>> Several times a year I will see batches of
>> dead bees (like pesticide poisoning)
>> outside certain hives.

But do you see the quivering, staggering, dying bees, the ones that show
neurological symptoms?  If you don't, then this would narrow the list of
suspect pesticides dramatically, as I have always considered the symptoms of
the dying bees to be a better indicator of pesticide exposure, and I have
seen no pesticide kills that did not include bees exhibiting these symptoms.
I encourage those who call me with such reports to take some video of this
behavior, because, tragic as it seems, it is the best evidence of the acute
poisoning.

> I keep my colonies nowadays for 11 months
>  of the year in areas essentially free of
> pesticide exposure.  I continue to observe the above.

I think it would be more accurate to say "free of KNOWN exposure" in the
above.

I'd like to know what a pre-dawn check of entrances shows for these hives.
Looking at what collects at the doorway before the bees can fly to take out
the trash is often highly illuminating.  A pre-dawn stroll and glance at
entrances can often be more valuable in terms of diagnosis than an actual
"inspection" of every frame in the hive.
	
>>> How often in the field will you have
>>> long durations of bees feeding on pesticides?

In a single season of apple pollination, a single hive can be deployed to as
many as 6 to 8 orchards in succession, assuming that the pollinator "works
North", and has a decently-planned geographic spread of clients.  The
depressing thing is that apples are among the most sprayed of crops.  The
encouraging thing is that apple growers are precise and disciplined in their
use of poisons.

>>> Maybe this is the disconnect between
>>> what is actually seen in the field and
>>> what researchers see.

The speculation above would imply that one or more pesticides at "field
realistic doses" would build up over time, rather than being metabolized
away, with no build-up.  The usual suspects will spout the usual flat
statements, and none will give an inch, as readily and rapidly changing
one's stance in light of new data is a hallmark of scientists, not of
beekeepers.

I have to mostly lean toward the "test in the lab" rather than the "test in
the field" approach, as I've yet to see field data disprove lab data in the
context of bee toxicology, but I've often seen lab data disprove claims made
based upon field data.

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