> It has been said that, "The label is the law." This means that using a pesticide in a manner that is inconsistent with the use directions on the label is a violation of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and can result in enforcement actions to correct the violations.

I beg to differ.  FIFRA has never been enacted as positive law, and is so narrow in its scope and application that folks would be hard pressed to find any substantive measure of it protecting honeybees.  FIFRA doesn't even apply to any of the 50 states.  It is limited to what common folks call "federal zone".  

As stated before, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land.  I'm not aware of the states giving the federal government authority to regulate pesticide labels in the 50 states.  Amendment X clearly states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."  This means that the federal government only has the power to regulate pesticide labels on areas the federal government has jurisdiction over, ie "federal zone".

You only need to look at the FIFRA definition of "State" to see that the 50 states are excluded from the definition of "STATE".  (Keep in mind that legal descriptions are provided when the word means something different than its usual meaning.)

>(aa) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means a State, the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands,
Guam, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, and American
Samoa.

Please note the capital "S" in State, which denotes a national government, and not a political subdivision known as a state.  By defining "State" to mean the federal government or possessions/territories (ie, federal zone) FIFRA would pass constitutional muster.  To the uneducated who assume "State" has a different meaning than the one provided, they may assume FIFRA has a larger jurisdiction than it actually does.  It's quite possible for folks enforcing FIFRA to not know the jurisdictional limits either.

>Anyone entering into an arrangement with the government takes the risk of having accurately ascertained that he who purports to act for the government stays within the bounds of his authority, even though the agent himself may be unaware of the limitations on his authority."The United States Supreme Court, Federal Crop Ins. Corp v. Merrill, 332 US 380-388 (1947)

The US House of Representatives' Office of the Law Revision Counsel observes that of the 50 titles in the US Code, only 1, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 17, 18, 23, 28, 31, 32, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 44, 46, and 49 have been enacted into positive law.
FIFRA is USC Title 7, which isn't on the list.  Enough said.

In 1904 Ohio passed legislation for the inspection of apiaries.  It wasn't until 80 years later those inspection laws were ruled unconstitutional.  (It should also be noted that under a FOIA request in 2012, Ohio was unable to find a single citation or prosecution under a beekeeping law since the laws were put on the books.)

Just because legislation is passed and appears on the books, doesn't mean the law is constitutional, and it doesn't mean the law's jurisdiction even applies to you.

> >Obviously, bees are protected by laws.
And which law would that be, Pete?

Yes, bees are protected by which laws again?  And what are the jurisdictional limits of the laws you cite?  And what bees are protected?  Native pollinator bees owned by the Dept of Natural Resources, or honeybees that are NOT owned by the DNR?

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html