: Hundreds of thousands of French 
teachers and civil servants staged a one-day strike
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/16/world/europe/16france.html

May 22, 2008: French rail workers on Thursday 
led a new nationwide day of strike...
http://rawstory.com/news/afp/French_rail_workers_lead_nationwide_05222008.ht
ml

Oct 18, 2007: Hit by nationwide strikes...
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/10/18/asia/sarkozy.php

Nov 13 - 29, 2007: Multiple nationwide strikes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_2007_strikes_in_France

3/28/2006: More than 1 million people poured 
into the streets across France and strikers 
disrupted air, rail and bus travel Tuesday...
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-03-28-france_x.htm

So, in France, nationwide strikes seem to happen more than
once a year, and are prompted by a variety of things.
(Sounds like a nice way to get a day off.)

To contrast, the most beekeepers I've ever seen in one
room in the USA was the 800 or so attendees of the 
Tri-County (Ohio) one-day beekeeping workshop, and
the US has never had any sort of "nationwide strike"
of the European type.  

Maybe we in the USA are too jaded.  I know that I sent 
away for my "Free Nelson Mandela", and they never sent
me one.

****************************************************
* General Information About BEE-L is available at: *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm   *
****************************************************