>
> >So...what are the data showing that the new plant protection chemistries
> are better?


The clearest data is from beekeepers in agricultural areas.  Virtually
every long-time beekeeper that I've spoken to across the country tells me
that pesticide issues these days have improved greatly over how it used to
be.

Other data are surveys of native insects, such as the butterfly count
recently released for Ohio (or was it Iowa)?

Ditto for biodiversity improvement in surface waters.

>How and why are they better than short-lived acute pesticides that kill
everything immediately?

Since most insect species are annual, if they are killed prior to
reproduction, there will no generation the next year.  Ditto for species
which feed upon them.  Ditto for wildlife such as birds who suffer greatly
from insecticides such as organophosphates.

Pyrethroids certainly have a shorter residual, but many species have
developed resistance to them (and as the Fraziers point out, are likely the
major pesticide exposure to honey bees).

Other classes of chemistries, such as the "biologicals," Bt, and RNAi hold
great promise.



-- 
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