>beekeepers are learning to manage their bees in a manner similar to that
of other livestock operators

This fact has become embarrassingly obvious.  Good animal husbandry in
beekeeping greatly increases colony survival rate.  Not to say that some
pesticides aren't serious issues.  But before one points the finger at
sublethal effects of ag pesticides (as opposed to acute kills), one should
first control for the effects of poor husbandry.

>Without farming much of the country is and was a vast set of monocultures.

This statement could stand some clarification.  The native prairie (which
existed before honey bees were introduced) could hardly be termed a
"monoculture" since it contained a wide diversity of plant and animal
species.  Ditto for unmanaged forests.  Compare to a true monoculture of a
section of a single cultivar of a single species of introduced crop.

>Peter by now you of all should realize that is the basic tactic, if the
research doesn't support your position attack the source.

Amen to that!  I've been called every name in the book by some anti this or
that advocates for actually doing my homework and trying to honestly report
the facts. There certainly appears to be a strong correlation between the
shrillness of an advocate and his lack of deep knowledge of the subject.

> This paragraph surprised me because I have read several studies that
report neonicotinoids are very persistent in our environment

Some can be.  But there is a difference between persistence and toxic
exposure to organisms of interest.  Every natural element is "persistent in
the environment."  What matters to bees is whether it gets into pollen or
nectar of bee-attractive plants, at a concentration that can cause adverse
effects.

>I disagree with your statement pesticide companies making profit from
killing everything.

The last thing a pesticide company wants is to kill everything.  The money
is in developing targeted products that kill only pests, and have minimal
other environmental impact.  It costs a great deal of money to bring a
pesticide to market; and even more when the new bee assessments are adopted
this year.  A company doesn't want to waste money on developing a pesticide
that later shows adverse environmental effects.

Of course, once they've invested money, they will try to defend their
product--that's a given.  The question is to see whether their defense
holds water.  In my face-to-face discussions with actual crop protection
company scientists, I find them to be totally honest about the good, the
bad, and the ugly of their company's products, as well as being concerned
about the environment (they have children and families just like the rest
of us).

-- 
Randy Oliver
Grass Valley, CA
www.ScientificBeekeeping.com

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