>    In monocultural settings as cranberry (and blueberry) is grown today, it is
>    the shortage in numbers of pollinating insects that is the limiting
>    factor.  Bumblebee nests may be comprised of a few dozen individuals
>while a
>    cranberry field has millions of flowers.  Considering the current
>prices for
>    commercially available bumble bee nests,  I question the economics of their
>    use in a field setting.  (Greenhouses is a different matter).  Perhaps,
>    simple enhancement of nesting habitat would be more cost-effective.
>
>
>    Paul van Westendorp                         [log in to unmask]
>    Provincial Apiarist
>    British Columbia
 
I was presuming that there was some substantial natural population of
bumblebees already present - if that isn't true, then you may well be
right, and I admit to being uncertain as to the present cost of commercial
bumblebee nests. No doubt there needs to be more detailed work done under
circumstances where the native bee population is low, and it might
ultimately prove cheaper to use honeybees in cases where *all* the
pollinators are introduced; the point is that I think you'd still agree
that bumblebees should not be automatically ruled out as a commercially
viable alternative? Is Kenna on-line here?
Cheers,
 
Doug Yanega      Illinois Natural History Survey, 607 E. Peabody Dr.
Champaign, IL 61820 USA     phone (217) 244-6817, fax (217) 333-4949
  "There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
        is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82