Here in the U.C. California research communities (the plural is
intentional), the native pollinator research group is unfortunately often
at odds with the honey bee research folk.
But I do get asked by some of the better researchers for input on their
research proposals.  I often reply that the way their experiment is
designed, a negative outcome against honey bees is completely predictable.
Luckily, once I point that out, some are more than willing to improve the
design to avoid that issue.

The "native bee vs. honey bee" bias is obvious in many of my discussions
with authors of papers, who take liberties in their introductions and
conclusions in order to pimp up their papers for acceptance by journals
looking for "sexy" findings.

This is not a black or white argument.  In some areas, heavy stocking of
honey bees can clearly result in competition.  But in many areas, if it
were not for beekeepers placing loads of hives, most of the floral
resources would go to waste, since there are not enough native pollinators
to utilize what's available.  I recently pointed this out to the USDA when
Xerces filed to restrict honey bees from the National Forests.

As far as I'm concerned, we should look for collaborative possibilities.
Pete Berthelson, when he ran Pheasants Forever, was a perfect example.  He
pointed out that what's good for pheasants is also good for all pollinators
and other wildlife.  The more of us on the same train, the better we are
heard.

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