BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM
Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 5 Jul 2015 12:06:40 -0500
Reply-To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID:
<01fc01d0b744$f65466d0$e2fd3470$@com>
Subject:
Re: Neonics (again)
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
In-Reply-To:
<[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
From:
Charles Linder <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (20 lines) 
In the case of the neonics, I'm not seeing supportive evidence of that hypothesis.  



Common sense does not support it either,   honey bees being multigenerational in a single season spread out over at least 10 years show exactly the opposite.  No accumulation in wax,  no genetic deforimites,  and an increase of bees.

It would make more sense to claim Neonics cured CCD.  As Neonics use rose,  CCD vanished.

(no I am not making that claim)

We have had in the neighborhood of 60 generations of bees since Neonics became prevalent,  and no discernible change in survivability.


Charles

             ***********************************************
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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2