Peter Borst writes:  “One of  the things we now have that is weakening our 
case is heavy dependence on chemicals to control our pests. The farmers 
know this and they are perfectly justified in pointing this out. How can we 
condemn them for using any means possible to be productive and make a 
living, if the beekeeping industry is doing the exact same thing”

Peter and all,

It seems to me there is a difference between the beekeeping model and the 
commercial agriculture model as they pertain to chemical use.  One; use of 
chemicals seems to be reaching a point of diminishing returns for some 
beekeepers and maybe even some commercial beekeepers have reached this 
conclusion.  Large scale commercial farmers haven’t reached this point yet 
and they probably won’t unless consumers stop buying their products which 
they might.  Two; the chemicals beekeepers use seem to adversely effect 
mainly themselves, hence the diminishing returns.  The adverse effects of 
using chemical pesticides and fertilizers by large commercial farmers are 
more widespread and effect people other than themselves.  It has been 
pointed out ad nauseum here on this list that beekeepers are vulnerable to 
the bad practices and maybe even some of the legal practices of farmers who 
use chemical insecticides.  If and to the extent that this is true, then 
beekeepers are justified in condemning these practices.  I agree, though 
that it is counter productive to condemn and just leave it at that.  An 
atmosphere of cooperation must be maintained.  And of course being open to 
compromise is essential in this regard.

Steve Noble

*******************************************************
* Search the BEE-L archives at:                       *
* http://listserv.albany.edu:8080/cgi-bin/wa?S1=bee-l *
*******************************************************