From MAILER-DAEMON Fri Jan 3 13:20:40 2003 Return-Path: <> Delivered-To: adamf@ibiblio.org Received: from listserv.albany.edu (listserv.albany.edu [169.226.1.24]) by mail.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75CE124ADEE for ; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 13:20:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from listserv.albany.edu (listserv.albany.edu [169.226.1.24]) by listserv.albany.edu (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h03FjrBZ008596 for ; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 13:20:39 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200301031820.h03FjrBZ008596@listserv.albany.edu> Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 13:20:39 -0500 From: "L-Soft list server at University at Albany (1.8d)" Subject: File: "BEE-L LOG0112C" To: adamf@IBIBLIO.ORG Content-Length: 77037 Lines: 1663 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 10:21:38 EST Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: David Westervelt Subject: Re: State wants interview with me regarding Cumaphos use MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Jonh & all. Because we have a sec.18 use for CheckMite strips it is the rule that each state that is aproved to use them must Inps. a % of the beekeepers useing the strip to see that they are doing it by the LABLE . For the last 3 years my fathers company has been inps.They have ask all about the way he used the strips,if he was wearing gloves, did he have the LABLE with him when he was putting the strips in,What did he do with the old used strips, How long where the strips in ,Did he treat for SHB or V.Mites. They would like for you to tell them from your head all the info. they want. It's good if we can remember where our hive are in our heads but to try and tell him all the info he wants you better have it in a note book.and make sure it is by the lable. Thank you. David Westervelt Fl. Dept. of Ag. Apiary Insp. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 22:40:46 +1300 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Owen Watson Subject: Re: Waxed or unwaxed plastic? In-Reply-To: <200112141924.fBEJO8v27384@listserv.albany.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Only unwaxed frames are available here (I think). I waxed mine by pouring on a little molten wax and spreading it out with a spatula. Are there better ways? >Bob Harrison asked: > > >Was it WAXED Pierco? -- --Owen Watson --at home in Wellington, New Zealand --Don't reply to erewhon@rsnz.govt.nz -- ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:32:31 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: James Fischer Subject: Re: State wants interview with me regarding Cumaphos use MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I was surprised to read that members of this list were suggesting things like: > ...But don't volunteer any information. and > The first option is not to bother to call back. > It sounds like a fishing expedition... I must strongly disagree with both suggestions, as they advice a posture that is less than 100% open and honest, and are hence the postures of defeat. Let's assume a "worst-case scenario", where either civil or criminal penalties are possible. Is "keeping quiet" going to help matters? Is ignoring them? Either of those approaches will only make you appear to be a deliberate and willful "violator" of whatever law/regulation/rule they want to "enforce". Either of those approaches might turn what otherwise would be excused as "error or omission" into "criminal intent". Instead, imagine an honest and frank discussion. The state reps are honor-bound to report that you were "fully cooperative" with their investigation or inquiry, which may carry more weight than any action(s) that might be a technical "error". Recall stories about pesticide misuse that resulted in Bee kills in your state. Was the state a fierce enforcer of "the label law"? More likely they were a toothless apologist for the miss-deeds of the pesticide user, more concerned with agonizing over their lack of staff and funding for "better education" than with taking the time to levy fines or sue anyone. That said, there is nothing wrong with taking a pro-active, or even aggressive approach in any/all dealings with any government agency. An advocate would be an excellent asset, and your local State Inspector, being a fellow state employee to your callers, is an excellent choice. There is nothing wrong with waiting for your State Inspector to find out "what's up", before you respond to the inquiry, but to be anything less than completely candid would be stupid. I presume that Kansas had a Section 18 for Checkmite, and I presume that you read and followed the instructions. If so, you have NOTHING to fear from the same state government that applied for and got the Section 18 approval in the first place. If you did not properly dispose of the strips, the damage is likely already done, but I would guess that the state's primary concerns would not be "disposal", but would instead be: a) Did you get the instructions for storage and handling? b) Did you follow those instructions, or do you have some CheckMite in a kitchen drawer? Checkmite is a very nasty organophosphate that I would not allow within grenade-launcher range of my farm. The rest of agriculture has wised up about organophosphates, and are phasing OUT their use. Beekeepers, on the other hand seem to be mostly unaware of just how nasty this stuff can be. The only rational concern would be the "risk of human contact", which would be a concern about your health and safety. >From the questions asked, it sounds to me like the state of Kansas may be more concerned about verifying that vendors are sending the correct "Section 18 Label" with shipments to Kansas than with anything else. But don't ignore them, 'cause they will not "go away", and don't try to keep things from them, 'cause most people are terrible liars, and don't even know it. (I clean up at cards on a regular basis with otherwise intelligent and sophisticated people who have no idea how easy they are to "read".) Don't try to play games with bureaucrats - they play little "waiting games" and games of half-truths for a living, and by comparison, the average citizen is a rank amateur. jim farmageddon ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 01:25:55 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: James Fischer Subject: Re: On Pierco plastic frames MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ted Fischer said: > One problem that I have not seen discussed is due to the excess bee space > when a brood chamber of Pierco is placed beneath a chamber of wood frames. > When trying to separate the two brood chambers burr comb holds the Pierco > frames, making them lift up off their frame supports. If the Pierco top-bar thickness is less than the thickness of a wooden frame top bar, why not add a shim to the frame rest? One could cover the shims with the metal angle "frame rests" sold for brood chambers to make a smooth surface. Of course, this means that one has dedicated a hive body to Piercos, and created a non-standardization. > I have to insert the hive tool and pry down the Pierco frames, while holding up > the brood chamber with the other hand. I keep a violin string with a wooden handle at each end for this sort of situation. One simply "saws" the wire slowly from front to back of the hive, which nicely cuts any burr comb, and cleans propolis from hive body mating surfaces to boot. (Those who advocate non-violins can use piano wire.) jim farmageddon ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 00:01:18 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: AHBs in the US Hi to all on BEE-l James Fischer wrote: Excuse the mass hysteria, but bees simply did not kill people or animals in the western hemisphere before the spread of AHB. Reply: This is quite an untrue statement. As a past President of the state's Arizona Beekeepers Beekeepers Association and for many years it's Apiary Advisory Committee and the States AHB Task Force, I must say it was well known that just in our state alone, there were ongoing bee stinging incidents of at least a couple dozen each year involving livestock and domestic pets, that included the stinging to death of such animals, as well as major stinging incidents involving people, some of which also were documented to have cost lives. My husband and I also represented the State of Arizona on a formal trip to gather documentation and testimony from the State of Texas, with the help of APHIS and the USDA/ARS on what actual circumstances were on all aspects of the AHB problem (then new). This was done by formal interview with police and fire departments, and various health officials, pesticide companies, commercial beekeepers, APHIS officials, and USDA/ARS officials in Texas. Testimony was taken during interview with me (Dee) holding a video camera over my right shoulder (sound enhanced). Presidention of evidence was then turned over to the State of Arizona upon our return. By the way, copies were kept, which I still have in my possession. Much of what is said today, if the true were known, is blown out of proportion. It's a shame so many talk today,without actually being in on the acutal inner workings of what went down to create today's AHB mind set problem. Sincerely, Dee A. Lusby ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 22:50:17 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: waldig Subject: Re: On Pierco plastic frames. In-Reply-To: <200112141702.fBEH20v22463@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >>I have used Pierco brood frames for some time now. One problem that I have not seen discussed is due to the excess bee space when a brood chamber of Pierco is placed beneath a chamber of wood frames. Sounds like the plastic top bars are thinner than the wooden ones. I would think that in a stack of all plastic frames in both the brood chambers and honey supers this issue goes away? Waldemar ---------------------------------------------------- Sign Up for NetZero Platinum Today Only $9.95 per month! http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 14:55:24 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Jim Stein Subject: Re: Waxed or unwaxed plastic? In-Reply-To: <200112151549.fBFFnMv02253@listserv.albany.edu> In <200112151549.fBFFnMv02253@listserv.albany.edu>, on 12/15/01 at 02:55 PM, Owen Watson said: >I waxed mine by >pouring on a little molten wax and spreading it out with a spatula. Are >there better ways? I use a foam paint brush, dip it into molten wax and paint it over the plastic cells. You only have to get the wax on the top edge of the cell. I found that factory applied wax doesn't work very well. By applying my own wax, the bees jumped right on it and drew it out. Jim -- ----------------------------------------------------------- jstein@worldnet.att.net ----------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:05:49 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Garry Libby Subject: Re: Plastic Frames & Foundation vs. Wood In-Reply-To: <200112141924.fBEJOwv27461@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lance Parr asked: "BTW: Has anyone any experiences to report with the Dadant plastic frames (I think they were called Plastiframe)? I notice that they've disappeared from the Dadant web site catalog, and were shown as a clearance item in the last paper catalog." At EAS in August, Nick from Pierco told Me that Some businessmen from Nepal had visited Cal Mold asking to see how Pierco was made. Then went home and started manufacturing it without licence. That was the same company that manufactured the styro hive that Dadant sold a few years ago. Garry Libby Attleboro, Massachusetts, USA --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.307 / Virus Database: 168 - Release Date: 12/11/2001 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 14:20:47 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: ryarnell@OREGONVOS.NET Subject: Re: Waxed or unwaxed plastic? In-Reply-To: <200112151549.fBFFnKv02250@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit We've only done it once this worked well: we heated the wax to 10-20F above melting point. Cut the bristles of a 4" chip brush down to about 1" long and use that to paint the wax on. If the wax isn't a few degrees above its melting point, it will not stay liquid long enough. Don't have any idea whether it was he season or whether the bees like local (familiarly scented)wax better than whatever Pierco uses, but those frames were adopted quickly. Quoting Owen Watson : > Only unwaxed frames are available here (I think). I waxed mine by > pouring on a little molten wax and spreading it out with a spatula. > Are there better ways? Richard Yarnell, Shambles Workshops, Beavercreek, OR ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 07:42:39 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: "Frank I. Reiter" Subject: Re: State wants interview with me regarding Cumaphos use In-Reply-To: <200112151549.fBFFnrv02291@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit James Fischer wrote: > > Checkmite is a very nasty organophosphate that I would not > allow within grenade-launcher range of my farm. The rest of > agriculture has wised up about organophosphates, and are > phasing OUT their use. Beekeepers, on the other hand > seem to be mostly unaware of just how nasty this stuff can be. I've read statements like this many times on Bee-L but I don't think I have yet seen any explanation of what makes organophosphates so nasty. you can count me among the ranks of those who are unaware. Can anybody here share some details about the potentil problems of using organophosphates in general and Checkmite in particular? Frank. ----- The very act of seeking sets something in motion to meet us; something in the universe, or in the unconscious responds as if to an invitation. - Jean Shinoda Bolen http://WWW.BlessedBee.ca/ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 10:40:20 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Bob & Liz Subject: Re: State wants interview with me regarding Cumaphos use MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Frank and All,, The Coumaphos story is in the archives and one need not search farther = than the last two years. A half hours reading should bring a Bee-L = person up to speed. Coumaphos is a sensitive subject as was Apistan when = first introduced.=20 Coumaphos was registered to save an industry but was never intended as = the final answer. I am surprised by those beekeepers which talk about = alternating coumaphos and fluvalinate for the next century as the = answer. Coumaphos resistant mites have now been documented.=20 Not a big concern for most hobby beekeepers but I assure you the = commercial beekeeper will pick up the list of around 100 chemicals = shown to be effective in controlling varroa and choose a new chemical. = None left on the list carry the control of fluvalinate, amatraz or = coumaphos so the saga continues. Many on the list are in fact more = dangerous then coumaphos.=20 All the chemicals which have been tested against varroa are listed on = the last page of "The Varroa Handbook". I am giving a talk about Varroa on February 17th. In Kansas City. All = facets of the varroa problem will be discussed. The talk is free and the = Midwestern beekeepers assn. Would welcome beekeepers from the = surrounding states. Email me for information on time, place and = directions. Every time I have posted a location I was going to be at = least one beekeeper I have never met has stepped up and introduced = himself and said he reads Bee-L. and my posts.=20 Sincerely, Bob Harrison Odessa, Missouri ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 15:05:36 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: James Fischer Subject: Re: State wants interview with me regarding Cumaphos use MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Frank said: > I don't think I have yet seen any explanation of what makes > organophosphates so nasty. In two words, "cholinesterase inhibition". In plain English, this means that your synapses can stop working. This results in your neurons not getting signals from your synapses. That means that your "electrical system is shot", causing twitching of muscles, paralyzed breathing, convulsions, and in at some level of poisoning, death. Even tiny levels of exposure seem to result in detectable and damaging levels of poisoning. Every time these chemicals have been studied, the level of concern is raised by responsible parties. The most dangerous aspect is that the effect of these chemicals is cumlative. They "build up" in the systems of mammals with every exposure. > you can count me among the ranks of those who are unaware. > Can anybody here share some details about the potentil problems > of using organophosphates in general and Checkmite in particular? Here's a typical example of a very calm treatment of "the problem" by a typical state agency: http://www.extension.umn.edu/projects/mpiap/fqpa/workop.htm "Even with maximum feasible protective clothing and engineering controls, calculated risks for most OP [organophosphate] workers and handlers still exceed the Agency's level of concern. EPA believes that an across-the-board increase in risk mitigation measures is needed to protect occupational users of the OPs." In other words, even with every possible protection and when taking every possible precaution suggested by the EPA, OPs still have a serious, tangible, and irreversible health impact on those who use and handle them. In short, the EPA is admitting that there is no "safe" way to handle or use the stuff, no matter how careful you are or how much you spend on protective equipment. They are also admitting that they have no idea how to keep people safe from this stuff. Here's a blow-by-blow description of the biochemistry and the specific mechanisms as they apply to mammals: http://ace.orst.edu/info/extoxnet/tibs/cholines.htm Here's a decent plain-English overview, from Consumer's Union: http://www.consunion.org/food/pest-ops.htm Here's the EPA's website on organophosphates: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/op/ If you'd like to read more, do a Google search on any of the following: cholinesterase inhibition organophosphate cumulative assessment organophosphate EPA I'm not sure that Checkmite is mentioned as a brand name in any of the available information, since scientists use the full chemical names rather than brand names. Also, Checkmite is a newer product, and is less widely used than the other organophosphates. You know that I satirize and poke fun fairly often, but I'm not exaggerating even a little bit in the above. Read some of the links above, and consider who is saying what. I defy you to find a nastier class of chemicals anywhere on the entire planet. jim farmageddon ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 16:29:34 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Dick Allen Subject: Re: State wants interview with me regarding Cumaphos use Beekeepers: A recent post was made concerning the nastiness of coumaphous: >In two words, "cholinesterase inhibition". >In plain English, this means that your synapses can stop working. >This results in your neurons not getting signals from your synapses..etc. etc. I, too, am less than overjoyed about the use of coumaphous as a miticide. ...but, isn't this the way nearly all pesticides work? Doesn't fluvalinate work in the same manner? Or am I mistaken? By the way Mark Winston, in his column for the December 2000 Bee Culture magazine shared some of his thoughts and feelings about the EPA approval of coumaphous, in addition to Terramycin and fluvalinate. Regards, Dick Regards, Dick ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 16 Dec 0101 22:49:28 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Mike Tooley Subject: Re: State wants interview with me regarding Cumaphos use > The most dangerous aspect is that the effect of these chemicals is > cumlative. They "build up" in the systems of mammals with every exposure A quick search of'coumaphos' on Yahoo came up with the statement (from memory)" because of its low toxicity to mammals it is approved by the USDA as an ingredient in chicken food to control parasites"Seems to be some disagreement by gov. regulators.That said,where theres smoke there is usually some fire,so every person should make up there own mind from the best available info.Havent checked your links yet,but will.With coumo resistant mites now being reported from several areas of USA,it will soon be irrelelevant anyway.Best be thinking ahead.. -Mike --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using InterStar WebMail ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 00:12:09 +0000 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Peter Dillon Subject: Re: State wants interview with me regarding Cumaphos use MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear All, To put it in a typically British way - We beekeepers who use pesticides to control some of our problems are to say the least "on a sticky wicket". As mentioned in the mail sent by Dick Allen, many pesticides interrupt neural transmission, often using mimic compounds that lock into natural sites - and eventually causing damage or death to the treated individual. Other molecules manipulate or disrupt different bio-chemical pathways. We worry or complain when these chemicals are applied by third parties and effect our bees. We kick up a fuss ( with many different levels of response) and indignantly point fingers at other members of agricultural industry when we see or think that improper uses of pesticides are the norm. Often the response is, "there is no alternative", or "we have the proof that it causes no problem" - "go away and prove that there is a problem" through to "tough, our activity has more economic clout than yours". Yet, put in a similar situation to that of the average farmer - when we have a pest - the first type of strategy that is reached for by most beekeepers is that of " poison the pest out of existence" using very often the same chemicals or related molecules that in other scenarios we are against. Often, we have recall on the same companies to supply us with the remedy who then supply compounds to others which kill our bees - and if the money is in the market, they are willing to supply. So, in this modern world of agriculture - do we come clean, accept that we need these substances for the survival of beekeeping - at least for the time being. Or, does the beekeeping fraternity accept that these chemicals should be totally rejected! The consumer will possibly react to the addition of chemicals to our historically pure produce (still viewed as such by the greater % of the population). At the moment we appear to be sitting nicely on the fence and demanding the advantage from both sides. MPOV is moving to where we as a collective body need to press for strategies - often termed "alternative" due to lack of heavy weight research. Regarding V.d. I presume little may be done to alleviate our dependence on novel molecules - we are too far gone in the story. We have already seen potential problems arising with antibiotic resistance. This should surly be taken as a warning and a strategy developed to head off the inevitable. Before I am classed as a raving "bio" fanatic - not so, depending on the accepted remedies. BUT I do feel extremely hypocritical and can see the futility of the system in place. Complicating the situation is as touched upon earlier - if we as an a group of producers are forced to acknowledge our polluting and contaminating methods by such bodies as the European Union, EPA, Codex A. etc. (as for the limits for antibiotic residue in honey for example), the responsible bodies controlling the use/ production and marketing of substances damaging to OUR productivity must realize their responsibility. They to cannot continue to "sit on the fence " and reap from both sides when it suits. Peter ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 17:37:10 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Paul Cherubini Subject: Re: State wants interview with me regarding Cumaphos use MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Can anybody here share some details about the potential problems > of using organophosphates in general and Checkmite in particular? Some perspective: Coumaphos is EPA approved for direct application to beef and lactating dairy cattle, sheep, goats, swine, horses and poultry to control a wide range of external parasites http://www.mindspring.com/~cherubini/coumaphos.jpg In addition, veternarians have access to formulations of coumaphos that can be fed to cattle to control gastrointestinal worms http://www.speclab.com/compound/c56724.htm Other organophosphates are EPA approved for spraying directly on human food for protection again food infesting insects. Take Reldan (chlorpyrifos-methyl) http://www.geocities.com/Eureka/Plaza/8603/label_rel.html It can be diluted with water and sprayed on barley, oats, rice, sorghum and wheat.' Or if one is a corn farmer Actellic (pirimiphos-methyl) http://www.geocities.com/Eureka/Plaza/8603/label_act.html can be diluted with water and sprayed on corn going into storage for insect control. In the recent past, Malathion was approved for spraying on almonds and peanuts going into storage for insect control. Also (by prescription only) for application to the heads of children to control lice. Paul Cherubini Shore Chemical Company Turlock, Calif. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 20:19:52 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: ryarnell@OREGONVOS.NET Subject: Re: State wants interview with me regarding Cumaphos use In-Reply-To: <200112151549.fBFFnrv02291@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I was surprised too, but have a slightly different take on it to suggest: Beekeepers are in need of as much help as we can get. Many times in this forum, it has been noted that processors and marketers swing a lot more weight when it comes to policy matters. This kind of contact may be a point of entry for grass roots influence. My experience has been that local and even State agriculture agents are anxious to see farmers succeed. Their jobs depend on it. Usually they are doing the work they do because they enjoy it. If they encounter a friendly person, especially one who asks questions, they will go out of their way to be helpful. But that doesn't mean that information flows only one direction. A well informed client can influence the agent who will either spread the word or question policy which appears to be contrary to the best interests of his clients. If you can provide them with authoritative references, if sure doesn't hurt. Most agents have email addresses and access to the web. You can provide references via the web. I don't think it hurts to ask them if they know about this forum and to invite them to sign on. That suggests that beekeepers should be as well informed as possible, in compliance with regulations, especially label directions on pesticides and hazardous materials. Look on most contacts you have with inspectors and other USDA representatives as resources rather than enforcers. They'll usually reciprocate. If you're misusing chemicals and abusing the public trust to produce a good and safe product, you probably deserve what the inspectors dish out. Quoting James Fischer : > I was surprised to read that members of this list > were suggesting things like: > > ...But don't volunteer any information. > and > > The first option is not to bother to call back. > > It sounds like a fishing expedition... > I must strongly disagree with both suggestions, as > they advise a posture that is less than 100% open > and honest, and are hence the postures of defeat. Richard Yarnell, Shambles Workshops, Beavercreek, OR ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 12:48:13 -0600 Reply-To: Bob & Pat Fanning Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Bob & Pat Fanning Subject: Re: On Pierco plastic frames MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jim, please do not take this as criticism but, does this not transfer the problem to the super below? Seems this solution might also create a future problem of mixing supers and frames, unless all supers are converted to Pierco. Bob Fanning Huntsville, Alabama USA > jim said: > If the Pierco top-bar thickness is less than the thickness of a wooden frame > top bar, why not add a shim to the frame rest? > ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:08:57 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Larry Lindahl Subject: Liquid Invert Sugar It is my understanding that liquid invert sugar is made by two processes - acid hydrolysis and enzyme hydrolysis. Has anyone heard or if one of these processes used is not good for feeding to the bees? Comments? ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 13:47:25 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: James Fischer Subject: Re: AHBs in the US MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dee Lusby said, about European honeybees: > I must say it was well known that just in our state alone, there were > ongoing bee stinging incidents of at least a couple dozen each year > involving livestock and domestic pets, that included the stinging to > death of such animals, as well as major stinging incidents involving > people, some of which also were documented to have cost lives. > Much of what is said today, if the true were known, is blown out of > proportion. I'll accept the honesty of the statements above, but the societal implications of statements like those should be considered with great care before they are repeated in open forums where they might be interpreted as universal truths. In other words, which "truths" would you LIKE to be blown out of proportion? Of those AZ and TX cases mentioned, how many can be proven beyond ALL possible doubt to have been caused by European honeybees? Of those with credible supporting evidence, how many can be proven to have not been "special cases", where the bees were somehow provoked, and the target was unable or unwilling to flee the area of the hive? Before you answer that, read on. European honeybees suffer from negative perceptions now. These perceptions can be overcome with education, which I hope can be generally agreed to support the stance that European honeybees are not a generalized threat to anyone or anything who stays away from the immediate area of a hive. The AHB has been sensationalized, and while this may be a damn shame, it has at least been possible to clearly differentiate between the AHB and the "domesticated" European honeybee, and avoid having any hysteria directed at managed colonies. Given the large number of "sensational" tabloid publications one can find at the supermarket check-out, please note that not all journalism is "responsible". Imagine what the "Weekly World News" might do with even a single story of a death caused by European honeybees. While one can dig up somewhat ancient documentation of court cases where a beekeeper was, for example, held liable for the death of a horse, even these could be dismissed as "somewhat apocryphal anecdotes", given the lack of clear and compelling proof that honeybees were the actual proximate cause of the incident. But more recent cases might be better documented, if someone tried. If the press and general public got the impression that European honeybees could be a fatal threat, even to those not venturing close to a hive, what would the reaction be? If European honeybees were described by the media as a possible risk, under more than very narrow circumstances, all of the hysteria about Africanized honeybees might then be re-focused on honeybees in general. Hysteria leads to calls for "public action", and elected representatives can be expected to try to protect the interests of their constituents, most often using methods like these: a) Zoning boards might then have a valid reason to prohibit all beekeeping within their areas of influence, which would eliminate a significant percentage of US beekeepers. Beekeeping would no longer be possible in urban or suburban locations, where most of the US population lives. b) Even rural beekeepers like myself would face "liability issues". (As it stands now, "everyone knows" that European honeybees certainly defend their hives, but bees are not viewed as presenting any generalized risk to neighboring farms, stocked with very expensive livestock. As a result, one does not need to carry "liability insurance" coverage specifically for bees, and general liability insurance for beekeepers is cheap.) c) Even an "agricultural" zoning designation does not imply that one is free to do what one wishes. For example, "hog farms" are prohibited in my county without a special permit, and not surprisingly, there are none. Even the most rural beekeeper has some risk of being perceived as a "public nuisance", and having beekeeping restricted, regulated, or prohibited. d) While criminal matters require "strict proof, beyond all reasonable doubt", civil matters require no more than the "preponderance of the evidence". The entire concept of "proof" in science, while rigorous, does not translate well to the social forums of law and government. The majority of beekeepers located in "zoned" areas who would be affected can be assumed to be "hobby" or small-scale beekeepers. These beekeepers "keep the industry alive", by buying supplies at retail, buying packages and queens, and paying good money for things that large-scale operations can afford to produce in-house. The ripple effect would be nasty: 1) The loss of all but rural beekeepers would likely mean that costs would go up for the remaining (rural) beekeepers, since even a simple thing like a hive tool currently has a low(er) cost due to "mass production". 2) Some number of beekeeping supply companies would fail, or be forced to make significant "downsizing" moves. Less customers means less sales, and sales to hobby beekeepers are more profitable, since hobby beekeepers do not qualify for "quantity discounts". 3) The various beekeeping magazines might also be forced to downsize or fold. 4) The queen and package bee business would also suffer, and the current wide range of choices in types of bees available might shrink. Given scenarios like the above, one should be very, very careful to apply extremely rigorous criteria to the evaluation of reports of "bee attacks". The most basic criteria should be an understanding that even well educated people cannot seem to tell a bee from a jellowjacket. Heck, even after doing repeated training to intelligent and observant people, I still get reports from the telephone company, cable-TV company, and the local electrical co-op that they have "bee swarms" in their equipment. The insects turn out to be yellowjackets or wasps nearly every time. All these companies have an incentive to report "wasps" or "yellowjackets", since the deal is that we charge them for bee removal, but do not charge them for wasps or yellowjackets. (It is a good deal - they pay obscenely high prices for bee removal, the whole "pest-control" issue is avoided, and they get the insects removed by people who treat their high-tech and/or high-voltage equipment with care, understanding, and respect.) Bottom line, the AHBs that have spread over the Mexican border have proven to be much more defensive over a much wider radius from their hives than the European honeybee. Differentiating between the two is technically difficult, but an absolute necessity to allow beekeeping to continue to be viewed as merely an "unusual" avocation, rather than a "public nuisance". jim farmageddon ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 22:33:28 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Bob & Liz Subject: Re: State wants interview with me regarding Cumaphos use MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable -----Original Message----- From: Paul Cherubini [SMTP:monarch@SABER.NET] Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2001 5:37 PM To: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu Subject: Re: State wants interview with me regarding Cumaphos use Hello Paul and All, >In the recent past, Malathion was approved for spraying on almonds and = peanuts going into >storage for insect control. Also (by prescription = only) for application to the heads of children to control lice. Malathion - 0.0-Dimethyl-S-1,2bis(4-chlorophenyl)-ethanol is listed = in "The Varroa Handbook" . Could Malathion be the next chemical given a = section 18.? Sincerely, Bob Harrison ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 09:25:12 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: State wants interview with me regarding Cumaphos use MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Paul Cherubini wrote: > Some perspective: > > Coumaphos is EPA approved for direct application to > beef and lactating dairy cattle, sheep, goats, swine, horses > and poultry to control a wide range of external parasites > http://www.mindspring.com/~cherubini/coumaphos.jpg One problem with applying any definitive characteristics or danger to a pesticide is that you need to know its formulation, application instructions and carrying agents. In one form it can be fairly benign while in another, persistent and dangerous. Lots of things come into play, including strength, solubility, how applied, when applied, temperature, what it is dissolved/mixed with, etc. So I would be careful with generalities. A classic example is that even though our stomachs contain hydrochloric acid and it is essential to our good health, it is not a good idea to drink lab grade undiluted HCl. If organophosphates were relatively benign, they would not be being phased out of the pesticide inventory. I consider them dangerous and am happy to see them go. Bill Truesdell Bath, ME ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 09:33:01 EST Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Thomas Cornick Subject: Re: State wants interview with me regarding Cumaphos use MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit When it becomes necessasary to use organpohosphates to keep my bees alive I will stack the equipment in the yard and invite all of you to attend, bring marshmallows. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 12:17:58 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Peter Borst Subject: Organophosphates Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >From Environmental Research Foundation http://RACHEL.ORG/home_eng.htm Organophosphates act as nerve toxins, disrupting the nervous system by inhibiting the enzyme cholinesterase. Short-term symptoms resulting from human exposure to organophosphates can include breathing problems, headache, nausea and dizziness. High exposures can produce fatal poisoning. -- J. Routt Reigart and James R. Roberts, RECOGNITION AND MANAGEMENT OF PESTICIDE POISONINGS. (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs, 1999). Available at http:www.epa.gov/oppfead1/safety/healthcare/handbook/handbook.htm * * * * * "Using U.S. Department of Agriculture statistics based on 27,000 food samples from 1994 to 1997, the CONSUMER REPORTS looked at foods children are most likely to eat," the NEW YORK TIMES reported. "Almost all the foods tested for pesticide residues were within legal limits, but were frequently well above the levels the Environmental Protection Agency says are safe for young children. According to the Consumer's Union Report, even one serving of some fruits and vegetables can exceed safe daily limits for young children," "Methyl parathion accounts for most of the total toxicity on the foods that were analyzed, particularly peaches, frozen and canned green beans, pears and apples. Late last year [EPA] said that methyl parathion posed an 'unacceptable risk' but that it had not taken any action to ban it or reduce its use. Organophosphates [such as methyl parathion] are neurological poisons and work the same on humans as they do on insects," the TIMES said. * * * * * Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) is a group of cancers that arise in the white blood cells. ... recent evidence suggests that another class of pesticides --the organophosphates such as malathion and parathion --can cause NHL.[7] Thus organochlorines, organophosphates, and phenoxy herbicides are now all implicated in the mushrooming problem of NHL. ... In the case of these chemicals, it is not too late to make sensible, precautionary decisions. In our homes, our public buildings, our schools, and our businesses we could avoid these products like the plague. Alternative ways of dealing with pests are well-known. If pesticides are needed at all, they are needed only in emergencies. Two studies are described briefly in John Wargo, OUR CHILDREN'S TOXIC LEGACY (New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 1996), pg. 237, footnote 13. And see S.H. Zahm and others, "The role of agricultural pesticide use in the development of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in women," ARCHIVES OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Vol. 48, No. 5 (September 1993), pgs. 353-358, which found a 4-fold increase in NHL among women exposed to organophosphates. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 23:31:24 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Dick Allen Subject: Re: Liquid Invert Sugar Larry: A photocopy of an article I have appeared in an issue of the ABJ (sorry, I don't know which issue) which was reprinted from Hivelights, August 1995 had this to say: "High fructose sugars are invert sugars than can be produced by either acid hydrolysis or enzyme hydrolysis. It has been known for quite some time that those produced by acid hydrolysis can be deadly if fed to honey bees.... A study in Germany (Jachimowicz and Sherbiny, 1975) found that the concentration of hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF) in sugar syrups is indeed the factor that influences bee mortality..... Mortality was the result of gut ulceration...." Regards, Dick ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 23:39:16 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Dick Allen Subject: Re: Liquid Invert Sugar Larry: The article I quoted from was titled "Choose Carbohydrates Carefully for Your Bees" by R.E.L (Dick) Rogers Apiculturist/Tree Fruit Entomologist, Nova Scotia Dept. of Agriculture, Kentville, NS. My apologies for leaving that information out. As I previously posted, I don't know which issue of the American Bee Journal it came from, but it was supposedly reprinted from Hivelights, August, 1995, Canadian Honey Council Regards, Dick ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:58:56 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Allen Dick Subject: Re: Liquid Invert Sugar MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > "High fructose sugars are invert sugars than can be produced by either acid > hydrolysis or enzyme hydrolysis. It has been known for quite some time that > those produced by acid hydrolysis can be deadly if fed to honey bees.... Thanks to those who replied, but, actually this very question has been quite thoroughly discussed in the archives of this list. There is also discussion there of extensive bee losses in Western Canada due to distribution of an off-spec batch of the 'good' type of syrup. Simply visit http://listserv.albany.edu:8080/cgi-bin/wa?S2=bee-l&X=-&q=hydrolysis&s=&f=&a =&b= (watch the word wrap) or enter by http://www.internode.net/honeybee/BEE-L/ and use hydrolysis as a search key to find an extensive list of articles. Item # Date Time Recs Subject 001225 93/04/28 15:13 24 INVERT SUGAR FOR BEES 011947 96/11/11 17:54 34 Sugars, invert, HFC and more 015994 97/05/26 10:42 286 spec's on Fluvalinate [long] 019292 97/11/08 16:11 77 Re: Sugar and honey 024905 98/10/16 11:00 23 Re: BEE-L Digest - 14 Oct 1998 to 15 Oct 1998 024911 98/10/16 13:07 61 Today's HFCS sugars 025633 98/12/09 05:27 49 Re: left/right handed sugars and fondant 030648 00/02/12 10:14 38 Re: Early Feeding 033570 00/11/28 08:57 48 Re: Help with honey bee chemistry 033572 00/11/27 21:29 57 Re: Help with honey bee chemistry 033656 00/12/01 10:54 66 Re: Chemistry of honey 033680 00/11/29 23:31 28 Re: Help with honey bee chemistry 033682 00/12/01 14:44 33 Re: Help With Honey Chemistry 037986 01/12/15 19:08 13 Liquid Invert Sugar 037992 01/12/17 23:31 24 Re: Liquid Invert Sugar 'HFCS' as a key brings up 81 results. 'Invert' brings 89. Members are encouraged to check the archives before posting commonly asked questions. allen ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 11:35:09 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Inger Lamb Subject: hive inspections MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Bee People I am looking for information about state hive inspections. In some old = postings it looks like Florida shifted to having the beekeepers pay a = fee for their inspections. Is this the case today, and if so how has it = worked? Here in Iowa we just lost our state apiarist and we are trying = to figure out what to do to maintain a monitoring system for our hives. = How do other states monitor their hives? Thank you Inger Lamb, secretary, Iowa Honey Producers Assoc ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 15:31:09 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Tim Arheit Subject: Re: hive inspections In-Reply-To: <200112181806.fBII6Kv07881@listserv.albany.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 11:35 AM 12/18/01 -0600, you wrote: >How do other states monitor their hives? In ohio each county is responsible for hiring (paying) a county inspector. The state Ag office really does choosing, training and regulating. We do pay a fee when registering apiaries but it is trivial ($5 per apiary). There is a state inspector and I believe he is on the states Ag office staff, but usually the county inspector does all the inspections within the county. I don't know what the payscale is, but it has been implied that there is millage and per hive or apiary pay. And sometimes the money allocated by the county isn't enough, so inspections are done until the money runs out. There seems to be a shortage of inspectors in our area as well. Judging buy the number of notices (inspector wanted) from the Ag office we lost our county inspector and 2 or 3 of the adjacent county inspectors as well as the state inspector last year. Our county only replaced ours early fall. I don't know if there any common thread. The only inspector I had talked to (our county one) was planning on retiring due to age and to spend more time with family. -Tim Arheit ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 17:01:01 EST Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: GImasterBK@AOL.COM Subject: Re: hive inspections MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Inger, I suggest you contact I. Barton Smith, Chief Bee Inspector of Maryland, who is the Secretary of the National Bee Inspectors Association and has been for many years. He could give you FIRST-HAND good info for your questions. His e-mail address is: smithib@mda.state.md.us George Imirie Certified EAS Master Beekeeper ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:47:02 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Bob & Liz Subject: Re: hive inspections MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable -----Original Message----- From: Inger Lamb [SMTP:ingerlamb3@HOME.COM] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:35 AM To: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu Subject: hive inspections Hello Inger and All, Many libraries carry "Beekeeping in the United States" Ag. Handbook no. = 335 put out by the USDA. Although outdated the book lists all states = regulations at the time of printing on pg. 120 through 124. Some regulations have changed but many are the same. Inger wrote: I am looking for information about state hive inspection. In some old = postings it looks like Florida shifted to having the beekeepers pay a = fee for their inspections. Is this the case today, and if so how has it = worked?=20 Most beekeepers feel the inspections should be free. IF INSPECTIONS WERE = FREE I WOULD DEMAND EACH HIVE INSPECTED EVERY SEVEN DAYS AND ONLY LEAVE = THE OFFICE TO CHECK THE INSPECTORS WORK AND CORRECT PROBLEMS HE FINDS=20 Here in Iowa we just lost our state apiarist and we are trying to = figure out what to do to maintain a monitoring system for our hives. =20 I would check all the coffee stops between the last location the state = apiarist was seen at and his office. Kidding! Many states are eliminating the inspection system (Arizona) and others = are beefing up inspections(Illinois) =20 How do other states monitor their hives? Most only check a small percentage of migratory beekeepers hives either = entering or leaving the state .Most states require permits for movement = in and out of their state. from migratory beekeepers. Most states with = bee inspectors will inspect a hive if you call and suspect you have = found a problem (small hive beetle or American foulbrood). Sincerely, Bob Harrison Ps. I am going to get myself in trouble but I personally would eliminate = inspections unless a problem arises. I also think the policy the state = of Illinois is pushing is absurd of getting an inspection and permit = each time hives are moved across county lines within the state of = Illinois. When the beekeeper operates in many counties within the state = getting a permit each time he moves between counties is absurd.(in my = opinion) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 09:21:06 EST Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Tim Morris Subject: Re: BEE-L Digest - 17 Dec 2001 to 18 Dec 2001 (#2001-343) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/19/01 12:01:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, LISTSERV@LISTSERV.ALBANY.EDU writes: How do other states monitor their hives? Thank you Inger Lamb, secretary, Iowa Honey Producers Assoc >> Ingar, While I have not had mine inspected ye, here in Ga you can get them inspected at any time, you just have to ask. Technically by State Law all hives must be inspected, however as we all know bees are low on the state lists so there are not many inspectors-not enough to go around. They tend to hang around the areas of the state where the package bees come from. Understandable as this is the major part of the bee industry for Ga. Now I thought Tennessee had a nifty program. For several years they had no inspector. The associations petitioned enough to get one state apiarist. Obviously this was not enough for the whole state, so the state actually set aside some money-dont know how much, whereby the state inspector could "deputize" certain peoples in the various clubs. These deputies would then be paid a certain amount for each hive inspected. This came from that lump sum the state had set aside. According to Ray McDonnell, state apiarist, it seems to work. Maybe this could be of some use. TIM MORRIS ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 09:29:09 EST Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Thomas Cornick Subject: Re: hive inspections MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Here in CT(USA) inspections are free, registration is required annually 1 October and when hives are relocated, also free. (they could improve on their registration form) Pretty much done on a when they get to it basis unless you call with problems, it's only recently they stopped laying the inspector off in winter. They do inform you when they discover a problem in an apiary you should know about, for example resistant foulbrood. They also provide a pamphlet listing beekeepers with hives registered by town which is handy in finding a beekeeper to pick up a swarm before it lost. I personally take Archimedes view of the government. "Stand from between me and the light" ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:40:16 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: BeeFarmer Subject: Re: BEE-L Digest - 17 Dec 2001 to 18 Dec 2001 (#2001-343) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It was interesting to learn that West VA. Had some incentive to register your hives as they received free medication for their hives! I don't know if that continues as of today but about a year ago it did. BeeFarmer Getting Kids involved in 4H Beekeeping http://www.homestead.com/BeeKeepers/ > How do other states monitor their hives? ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 14:05:15 -0500 Reply-To: drahman@owens.cc.oh.us Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: "Don T. Rahman" Organization: Owens Community College Subject: Re: hive inspections In-Reply-To: <200112191222.fBJCMWv08138@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Just to clarify Ohio's system. Ohio has a State Apiarist and two state inspectors who are all employees of the Dept of Ag. Each county is supposed to have a county inspector who is appointed by the county and paid through a co-operative program between the county and state and administered by the State Apiarist. We had three state inspectors until this past spring when, due to budget cuts, we lost the third inspector position. And the remainder of the program is on thin ice with the current short fall in the state budget. It appears from this thread that this is happening all over the country. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 11:27:03 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Aaron Morris Subject: Service Interuption MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" On Thursday, December 27, 2001 the LISTSERV server LISTSERV.ALBANY.EDU will be down for major software upgrades beginning at 8:00AM. Due to the extensive nature of the upgrades, the server may not be back online until 5:00PM that day. During this time, no LISTSERV services provided by the server will be available, including mail to and from LISTSERV, and the LISTSERV web interface. Aaron Morris - thinking a day without BEE-L! ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 17:20:57 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Scott Moser Subject: Hive Beetle Greetings all, I wanted to let everyone know that a beekeeper in the St. Louis, Missouri area does indeed have the small hive beetle. Dr. Ray Nabors did a preliminary check on some samples, and said he believed them to be the beetle, but confirmation came today from Beltsville that they were indeed the small hive beetle. The beetles were found in Jefferson County, about 30 miles southwest of St. Louis. What isnt sure is if they have been in the area for a while, or they came in with package bees. The beekeeper affected bought 8 packages from out of state this spring, and found them this October in 2 of his package hives, and a nuc he bought locally this spring. Just a heads up to those in Missouri and surrounding areas. Happy Holidays to all! Scott ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:48:58 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: James Fischer Subject: Re: hive inspections MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If you seek a good hive inspector/apiarist program as a model, one could not go wrong by simply Xeroxing whatever Maryland does. I have never kept bees in Maryland, and I only spent a few minutes with a Maryland bee inspector, but I was very impressed... It was at EAS 2000, held in Maryland that year. An apiary seminar was about to start, and I and another fellow arrived slightly early for the seminar. The other fellow was standing alone, nervously polishing a hive tool with a paper towel... gosh, maybe he was new, shy, and did not know anyone there... So, try to make conversation, in my best Lutheran church-supper manner.... "Wow, that's a nice shiny hive tool..." But I was instantly interrupted by a fully-automatic, put-a-new-part-in-your-hair, rapid-fire, 60-caliber, with tracer rounds, stream of words from this fellow, who suddenly took on the persona of a drill sergeant, right down closing the distance between our noses to exactly 2 inches: "If YOUR hive tool is not every BIT as clean and SHINY as mine, then you are spreading DISEASE between your hives..." He went on like that for a while, speaking in all caps, and using exclamation points as his only choice of punctuation. When he at last stopped for breath, I took a step back, and said: "Sorry, I was just trying to complement you on your very stylish and practical Chrome-Plated hive tool - I've never seen a chromed one before, and thought it was a very good idea." Now THAT's an inspector! jim farmageddon (Where "chrome is where the heart is", and "there's no place like chrome", and "I'll be chrome for Christmas".) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:59:40 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: John Edwards Subject: Eric Erickson - Director, Tucson USDA Bee Lab MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In case anyone has an interest, I heard this week that Eric is retiring Jan. 3, 2002, and will have a retirement dinner Jan.22. For info and the full text, email Diana at medley@tucson.ars.ag.gov ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 08:35:43 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Al Lipscomb Subject: Re: FW: BEE-L: approval required (935AAB1D) In-Reply-To: <200112132115.fBDLFrv19993@listserv.albany.edu>; from AMorris@UAMAIL.ALBANY.EDU on Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 04:06:43PM -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > I'm in College Station, Texas (East Central Texas). This spring I started a > 3 lb. package of Russians from Hardeman's on nine frames of deep white wax > coated Pierco frames with a division feeder full of 2:1 sugar syrup. > Following advice seen on this list I sprayed each frame with the same 2:1 I would have used 1:1. 2:1 is pretty thick and does not take the place of nectar as well as 1:1 does. I have used plastic frame/foundation as well as wooden frame/plastic foundation with no problem. It does sound like you had a violation of bee-space but that is at best a guess on my part. -- | There is no doubt we need government in our lives. There is also no doubt that we need salt in our diet. Watch out for too much of either one. AA4YU http://www.beekeeper.org http://www.q7.net ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 08:53:24 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Al Lipscomb Subject: Re: State wants interview with me regarding Cumaphos use In-Reply-To: <200112141303.fBED37v14329@listserv.albany.edu>; from Jkeim@WENGER.COM on Fri, Dec 14, 2001 at 06:26:58AM -0600 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Fri, Dec 14, 2001 at 06:26:58AM -0600, John Keim wrote: > I am a sideliner in Northeast Kansas, and run about 100 colonies. This is my > 6th season upcoming. Last spring I ordered Checkmite strips for varroa > control from Mann Lake, as I did the year before. > > Yesterday a representative from the Kansas State Department of Ag. (didn't > state which branch) called and questioned my wife about installation, > disposal and use, and whether Mann Lake had sent the proper labeling for of > the Checkmite strips. He told her that Mann Lake was required by law to > report this to the State of Kansas, and that was how they knew we used them. > My wife doesn't work in the yards with me, so she told him he would need to > talk to me. > It is sad to say that you must be careful in what you say or do in regards to communication with a state official. One misunderstood statment can result in big problems. If this was your state bee inspector then you should be OK. But other agencies are always looking for ways to expand their turf, and funding along with it. If questions need to be answered then get them in writing and respond in writing. For those who commented on "open and honest" then they should endorse this even more as it reduces the chances of missunderstandings. -- | There is no doubt we need government in our lives. There is also no doubt that we need salt in our diet. Watch out for too much of either one. AA4YU http://www.beekeeper.org http://www.q7.net ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 18:23:25 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Marc Studebaker Subject: Re: Service Interuption MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > On Thursday, December 27, 2001 the LISTSERV server LISTSERV.ALBANY.EDU > will be down for major software upgrades I would like to thank the moderators of this list for all the time and effort they put into this discussion group. Good job!!! Merry Christmas to all marc studebaker ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 16:26:54 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Dick Allen Subject: Why Beekeepers Trucks Are Never Stolen MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Beekeepers: The Southcentral Beekeepers Association exchanges newsletters with a few other associations in the lower 48. This was from the Southern Oregon Beekeepers Association which was reprinted in The Bee Line, newsletter of the Oregon State Beekeepers Association. They have a range of about 20 miles before they overheat, break down or run out of gas. Only the owner knows how to start them. The automatic choke was long ago replaced by a hand choke that’s hard to find. The air conditioner hasn’t worked in 12 years. The epi-pens in the glove box are almost that old. The steering wheel hangs onto YOU, as it’s covered with propolis. Door handles and gear shift knob, too. You can double its value by filling the gas tank. The last time you changed the fuel filter you found dead bees in it. The passenger door is held shut with bungie straps. The tailgate is scorched from when the smoker set fire to the supers. There’s a quarter inch of dust on the dashboard. It is difficult to drive fast with all the hive tools, bailing twine, rags, ropes, chains, buckets of terra mix, veils, bungie straps, boots and loose paper in the cab. Regards, Dick ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 21:46:39 +0000 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: James Kilty Subject: Re: Drawing 9 frames Comments: To: beekeeper82@yahoo.com In-Reply-To: <200112140106.fBE16ev29030@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 In message <200112140106.fBE16ev29030@listserv.albany.edu>, Carm writes >Anyone else always use 9 frames when drawing comb? Applying the approach of Manley, I often use honey supers of 1.6" spacing (Manley frames have parallel ends 1.6" wide so they butt up against each other) and find that most colonies will indeed draw them out from foundation. It does seem more reliable to alternate drawn frames with new foundation. Sometimes though they draw out the already drawn comb as far as they can so the foundations stays foundation!!! It seems to depend on the particular strain. Most of the time they are parallel. -- James Kilty