> >Why could more than a miniscule fraction of farmers be
> expected to be interested in planting flower strips for bees,
> given that beekeepers are having no major problem keeping
> them supplied with bees?
>

Paul, I'm looking at the larger picture, and not talking specifically about
honey bees.  The concept of agroecology is becoming more widely promoted
throughout the world, and agriculture will by necessity be forced to start
embracing it.   Agricultural lands can be managed in ways that are more
ecologically sustainable, with greater habitat for wildlife, and both
short- and long-term benefits to both individual farmers, and the
agricultural community as a whole.  It's not just about honey bees.

>
> >And if only a tiny fraction of farmers would be interested,
> how could that trivial effort accomplish biologically meaningful
> landscape scale change?
>

Far more than a tiny fraction already accept taxpayer-funded farm
insurance.  If such insurance came with qualifications for more
ecologically-friendly land management as a quid pro quo for receiving
taxpayer dollars, biologically meaningful landscape changes quickly could
take place.

>
> >In fact, your "forage planting", "Extension
> promotion of IPM", and "Installation of sentinel apiaries"
> proposals all involve giving federal dollars to pollinator
> protection groups and academics.


I find no necessary basis that the above statement is indeed factual.
Forage planting could just as well be for any sort of wildlife management,
carbon sequestration, or soil management.  Honey bees need not even be
mentioned.  For example, Pheasants Forever does a great job of presenting
win-win strategies for forage planting that benefit all stakeholders.
Pollinator protection groups could well be involved, but not by necessity.

Sentinel apiaries could easily be managed by local bee clubs at minimal
costs, or even be a requirement imposed by EPA upon registrants of
pesticides.  They would supply on-the-ground truthing of the degree to
which agricultural applications of pesticides are actually detrimental to
pollinators (or not).  I've been pushing this one hard at higher levels,
and nearly procured funding this year to start a demonstration program.

Extension promotion of IPM has absolutely no need to involve pollinator
protection groups or academics--this is a pest management issue for the
most cost-effective ways to control pests with the least amount of
environmental damage.  It is the application of basic agricultural
research, and of financial benefit to farmers.

So many naysayers...so few willing to work toward meaningful change when
they have the chance.

-- 
Randy Oliver
Grass Valley, CA
www.ScientificBeekeeping.com

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