Subject: WDH, Pollinator & Bees (Was: One-Straw Revolution)
From: wtmorgan@pilot.msu.edu (Bill Morgan)
Organization: Michigan State University
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 16:34:43 -0400
Message-ID: <MOD$970820.26482@rec.gardens.ecosystems>
References: <MOD$970806.6297@rec.gardens.ecosystems> <MOD$970819.22855@rec.gardens.ecosystems>



Dave (Pollinator):

As always, there is never enough good bee info out there. As always, you
are a good source. Keep at it.

[more thoughts follow:]

In article <MOD$970819.22855@rec.gardens.ecosystems>, pollinator@aol.com
(Pollinator) wrote:

> In article <MOD$970806.6297@rec.gardens.ecosystems>, William D Hulet
> writes:
>
> > How about no dependence on any artificial imputs? I'm concerned
> >about the use of imported pollinators, carnivorous insects, virus sprays,
> >and all the other "organic" substitutes for pesticides. In Ontario our
> >indigenous ladybugs are getting displaced by imports that people pick up
> >at the store; and I keep hearing dire things about the impact that
> >imported honey bees are having on our local feral hives and native pollen
> >bees.

WDH makes some good points. Nothing is without risk, after all. But risk A
has to be compared to risk B and the risk of doing nothing. Pesticides vs
no action vs biological control. All have associated ecological risks. And
it has to be considered for each separate case. It is not uniformly true
that biological control is better than no action, or worse than using
synthetic pesticides, etc.

Also, the idea that "imported" honey bees have impact on "local feral
hives" is specious. The local feral hives ARE honey bees. Wild bees
(bumblers, solitary bees, etc. etc. may be negatively impacted, of course.)
Even there, few bees are impacted by the honies.

Bees divide the resources partly on the basis of size. Few bees are in the
honey bee size range. Most are much smaller, a few equivalent, and very few
larger. Probably the larger megachilids and smaller bumblers are most
likely to feel competition from honey bees. Maybe a few others here and
there.

> The biggest problem native bees have is not honey bees, though there is
> competition in some cases where resources are scarce. In my experience the
> nectar and pollen resources of an area are rarely fully utilized by ANY bee.
And that trend has to have been increasing during this century. In the
western half of the US, for example (and I'm from the high plains),
irrigation has prompted the tillage of marginal lands, and mega-corporation
farming/ranching has eliminated many "waste" areas and turned them into
fields. Well, that might be alkalai bee nesting habitat. These suckers may
not matter to the mega wheat farmer, but they sure as hell matter to the
alfalfa guy next door (And in some of these areas, alfalfa is the #1 crop
[if you don't count cows as being a crop])

Even so, that area is pretty safe. It will take a long time to drag it
down, even if things keep going the way they have been. (And it can't,
because after the Oglalla aquifer is tapped out, irrigation goes back to
almost nil, and corporate farms go belly up, and....)

I've been back the last two summers (first summer visits for years), and I
was astonished by the number and diversity of bees, wasps, beetles,
butterflies, bee flies, etc. etc. There are tons of pollinators there.
Compared to a Michigan landscape....

My sunflowers in back of the house get pollinated by a few andrenid bees,
some bumblers, a few halictids. Nothing much on 'em. In the high plains,
those same flowers would be alive with bees, beetle, flies and butterflies.

>
> The biggest problem for native bees is pesticide misuse. There are
> techniques to enhance native pollinators and even to pollinate crops with
> them. These techniques are of little value in monoculture. Crops must be in
> very small plots, with a lot of interplanting, some areas left wild, etc.
Is that, in your opinion, a problem of the native pollinators, or of the
practice of monoculture?

I'm biased in that regard, I wouldn't even want a lawn like that.

> But we are all related. You can do wonderful things to encourage native
> pollinators, then your neighbor can (illegally) poison them when they are
> working on some blossoms on his property. Property lines are irrelevant to bees.

Indeed. This reflects a more general problem in life. It is often so
difficult to create something useful or beautiful, yet it is easy to
destroy it. I believe that elsewhere, you mentioned that some yahoos in a
4-wheeler ran over some hives belonging to a friend of yours.

> You have to remember that bees are rarely poisoned at the nest site.
> They are poisoned at the flower site, either directly, or by picking up
> contaminated food. One application of insecticide while bees are visiting,
> can create a large area around it that is barren of pollinators. Honeybees
> that are hit with such damage, at least have a human helper to help them
> repair and salvage what can be saved. Wild pollinators do not have any aid,
> and generally fare much worse.

Note to home gardeners: If you have plants in flower, do not apply
bee-toxic pesticides to them. Use a different pesticide (Rotenone is not
toxic to bees), or pick and squash the pest insects, or live with a little
damage. If you are growing a crop that does flower, but whose flowers are
irrelevant (e.g., potatoes), pull those flowers off before using a
pollinator-toxic pesticide.

[kiwi]

> There are many, many similar niche pollen and nectar sources that are
> not well utilized by honeybees, simply because they prefer to go to the
> blackberries, the clover, the cotton, the goldenrod, and other massive
> resources, and ignore many of the minor sources.
And (especially in the tropics) some plants have a one and only pollinator.
If the pollinator is threatened by pesticides, or by habitat destruction,
you can bet that the plant is a gonner. In North America, a good example of
this is the Yucca, which is pollinated by the Yucca moth. Neither could
exist without the other. Fortunately, both are doing very well at the
moment, thank you.

> And I've often seen even the massive sources not utilized. In western
> NY there is a lot of former or fallow farm land that is growing wild and
> goldenrod is rampant. There is not a bee alive that doesn't LOVE goldenrod,
> and it is the last chance for a good feed before winter for many species.
Perhaps the bees west of the 98th meridian only *seem* more conspicuous
because areas of rampant flowering are limited, usually being recently
disturbed areas?

> On a sunny day, I walked between two bee yards that were a half mile
> apart. One yard had about sixty hives, the other 35. The areas around the
> bees were being intensively worked, but for about a quarter mile in the
> middle there were NO honeybees. -And precious few of any other type either.
> This is an area where there were still some wild bees left, but they were
> distributed so much by the abundance of resources that it seemed like only
> a few.

So many flowers, so little time...

>
> Many of the wild pollinators are specific to one host plant, usually a
> wild one, so are of little value to our food crops, though of immmense
> value to wildlife in some cases. Their life cycle may only have a couple
> weeks in the adult stage, timed to coincide with the bloom of the plant
> they favor. There are thousands of species of these wild bees.
True in general. But don't take it as being true for all wild pollinators.
Some are quite specific. Some are generalists. Keeping a diverse assemblage
of pollinators should be our goal.

> Other wild bees are longer lived, and will go to any flower that will
> yield food, but they also are not good pollinators of our food crops,
> because they are not loyal to one species of plant. Dandelion, mustard, or
> henbit pollen is of no value to an apple blossom. With honeybees,
> individual workers tend to be loyal to one species (so they are ideal for
> apples).
A good point. Apples are introduced, as are honeybees. They were old
friends long before they came to the New World, long before either was
domesticated.
Honeybees are the right bee for apples, though I have seen (In Western NY),
that wild bees can fill the same niche, aat least in part. (And it probably
took years for them to get to such populations.)

> We need to do a lot more study and certainly better protection and
> enhancement of our pollinators.
Add education of the general public to that.

OK, I'm halfway kidding. I can see that you already *are* putting a lot of
effort into that.

>It's not hard to find cases of plants that
> have been studied extensively, because there may be medicinal properties,
> or other economic value to the plant, yet you can ask what are the primary
> pollinators, and all you get is a blank look.
======
digression
======

Biology is a young science, after all. Probably it was only a couple of
hundred thousand years ago that people began to have a full awareness of it
at all. But of course, that was well before astronomy "the mother of
sciences" [guffaw] got any notice.

What's more important: the difference between a leopard, a lion, a hyaena
or a croc; or the difference between Rigel, Antares, Deneba, or Regulus.
Get Sirius!

======
end digression
======

> The relationship between plants and their pollinators is complex. Some
> pollinators are migratory, and they depend on corridors of plants to come
> into bloom at the right time for the seasonal migration. Man often disrupts
> these corridors with no understanding of the disruption they may cause
> hundreds of miles away, by starving pollinators while they are enroute.
TELL IT!

> Pollination is the one factor least understood by many in our
> agricultural system. Pollination management is a course you'll find in only
> a handful of universities. Pollination management seeks to enhance, develop
> and protect all different kinds of pollinators, recognizing the strengths
> and weakness of each, and utilizing them fully in food production for us
> and the other creatures that inhabit the earth with us.
>
> A story often told in agricultural circles is the Berkeley "Love-In" in
> the '60's, where a "flower child" was asked by a reporter what would happen
> if everyone adapted their life style. "Who would feed us?"
>
> She looked at him blankly and said, "Food IS."

And so the other end of the spectrum.

You rightly decry those who go out and spray pesticides "on schedule" just
because it is "on schedule". In rec.gardens, I often knock the people who
had "something" on their plants and sprayed it with "something that we had
in the cupboard." And here is their opposite of the ultimate
interventionist: the one who thinks it will all take care of itself.

Well, no. It won't. For better or worse, we are now responsible. Collectively.

Everyone has a role here. [Do you know yours?]

> Those who know the work involved in food production can rightfully
> mock her attitude. But many of the same people are blankly saying,
> "Pollination IS."
And the same for all such processes. Biodegredation of waste. Production of
fiber. Or wood.

Need I go on?

It is an easy attitude to mock. As easy as mocking: "Damn bees, they fly
around me."

You are absolutely right. People ignore [no, that is unfair; they just
don't know] about pollination. They don't know the difference between
bumble bees, honey bees or some other bees. In fact, many don't know the
difference between a bee and a wasp.

Keep posting, Dave.

>
>
> Pollinator@aol.com Dave Green Hemingway, SC USA
> The Pollination Scene http://users.aol.com/pollinator/polpage1.html
> Pollinator@aol.com
> Dave Green Hemingway, SC USA
> Practical Pollination Page
> http://users.aol.com/pollinator/polpage1.html

Regards,
Bill

--
Bill Morgan
wtmorgan@pilot.msu.edu
Center for Room Temperature Confusion