Hi Gordon,
 
>As groups like bee-l and sci.agriculture.beekeeping get bigger it is
>inevitable that people leave due to overload. Someone recently wrote
>directly to me asking if there was a UK mailing list because bee-l and
>sci.a.b were very USA oriented.
 
 In a way there is, it's called BeeNet - UK and it has local
 areas to the UK and International areas covering almost
 everything on your list below. You can also get
 sci.ag.beekeeping ( a read and write area) and BEE-L (a read
 only area), as I understand it, the owner of BEE-L
 forbids BeeNet users from replying to messages in BEE-L.
 
 As I've said before access to the internet is very expensive
 and most, at least here, can't afford it. However the expenses
 for BeeNet are mainly born by the individual Sysops in each
 country.
 
 The UK is currently one of the fastest growing BeeNet countries
 in Europe. I would suggest you contact:
 
 
  Steven Turner
  Regional Coordinator, Beenet UK,
  Catford, London
  44-181-695-5328  data phone
 
  Allen Coates
  Cider County, Bristol
  44-117-955-3421  data phone
 
 
 
>Maybe it's time we started considering splitting bee-l and/or sci.a.b
>into context related subgroups.
 
>Bee-l is supposed to be for "Discussion on Bee Biology". We have
>tended to stray substantially from that into bee farming, honey
>production, wax uses and so on. Maybe bee-l should be returned
>to its original mandate and a new line for non-biology related
>stuff should be started.  What think?
 
 It would be very nice to see Bee-l get back on track.
 
 
>A better candidate still for splitting would be sci.a.b (except that
>not everyone who gets bee-l can get newsgroups). I think that sci.a.b's
>mandate is wider and maybe less biology oriented. An advantage with
>newsgroups is also that one can more easily filter stuff automatically
>for example, I always exclude postings with LOCAL in the subject line
>because that _usually_ means USA somewhere. Similarly, I'd probably
>filter our bears in the subject line -- not a problem we have in
>England ;-).
 
>I think that we could consider moving towards something like the
>following, perhaps starting with the * ones.
 
 Already done, contact BeeNet.
 
>sci.agriculture.beekeeping
>    sci.a.b.biology         *
>    sci.a.b.ecology
>    sci.a.b.farming         *
>    sci.a.b.help            *
>    sci.a.b.hive-produce
>    sci.a.b.honey
>    sci.a.b.newbee          *
>    sci.a.b.other-bees
>    sci.a.b.pests
>    sci.a.b.pollination
 
>Incidently, that suggested starting point is intended only to reflect
>what I think is a reasonable spread of interests, not some particular
>interest of mine -- I personally would subscribe to most anyway. Maybe
>others would view the mix differently -- maybe pests should be there?.
 
>Best regards,
>--
>Gordon Scott   [log in to unmask]   Hampshire, England.
>               [log in to unmask]
>               Beekeeper; Kendo 3rd Dan; Sometime sailor.
>The Basingstoke Beekeeper (newsletter) [log in to unmask]
 
 
 Regards,
 
 Durk Ellison
 OH2ZAS
 BeeNet: 240:2358/100
 email: [log in to unmask]