Randy Oliver observed that the “native pollinator folk” had been silent, and posed some specific questions (in italics below). Here are answers to those questions from the Xerces Society. In the recent discussion, we, NAPPC (Coevolution Institute), and university scientists have all been included under the umbrella of “native bee advocates.” The answers below only reflect the opinions of the Xerces Society.
 
******************
1.  As I stated before, it's generally accepted that honeybees can disrupt ecosystems by pollinating exotic weeds, and by competing with native pollinators for resources.  Given that, do the NP groups have any problem with accepting honeybees as a vital component of American agriculture?
 
We have read the recent research providing evidence that honey bees may provide an extra advantage to exotic weeds. We also have closely followed the research that suggests honey bees may compete in some cases/places with native bees (particularly with generalist foragers like bumble bees).  
 
However, we believe that honey bees are, and will remain, the primary pollinator workhorse of agriculture. This is what we promote to the press, in our publications, and in our workshops. 
 
That being said, we do not actively work on the conservation of honey bees.  The honey bee community (beekeepers and researchers) have an established presence, many advocates, many research labs across the country, and a support network of extension agents, Departments of Agriculture, etc.  We are just one small organization with limited funds.  We are disappointed in the steady trend of the last twenty years in which funding has been pulled from Apiary Inspector programs and support for beekeepers, but honey bees have not been the main focus of our pollinator program.
 
(Just as an FYI:  Mace Vaughan, Xerces Conservation Director (he also manages our Agricultural pollinator program) has a background in honey bee research and beekeeping, working with the Nick Calderone at Cornell University in the late 1990s.  That work focused on honey bee behavior, and was an entrée for him into the wonderful diversity of bees (and other invertebrates) in the world and his present efforts in invertebrate conservation here at the Xerces Society.) 
 
******************
2.  Is your position to replace honeybees in agriculture with native pollinators, or simply to generate recognition of the contributions already made by them?
 
We never have proposed that native bees will replace honey bees in agriculture. Our position, and the goal of our Agriculture Program, is to come up with incentives for growers to protect or restore habitat on their lands that provides resources (forage and nest sites) for native bees and other pollinators. This same habitat will provide additional resources for honey bees and, if competition with a crop is a concern, can even be designed to provide bloom before and after focal crops. This would support a diverse community of native bees, as well as honey bees.  
 
To be clear, we also believe and promote that native bees can play more of a role in agriculture than they are generally given credit for and that they can be an excellent partner with honey bees in crop pollination.  
 
Should honey bees become more difficult to acquire for some growers, we also believe that cultivating good habitat around the farm may be an insurance policy where native bees can fill in gaps if a grower can only get a percentage (say 75%) of the bees she or he needs. 
 
******************
3. Are you promoting commercial exploitation of native pollinators, or is your intent to simply help them to exist in the wild?
 
We support commercial management of native pollinators as long as these organisms are not moved across ecoregions, but we do not actively promote it.  We are a conservation organization and our aim is to protect or restore habitat on the land for pollinators. 
 
That being said, we do not shy away from managed native bees.  In fact, we are helping the USDA-ARS Logan Bee Lab with some field trials for management of a native bee for berry pollination in Oregon.  
 
Our concern with managing native pollinators is in the transport of disease and inappropriate genetic stock across the country, should, for example, bees be raised in Ohio and shipped to California. As we’ve seen with some species of bumble bees, their transport across the country (or from Europe to the U.S.) may have led to the introduction of diseases.  This is the same problem the honey bee community faced in the 1980s (and continues to struggle with) when varroa mite, tracheal mite, and European foulbrood were introduced into the U.S.
 
******************
4.  I've already posted to this List that Coevolution Institute was instrumental in helping beekeepers present their case in the recent Senate hearings.  Also, my opinion that habitat improvement for native pollinators would likely benefit beekeepers as well.  Do your organizations feel that your goals are at odds with beekeepers, or do you feel that we can work together?
 
We strongly believe that our goals are in line with beekeepers and that we can work together.  We are working to have more habitat on the land for pollinators. This goal will help diversify pollen and nectar sources for honey bees. Also, our target is to get land managers to think about when there are periods when no or few flowers are available, and to try to fill these holes with a diversity of bloom.  This would have benefits for native pollinators and honey bees. We also work to educate farmers on the use of pesticides which will help all insect pollinator species. 
 
******************
5.  Is there discussion going on between your organizations and beekeepers organizations to coordinate our efforts politically?  If not, are you open to such coordination?
 
We have had conversations with beekeepers and bee researchers, and we are open to coordination with the honey bee community.  In fact, in the past we have been very active in improving labels on insecticides and in editing guidelines for protecting honey and native bees from pesticides.  
 
Our work is focused on habitat conservation, however, and efforts to coordinate with the honey bee community, is difficult to do because of this.  But we certainly would welcome having a discussion with leaders in the beekeeping community. 
 
******************
As a footnote, our pollinator conservation work extends beyond simply agriculture. We are engaged with land managers of all sorts, both public and private, to promote safe habitat for pollinators, including on golf courses, in urban parks and greenspaces, on power line easements, in gardens, and in natural areas. In many situations, the people we work with have land adjacent to farms, so the work they do will have spill over benefits for growers. We also work to protect at-risk pollinator insects and their habitat. More information about our work can be found on our website, www.xerces.org.
 
Randy, thanks for this specific request to respond to this discussion.  We very much appreciate it and hope that what we’ve written clears up our positions on these issues.
 
Sincerely,
Scott Black, Executive Director
Mace Vaughan, Conservation Director
Matthew Shepherd, Pollinator Program Director
______________________________________________________
The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation
The Xerces Society is an international nonprofit organization that 
protects the diversity of life through invertebrate conservation. To 
join the Society, make a contribution, or read about our work, 
please visit www.xerces.org.

Matthew Shepherd
Director, Pollinator Conservation Program
4828 SE Hawthorne Boulevard, Portland, OR 97215, USA
Tel: 503-232 6639 Cell: 503-807 1577 Fax: 503-233 6794
Email: [log in to unmask] 
______________________________________________________


******************************************************
* Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at:          *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm  *
******************************************************