>-  how do the farmers respond and get affected if the neonicotinoids
>removed from their available pesticides for use?
>- Do you think that a farmer will allow a beekeeper to place his bees on
>the farm?

Good points and they often get overlooked in the debate.

To my mind we need to separate the investigation and discussion of 
effects experienced from the use of various chemicals from the automatic 
conclusion that they must be banned if implicated in scattered losses of 
varying degrees -- or even universal degradation of insect life in 
developed countries.

Just because banning neonics is highly impracticable, and probably 
undesirable at this point, does not mean, however, that we should stop 
trying the understand what is happening and whether they are responsible
for some of the mysterious goings-on.

Knowledge is power, even if we can do nothing with that knowledge at 
the moment.  

For example, if we proved that neonics are having subtle and sub-lethal
effects on bees and other beneficial insects, then we would be in a better
position to decide how to mitigate that problem or arrange compensation 
for losses instead of having arguments based on limited understanding.

Without that knowledge, we are just guessing and it comes down to 
contests of opinion.

These are poisons.  Is there an antidote?  Are the poisons the problem, 
or the method of application?

We know these poisons are being spread far and wide and have half-lives 
ranging from days to much longer depending on the environment and 
circumstances.  they have been in use long enough that we should be 
able to examine the actual accumulations and localized concentrations 
and confirm or disprove the original projections made before they had 
been widely deployed.

Also, the effects of poisons are usually considered to be dose-dependent.
Additionally, the effects of one poison alone may be known and predicted, 
but these predictions may be high or low by large multiples in the differing
circumstances and in the presence or absence of other chemicals or 
nutrients.

I think that we are a long ways from understanding all the implications of
using neonics.

I'm thinking that as we wrestle with these chemicals, which many find more 
benign, or less harmful than previous or alternative solutions, that 
chemists and biologists the world over are working on something to 
replace them.

What will it be?  Will it be more benign?  Or will it carry some unexpected
payload that only becomes apparent after some time in use?

These are the same questions we are asking now about neonics.

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

Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm