Making claims about the monetary value of honeybee pollination may not be
a good idea.  Such statements can be counterproductive to the goal of
convincing people that beekeeping is an important activity.

There have been multiple studies done on this subject.  Each study has used
better methods than the one before, and each time, the numbers have gone
down to roughly 1/2 the prior number, and in the process, undermined the
reputation of anyone who presented the prior numbers as "facts".

The most recent studies include:

   A 1983 USDA study "Value of Bee Pollination to US Agriculture", USDA ARS

   The 1989 Cornell study, "The Value of Honey Bees as Pollinators of U.S.
   Crops," American Bee Journal (June and July 1989) Willard S. Robinson,
   Richard Nowogrodzki, and Roger A. Morse

   A 1992 study by the State Universities of New York at Buffalo and Brockport
   "Estimating the Economic Value of Honey Bees as Agricultural Pollinators
   in the United States", Journal of Economic Entomology (June 1992).

   A 1994 US General Accounting Office report to the Senate & House conferees
   on the USDA budget.

The 1983 study estimated the value of pollination at roughly
$19,000,000.00 US.

The 1989 study estimated the marginal increase in value attributable to
pollination by honeybees (in other words, the value of the increased
yield and increased quality due to pollination by ALL honeybees,
including feral colonies) at $9,300,000.00 US, and the marginal increase
in value of pollination services provided by beekeepers at $3,200,000.00 US.

But even the $3.2 billion was a bit of a stretch, given that, for some
crops, the entire value of the crop was attributed to pollination, which
presumed that without honeybee pollination, there would be no crop at all.

The 1992 study (published as a critique of the 1989 study) estimated the
value of all pollination (contracted and incidental) at between
$1,600,000.00 US and $5,700,000.00 annually.

In fact, the opaque complexities of the international commodities markets and
the historical flexibility of consumers to cope with shortages by replacing one
food in their diet with another, insure that a "value" number will be impossible
to nail down without a computer model that would be as intricate as those used
to model weather conditions.

The last time the issue was looked at by the GAO was in 1994.  Tossing around
dollar-value numbers backfired on the beekeepers, who used pollination as a
justification for honey price supports.  Federal price supports were eliminated for
honey for the strictly logical reason that honey production and pollination were two
very different beekeeping goals, and, in the view of the GAO, honey price supports
were encouraging beekeepers to focus on honey production rather than pollination.
It is interesting to note that of all the federal commodity programs under attack that
year as "wasteful", the honey price support was the only one eliminated.

So, at least in 1994, dollar-value numbers turned out to be a self-inflicted gunshot
wound to the foot of every beekeeper who had hoped to "save" the honey program.

A much better approach is to stay away from tossing numbers around that cannot
withstand scrutiny, and stick to statements that can be supported by verifiable facts.

A smart propagandist would get on the "US Food Security" bandwagon, and simply
state that honeybees are "cheap insurance" for the production of consistently high
yields of table-quality US-produced fruits, veggies, and nuts.  (Residents of other
countries can insert their own nation's name into the blank without problem, as all
countries are concerned about this issue.  No country likes depending upon
imported food.)

It is perfectly fair to state that feral colonies are very rare in places where crops
that require (or benefit from) pollination are grown.  It is also fair to point out that
the practices of monoculture, mechanized farming, and regular pesticide use have
eliminated most other pollinators and their habitats, making rental of managed
honeybee colonies "the only viable option that remains".

If you must use a number, talk about the possibility of a "$5 apple", or "$20 melon"
as reasonable outcomes of a lack of honeybees for pollination.  Numbers like these
are much easier to grasp, and easier to defend, since retail prices for specific foods
will certainly go up sharply without pollination.

        jim