Hi Paul, I know the question wasn't for me, but let me provide my 2c

You know I do not like the use of this word. You know I have shown before
that the use of the word sustainable is unsustainable, but let me say that
the main problem here is basically in your own wording of the questions.
You face sustainability within the bound of the farm. With that perspective
probably there are no problems, farmes can keep on earning money and some
how "sustaining" and sometime improve production, I would say, depending on
market conditions, even increasing profit margin. BUT (and on purpose use
UppersCap) we could no longer evaluate agricultural practises -
particularly within a beekeeping perspective - solely looking the farm
sustainability. We must broaden the scope and see what happend in a life
cicle perspective to all others involved or affected with in that
landscape. Farms are not islands. The world doesn't end by one owns fence.
And beekeeping is an open system.

This close system evaluation is basically what is causing the problems.

Probably it is not the use of neonics, but rather (and this is just an
example) is the air spray "up to the fence" what is causing the problem. We
all know that eventough you could use the best pilot, it is rather
imposible to use air spraying and stop just by the barb wire, so either,
the farmer doesn't plant to the fence, or doesn't use air spray or change
product. All in all, a need for changing the practices.


On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 12:00 AM, Stellio Matson <[log in to unmask]>wrote:

>
> Like could you name some specific widely grown crops where you
> know the farmers themselves are deeply worried they may soon
> have to accept lower yields due to serious and unsolvable
> problems caused by "mega-ag" practices?

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