Title: The misplaced management of bees
Authors: Benoît Geslin1, Lise Ropars1,2, Marie Zakardjian1 & Floriane Flacher1
1 IMBE, Aix Marseille University, Avignon Univ., CNRS, IRD, Marseille, France.
2 ThéMA, UMR 6049 CNRS/Université de Bourgogne Franche-Comté, Besançon, France.
ORCID Numbers – B. Geslin: 0000-0002-2464-7998; F. Flacher: 0000-0002-7871-4690; L. Ropars: 0000-0001-7621-2825
Corresponding author: Geslin, B. (benoit.geslin@imbe.fr) – Twitter: @bengeslin – laboratory website:https://www.imbe.fr/
Author contributions: B.G. conceived the idea and wrote a first draft. BG, FF & LR gathered the data. All authors contributed to the writing of the manuscript, the editing, and the manuscript formatting.
Data statement: Should the manuscript be accepted for publication, the data will be available in an approved public repository, and a DOI will be provided
Number of words in the main text excluding titles: 2096
Number of words in the abstract: 119
Number of figures: 1
Number of tables: 0
Number of references: 49
Abstract : To halt global biodiversity decline, many conservation measures are set up by citizens, companies, or stakeholders. However, even if originally well-intentioned, some of these actions could have direct or indirect negative effects on biodiversity when ecology is not accounted for. The management of bees is a good example of such misplaced conservation practices. We identified three successive errors in the management of bees which can disrupt the focus on real conservation issues: the multiplication of honeybee hives, the installation of insect hotels, the trade of solitary bee cocoons for release into the wild. To help the bees, as well as biodiversity in general, we must consider prioritizing efficient conservation measures which consider more broadly the complexity of ecosystems.
Viewpoint :
In a recent perspective paper, Ford et al. (2021) developed the convincing concept of “misplaced conservation” which include actions that, due to misinformation, directly or indirectly “harm biodiversity, waste resources, misinform the public, and (or) delegitimize evidence”. Misplaced conservation practices are thus often driven by people who want to help biodiversity but end up unwillingly harming it. The example of bee management is a good illustration of repeated misplaced conservation both regarding wild and domestic bees.
Bees suffer from anthropogenic pressures at a global scale with reported declines of their populations and species (Zattara & Aizen 2021). Due to their value as pollinators for wild plants and crops, bees are also perceived as a flagship of biodiversity by the general public (Sumneret al. 2018). This positive image, widely encouraged by mass media (Smith & Saunders 2016), has increased the willingness to save the bees in the population, and practices aimed at helping them have multiplied among environmentally friendly citizens (Fig. 1 – Stangeet al. 2017; Egerer & Kowarik 2020). Here, we explored three examples of misplaced management of bees and discussed consequences for their conservation and for biodiversity.