<A 2% burden integrated (compounded) over a sufficient time period adds up.>

That just brings up the question is a  (hypothetical?) 2% burden worth
doing something about?  I hate to say it but yes it might hurt beekeepers,
but then the question is: Is that offset by the amount it helps the crops?
You can talk about effects not detectable in field trials, but without
being able to pin a number on them can you really say anything about the
product?  What are you going to tell the farmer?  Your pesticide may or may
not being causing about a 2% harm to my bees, please desist from using it?
What if the farmer demonstrates a 20%gain in cost+benefit to their crops?
Everything is a tradeoff somewhere down the line.  I would be more
interested to see the cost/benefit of the neonic compared to available
alternatives, whatever that might be.

This is getting above my knowledge/interest/time, but I couldn't help throw
my 2 cents in as a very smallscale farmer and beekeeper.

Jeremy
West Michigan

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