3 ms·

"The native pollinators, such as bumblebees, are outcompeted by honeybee hives" ... in urban environments, and it' still debatable. Your #2 source provides add

"The native pollinators, such as bumblebees, are outcompeted by honeybee hives" ... in urban environments, and it' still debatable. Your #2 source provides additional details. There are a lot of other dubious claims here that the sources seemed to contradict each other. Something you didn't bring up is that people raising honeybee can benefit other pollinators due to changes in human behavior such as planting beneficial plants and refraining from pesticide use.

tptacek 1y ago
People can plant beneficial plants without introducing invasive competitors.
- giantg2 1y ago
  They can, but they don't. You missed the point. Awareness through exposure to beekeeping can change human behavior in a beneficial way. If you read some of the previously linked articles, you will see that it is still debateable if the competitors are actually causing any real problems for native bees. If the problems are debatable and on a low scale, then it's possible the benefits are a net positive.
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > can, but they don't Do we have evidence backyard beekeeping promotes these behaviours better than directly messaging folks to plant pollinator-friendly gardens? (Genuine question.)
    - giantg2 1y ago
      I don't know of any studies looking at this specifically, but there are numerous groups and programs that use honeybees as an outreach tool for environmental education. There are studies about the effectiveness of experiential learning vs classroom only learning. One indicator that this is working is the fact that most people in general think about honeybees when you say the bees or pollinators are dying. The steps of reducing pesticide use and planting pollinator friendly yards is universally beneficial. https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/careersandeducation/how-bee-u-nyc-brings-environmental-stewardship-and-pollinator-education-to-urban-communities/ar-AA1IHA5g https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/careersandeducation/how-bee-... https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8569223/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8569223/
JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> in urban environments, and it' still debatable In all environments. The source argues this competition is fine in urban environments because we’ve already displaced the native pollinators there.
- giantg2 1y ago
  Please read your #2 source. That one says competition is fine in rural areas because carrying capacity is still sufficient. This might be different than your #3 source, hence the comment about contradictory sources.
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > read your #2 source. That one says competition is fine in rural areas because carrying capacity is still sufficient Do you mean No. 3, the Oregon State University article? No. 2, the USGS article, explicitly says "honey bees are also significant competitors of native bees and should not be introduced in conservation areas, parks, or areas where you want to foster the conservation of native plants and native bees." (As for the Oregan State University article, the word rural never appears. It's focussed on urban areas, where honeybees have a smaller foraging radius and native bees are largely extinct. The carrying capacity argument only applies "during periods of abundant pollen and nectar.")
    - giantg2 1y ago
      Yes,my prior comment reversed numbers 2 and 3. "Only half of the studies pointed to a negative impact of competition, and most of the negative impacts were studies where wild bees changed their visitation rate on certain flowers. It has yet to be demonstrated how competition may result in a long-term change in the composition of bee species in an environment." You wouldn't find the term rural because they use the term wildlands. The studies used in the Oregon article are not all urban focused and included studies investigating increased competition in varying habitat, finding "As the California study demonstrated, increased competition may cause bee species to switch their foraging patterns, resulting in little impact on their overall reproductive success." And yes, any conservation area will not promote the inclusion of non-native species regardless of their impact. Just becuase they are competitors doesn't show that they have negative impacts.

tptacek 1y ago

People can plant beneficial plants without introducing invasive competitors.

giantg2 1y ago
They can, but they don't. You missed the point. Awareness through exposure to beekeeping can change human behavior in a beneficial way. If you read some of the previously linked articles, you will see that it is still debateable if the competitors are actually causing any real problems for native bees. If the problems are debatable and on a low scale, then it's possible the benefits are a net positive.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > can, but they don't Do we have evidence backyard beekeeping promotes these behaviours better than directly messaging folks to plant pollinator-friendly gardens? (Genuine question.)
  - giantg2 1y ago
    I don't know of any studies looking at this specifically, but there are numerous groups and programs that use honeybees as an outreach tool for environmental education. There are studies about the effectiveness of experiential learning vs classroom only learning. One indicator that this is working is the fact that most people in general think about honeybees when you say the bees or pollinators are dying. The steps of reducing pesticide use and planting pollinator friendly yards is universally beneficial. https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/careersandeducation/how-bee-u-nyc-brings-environmental-stewardship-and-pollinator-education-to-urban-communities/ar-AA1IHA5g https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/careersandeducation/how-bee-... https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8569223/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8569223/

JumpCrisscross 1y ago

> in urban environments, and it' still debatable In all environments. The source argues this competition is fine in urban environments because we’ve already displaced the native pollinators there.

giantg2 1y ago
Please read your #2 source. That one says competition is fine in rural areas because carrying capacity is still sufficient. This might be different than your #3 source, hence the comment about contradictory sources.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > read your #2 source. That one says competition is fine in rural areas because carrying capacity is still sufficient Do you mean No. 3, the Oregon State University article? No. 2, the USGS article, explicitly says "honey bees are also significant competitors of native bees and should not be introduced in conservation areas, parks, or areas where you want to foster the conservation of native plants and native bees." (As for the Oregan State University article, the word rural never appears. It's focussed on urban areas, where honeybees have a smaller foraging radius and native bees are largely extinct. The carrying capacity argument only applies "during periods of abundant pollen and nectar.")
  - giantg2 1y ago
    Yes,my prior comment reversed numbers 2 and 3. "Only half of the studies pointed to a negative impact of competition, and most of the negative impacts were studies where wild bees changed their visitation rate on certain flowers. It has yet to be demonstrated how competition may result in a long-term change in the composition of bee species in an environment." You wouldn't find the term rural because they use the term wildlands. The studies used in the Oregon article are not all urban focused and included studies investigating increased competition in varying habitat, finding "As the California study demonstrated, increased competition may cause bee species to switch their foraging patterns, resulting in little impact on their overall reproductive success." And yes, any conservation area will not promote the inclusion of non-native species regardless of their impact. Just becuase they are competitors doesn't show that they have negative impacts.