I guess I'd better jump back in here to get things back on track.  I didn't mean
to
compare insects with man and don't think I did.

The subject seemed to be whether domesticated bees are successful at the expense

of other species of pollinators.  I suggest that that may appear to be the case
because
we have done several things to eliminate some of the native pollinators.

a) we systematically clear diverse native plant populations which are dependent
on and support
an equally diverse population of pollinator species;

b) we plant enormous expanses of single species crops, thereby excluding many
pollinators.

It seemed to me that these two mechanisms were being ignored in the discussion
and that the
roll of the domesticated bee in the decline of other (some native) pollinators
was being exaggerated.
The result may, in fact, be the same in the long run.

Off topic but introduced by others: I don't much admire the way we've fouled our
nest.  I think we
are overly dependent on technology and chemistry which we don't sufficiently
understand to make
up for our imprudent destruction of other species and systems on which depend.
We tend to put too many
eggs in too few baskets.  I was raised in a place and at a time when USDA and
Dow, among others,
pretty much ruled the roost and were in bed together.  I've grown out of that
better nutrition through
chemistry and profligate application of water.  I've also grown skeptical of our
tendency to attempt to
fix one problem at a time.  We always run into unexpected results which, often,
make the original problem
worse.

As for the absurd figure of 36 Billion Humans: even if the Earth could support
that many people, why?
We've found serious flaws in the idea of mono cropping.  36 Billion people would
be mono cropping
to a faretheewell.

Bill Truesdell wrote:

> Computer Software Solutions Ltd wrote:
>
> > In my opinion, Mankind is in a class of its own when it comes to a
> destructive approach to things.
> snip
> > he began a process of what I might term 'Death Control'. And without a
> corresponding 'Birth

> > Control' the most dim witted member of this intelligent species should have
> been able to see
> > that this would cause run away population growth.
>
> The earth can sustain a population much greater than we have now. Some say
> as many as 36 billion.... The US would be the same without
> immigration. So the key is freedom and technology....
>
> As beekeepers, if we want to return to the natural state, forget the hives,
> forget apistan, forget crisco, forget terra, forget... well you get the
> idea. we treat to keep our bees healthy. We treat to keep our kids healthy.

This was not implied by my original post.  However, I suspect that packing large
numbers of hives in
close proximity exacerbates the spread of disease and parasites.  There are
economic reasons for the practice
but there is a price to be paid: pest management through better chemistry.
Sooner or later, the chemistry
will fail.