>Two points on this, First, the Union of CS's is far from unbiased

Thanks for pointing that out, Bill, since I was not permitted to do so.

As for the claims and arguments about neonics, we have the same problem -- straw men. 

People challenge the most extreme claims and oversimplify, easily debunk them, then say the entire issue has been laid to rest.  It has not.

If systemic neonics are a significant cause of bee death, it is not because they are the "number one killer." 

It will be becasue they are everywhere and their effects are typically so subtle and elusive as to be almost immeasurable.  It will not be that they obvioulsy kill otherwise robust colonies, but because they finish off colonies which otherwise might have recovered from other malaises. 

If systemic neonics are eventually implicated, it will likely be as an enabler of other primary killers, or as  a subtle tax on hives that weakens some to the point where they fail to thrive.

I suspect that the effects are very difficult to detect because they are like that intermittant problem with your car.  It runs fine in the shop, but leaves you by the road again and again.  It gets towed back in and mechanics just shake their heads.

I understand that many researchers , including the U of Fla, are now working on examining the effects on developing insects alone and in combination with other products and in varying environments.  Time will tell, but I believe these insecticides do exactly what they were designed to do.  They are designed to either kill outright and suppress insect development.  It is no secret.

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

Access BEE-L directly at:
http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/wa-LSOFTDONATIONS.exe?A0=BEE-L