Allen  wrote:

> As the dust settles, it seems pretty clear that CCD was/is a chimera and
> I am surprised that the term is still used with a straight face --  but
> we all continue to use it.

I'm with you, to me the term is a litmus test. You can right away tell that the person using it doesn't have a clue what they are talking about. I already gave the example from Beeologic's work:

> CCD-related losses (direct and indirect) have been estimated at $75 billion. 

What is the source of this information???

> In 2007, then-Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns warned that “if left unchecked, CCD has the potential to cause a $15 billion direct loss of crop production and $75 billion in indirect losses.” See Stipp (2007). The source of the multiplier that would inflate $15 to $75 billion is unclear.

See:
As bees go missing, a $9.3B crisis lurks. By David Stipp, Fortune. August 28 2007: 2:55 PM EDT
Available at: http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/09/03/100202647/index.htm.
             ***********************************************
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