>So I'll be less subtle - you described the dose
>given the termites as:
>
>> the tiny dosage they received (so tiny it is frightening)
>
>How could anyone call a 500 ppm dose applied
>directly to a single termite "tiny"?

That is the dose the researcher applied.  The dosages that the termites
received by trophyllaxis were tiny.  The only termite that did not show
symptoms had 0.1 ng in its gut.  The termites with 0.2 ng or more all showed
symptoms after two hours.  ng, nanogram, a trillionth of a gram.  TINY.

>But let's go on - let me provide some more facts.
>Please recall that you demanded facts.  :)

>Jim Kemp of U of PEI and Dick Rogers of Wildwood Labs did a
>residue study that found "no exposure" (residues below the
>detection limit, which at that time was 0.3 parts-per-billion)
>for bees foraging in fields rotated from potatoes where Admire
>had been used.

They did indeed even find some residue in clover leaves the third year after
the potatoes.  But grain was following potatoes.  What I am saying is that
when Jim Kemp looked at canola growing the year immediately after potatoes
he did indeed find not only detectable, but quantifiable amounts in nectar,
pollen and honey.  And this has not been published.  I have the table he
gave me when he proposed to study my bees on canola, and I have posted it to
the bee-l.

>They did a follow up multifactor study of what was actually
>affecting bee health and cited a long list of management
>issues impacting Stan's bees, which in sum offered a much
>more plausible explanation of the problems Stan was having
>than any sort of pesticide kill from ground drench sprayed
>on potato fields.

They did not cite management issues impacting MY bees.  They looked at
management issues on PEI in general.  However, unlike PEI in general, I had
almost no AFB, we do not have tracheal mites, varroa was not a problem in my
hives.  The depopulated hives did show EFB and chalkbrood, but they had
usually a half dozen frames of brood and a couple of hundred adult bees.  It
would be unusual if they did not break down with those.  In all the times I
asked Dick Rogers or Jim Kemp to explain where the bees had gone I never got
any reply that seemed at all plausible.

>There's the facts as they stand - I am happy to offer what I can.

That is the facts as you interpret them.  Perhaps Dick Rogers who posts to
this list and was the main person involved in the "multifactor study" would
like to offer an explanation for what "management issues" cause a hive of
bees in the middle of summer to have a tiny hand full of bees and a queen
who have abandonned many frames of brood and moved to a corner of the hive
with clean comb.  He did not indicate to me at the time that nosema levels
were high in my bees.  He may even have still been involved when the
sampling of hives on canola was done in New Brunswick and could corroborate
the information I posted (and maybe indicate why it was never published,
when the study showing "no residues" got extensive discussion at the
Canadian Houncil, CAPA, etc. However, he was not involved when Jim Kemp did
the extensive studying of my hives on canola in PEI.

When farmers started cutting down on amounts of imidacloprid by treating
sets instead of injecting soil, I started having fewer problems.  I do not
believe that my management changed.

Stan

****************************************************
* General Information About BEE-L is available at: *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm   *
****************************************************