> My unscientific guess is that upwards of 80% of
ecologists and conservationists first learned to love
nature in places that weren’t pure

Wow, we are really straying!  There's a big difference between "purity" and
avoiding causing the preventable extinction of a species.
For example, the invasion of the honey bee into North America may have
displaced the Carolina Parakeet from its nest cavities, contributing to its
extinction.  We have no idea as to how many pollinator species may have
driven to extinction by the introduction of Apis mellifera.  That is now
water under the bridge, and no crying over spilled milk.

But that doesn't mean that setting down drops of hundreds of hives in rare
ecoregions where an endangered plant or pollinator is hanging on, doesn't
have the potential of driving them to extinction.  Extinction is permanent,
and we beekeepers have an ethical responsibility for our voluntary actions
to drive a species to extinction.  There is noting wrong with asking Xerces
to provide hard evidence of adverse competition when a particular native
species is involved.  But having Xerces demand a blanket restriction of
placing honey bees on government land is overboard.

Randy Oliver
Grass Valley, CA
530 277 4450
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