> Not that I oppose research, even pure 
> research, but how would you present 
> this to the taxpayer?

I am surprised that I am "challenged" with a question having such an obvious
answer.  

In the case of the USDA ARS, the goals and funding are presented to the
taxpayer in the Farm Bill.  (Oops, I'm not quite correct there, as the
amounts allocated to the Bee Labs are so small as to not really appear in
the Farm Bill as a line item, but are something that must be addressed "in
markup" if Congress forgets to fund the bee research, something that has
happened more than once in the past few decades.)

In the case of State-level efforts, similar mechanisms exist where elected
leaders present the voters and taxpayers with the ability to review how
money is spent.

> Honey bee colony numbers in the 
> US have stabilized and no one has 
> ever documented a shortage...

Again, answering a question with such an obvious answer might make me seem
to sound like I am being condescending.  But I will try.  Imagine for a
moment that 1/3 of all cows in the USA dropped dead one winter.  What would
be the reaction to such widespread losses?  One would reasonably expect
governors to call out their national guard units, and declare states of
emergency.  Yes, more cows could be produced to make up for the losses, so
the net number of cows would not steadily decline, but what livestock
business can survive the persistent loss of a significant fraction of their
livestock no matter what live-saving measures they attempt?  And for how
long?  Realize that significant losses have been suffered each year for
several decades, mostly due to varroa.  We still lack an effective control
method for varroa.

I realize that very few Bee-L readers have ever actually made their living
from bees alone.  I myself made more money from high-grade boutique horse
hay than from bees in years when the weather smiled upon my hay-making.  But
if bees are one's only source of income, the losses simply are not
sustainable.  Yes, smaller failing operations can be bought for a fraction
of their healthy value, and for a short period of time, larger operations
can appear to grow in value by acquiring assets purchased below book value
from these failing operations, but even this is not sustainable, as, at some
point, the consolidation stops, and the "economies" become just as
uneconomic, but on larger scales.

The "shortages" are not in the fields, as beekeepers will find a way to meet
pollination contracts, even if they have to put wings and antennae on their
grandmothers, and have them run around making buzzing sounds and pollinating
with a feather duster.  The shortages are in things like decent quality
queens for splits.  I'm sure everyone has noticed just how terrible queen
"productive life" has become over the past decades, and younger beekeepers
may wonder why the queen-marking colors have a 5-year cycle.  (Answer, it
was possible, at some point in the past, to actually have a queen stay
productive for more than a year or two!)

             ***********************************************
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