On Apr 13, 8:36*am, Doug Freyburger > wrote:
> wrote:
>

>
> That and it's possible an entirely new species could be
> harvested from the wild and used in place of the current
> domesticated population. *A wild hive would not make as
> much honey as a domesticated one, but honey is a
> by-product of using bees for pollination not the primary
> product for most bee keepers.
>
> Harvesting from wild hives would increase genetic
> diversity in kept bee populations. *That's a good thing.

I'm most certainly not a bee expert, but here's what I know: The bees
that we think are wild are actually imports from Europe several
hundred years ago. They've displaced the native bee populations for
the most part. I live near the largest almond and stone fruit growing
region in the world, and they bring in thousands and thousands of
hives every year for pollination. You're right, that's where the
money is. They get paid to put their hives there, and then they get
the bonus of keeping the honey.

I'm not in ag, but it's funny that I hear about all sorts of work on
hybrid plants. But the harvest is dependent on the bees, and I don't
hear anything about cross-breeding bees to make better pollinators or
more resistant varieties. It seems U.C. Davis or somewhere should be
working on that.

Ken