From MAILER-DAEMON Sat Feb 28 10:57:11 2009 Return-Path: <> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 (2007-02-13) on industrial X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-87.1 required=2.4 tests=ADVANCE_FEE_1,AWL, MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR,SPF_HELO_PASS,USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=disabled version=3.1.8 X-Original-To: adamf@IBIBLIO.ORG Delivered-To: adamf@IBIBLIO.ORG Received: from listserv.albany.edu (unknown [169.226.1.24]) by metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id A89A84908D for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:52:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from listserv.albany.edu (listserv.albany.edu [169.226.1.24]) by listserv.albany.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n1SFkpIt016612 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:52:21 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:52:17 -0500 From: "University at Albany LISTSERV Server (14.5)" Subject: File: "BEE-L LOG0706E" To: adamf@IBIBLIO.ORG Message-ID: Content-Length: 39426 Lines: 855 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 02:37:55 -0400 Reply-To: james.fischer@gmail.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: Pollinator Protection Act of 2007 Introduced into the Senate MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > A little harsh, Jim! > I know some of these people, and they sure don't > fit the above description. I agree that the individuals are a pretty harmless bunch, but they are persistently single-minded and self-serving. Their recent track record, as I outlined, can only be described as "hijacking". No, I take that back. Its a "POLLINATOR PROTECTION RACKET"! Even Tony Soprano never would lower himself to this. "Gee, nice little funding bill you've got there. We'd hate to see anything happen to it, so we better insert some funding for native bees too." If we object to their skimming of money using the "CCD" problem as the excuse, we would only delay the bill further, atop the delay due to their lobbying. Simple extortion. > Looking at pollinators in general helps with the larger picture, and, > in general, what's good for native pollinators is good for honeybees. This is the classical "environmental quality" argument. Beekeepers have supported the agenda of the Xerces types in this area, and not attempted to hijack either the discussion or the funding. In return, we expected them to let us lead this tiny little effort, or at least expected them to stay out of the way. Instead, they went behind out backs, certainly delaying the bill, and may have put the bill's passage at risk with their unilateral additions. > In order to get a broader base of support in Congress, it may help to > broaden the bill to be more inclusive. You bill yourself as the "thoughtful beekeeper", so why not think this through a bit? There are powerful forces that have a habit of opposing anything that might expose them to finger-pointing and regulation. Agribusiness, chemical companies, and generic Paleolithic Conservatives all tend to have knee-jerk reactions that might bog the bill down due to the inclusion of language that diverges from the simple pragmatic language of "please fund work to find the cause of this specific agriculture problem". The phrase "native pollinators" tends to be uttered in contexts that involve both finger-pointing and regulation. While most beekeepers agree with the Xerces types on the general principles, we don't need them screwing this CCD funding bill up. Many clues have already gone cold while we waited for funding, so we don't need anything that might delay funding further. We certainly don't need this to turn from a pragmatic "agriculture" bill into an "environmental" bill. > there are those who feel that CCD is a natural phenomenon that will > likely recur, and then "disappear" again. Funny, I'm the one who mentioned that possibility first. http://bee-quick.com/reprints/serial_killer.pdf (Bee Culture, June 07.) Even if does turn out to be a natural phenomenon, we still need to be able to understand it, predict it, and figure out a way to avoid it. So we still need the funding, just to find out if it is "natural". The Gypsy Moth invasion was a "natural phenomenon", and serious money continues to be allocated to the effort to combat it. Ditto for drought, hoof-in-mouth, Florida citrus blight, bowl weevils... I'll say it again, if it were cows dying rather than bee colonies in these numbers, the national guard would have been mobilized months ago. > Those of this bent may feel that throwing truckloads of taxpayer > dollars at chasing the elusive cause might be a waste of said > taxpayers' dollars. If so, how would also funding UNRELATED research on "native bees" make it any more palatable to those who would think funding work on the clear and present danger at hand was a "waste"? But "Truckloads"? Certainly not. "Elusive"? It has only been elusive due to a lack of technology, expertise, and rapid response. It takes money to buy technology, expertise, and speed. Need I once again trot out the contrasting case of the contaminated pet food to illustrate exactly what the taxpayers expect in this area? I stand by each and every one of my prior statements. I could have been much more harsh, but I chose to set my keyboard to "chop" rather than "puree" or "crush". :) ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 09:09:58 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dave Cushman Subject: Re: Comparing LC to SC for varroa..... In-Reply-To: <891489.58801.qm@web51609.mail.re2.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Dee & All > and good ID work > FWIW that is repeatable, lab to lab, country to country. Identification by morphometry is often considered as too difficult for ordinary beekeepers, but in UK and Europe most of this sort of work is done by ordinary beekeepers that are prepared to work methodically, rather than research organizations. I have noticed an increase in interest of Morphometric methods recently, I believe that this is due to newer computerised methods being more widely available (many of the applications can be downloaded and are completely free). The methods can be performed manually using a 35 mm projector, for computerised working a good quality scanner is required, but many top end document scanners with slide scanning are good enough for anything except lab work. The rest is learning and understanding the process. Measuring on its own is not enough, we have to record patterns of behaviour as well as morphometric data, in order that we may make better judgements on our selection of breeding stock. The upsurge in interest has resulted (in UK, as well as Ireland, at least) in a new survey of bees to establish exactly what we already have (this is being done by ordinary beekeepers not labs !) perhaps the US could do something similar, because standardisation of methods with repeatable results country to country, as Dee suggests, would be a useful feature. Standardisation allows comparisons to be made and to this end I would like to see all honey bee morphometric and behavioural data kept in a centralised fashion so that it can be freely accessed by any individual beekeepers. This bank of data would grow progressively and help us all to understand our bee's interactions with their environment in more detail. Regards & Best 73s, Dave Cushman, G8MZY http://website.lineone.net/~dave.cushman or http://www.dave-cushman.net Short FallBack M/c, Build 6.02/3.1 (stable) ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 11:30:58 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.com" Subject: Re: Keeping a colony in a nuc year round. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>...any reason why you would need to restrict swarming. You are right. Losing bees in swarming in apitherapy is no issue. What I did not mention is that the couple lives in one of the 5 boroughs of NYC where beekeeping is discouraged and neighbors can get upset over swarming bees or just seeing bees period. The same issue occurs with observation hives where you have to rotate frames to keep the bees from getting too strong during the build-up. I am interested in queen laying restriction methods to maintain small populations in confined spaces such as nucs or ob hives without frequent intervention. Thanks! Waldemar ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 09:38:52 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Lloyd Spear Subject: Giant Hogweed MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline I'm not sure how all this started on this list, but I can report that Giant Hogweed is alive and well in Greene County as I know of two places where it thrives. I had no idea it could cause rashes. It is in/near bee yards that I have. While I do not know that I have had contact with its sap, I have not had any reactions. But then, I appear to be immune to poison ivy. I will ask if field workers in the area have had any difficulty. Lloyd -- Lloyd Spear Owner Ross Rounds, Inc. Manufacture of equipment for round comb honey sections, Sundance Pollen Traps, and producer of Sundance custom labels. Contact your dealer or www.RossRounds.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 09:28:14 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Scot McPherson Organization: McPherson Family Farms Subject: Re: Keeping a colony in a nuc year round. In-Reply-To: <20070629.043058.24851.1@webmail11.dca.untd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Queen laying restriction will encourage swarming instinct, not restrict it. Perhaps the better thing to do is keep 4 mating NUCs instead of a full frame nuc. This way the bees are not likely to buildup strong enough to want to swarm, and if they do swarm or die, the swarm will be so small no one will notice. AND you have the others to keep resources leveled out. You could combine them for winter, bring them indoors in the dark when winter starts and bring them out again on nice days for flying. Then split them back out to mating nucs in the spring. Might even go as far as 8 mating nucs could be stored together in 2 medium supers divided into sections, and then remove the dividers in the fall when getting ready for winter. Maybe a stupid idea, but I think it would work for your friend's needs and give him/her a constant supply of bees that has a fair chance of making it through winter. Scot McPherson McPherson Family Farms Davenport, IA ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 11:04:05 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Aaron Morris Subject: Re: Keeping a colony in a nuc year round. In-Reply-To: <200706291251.l5TBNrVe004527@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hmmm. 1) They just want to keep some bees for stinging. I'm assuming then that they are not beekeepers of any sort. 2) They will be trying to confine bees to a nuc box, year round. That's difficult even for seasoned beekeepers. 3) The couple lives in one of the 5 boroughs of NYC where beekeeping is discouraged. STRIKE THREE! This is simply a BAD IDEA! Tell them so! Having said that, queen restrictor? Get a closed nuc box (one with a hole drilled in the front for access/egress, cut a plastic queen excluder to the proper size and insert it so the queen will be restricted to one or two frames with no access to the entrance hole. This will restrict brood rearing to one or two frames and might keep the population down sufficiently to thwart swarming. Then again, nature always finds a way. Didn't you read _Jurassic_Park_? OR Get two nuc-size brood boxes that can be rotated on top of the nuc box. Allow the queen full access. When the top brood chamber is populated with bees and brood, take it off and replace it with the second nuc-size brood box and make a new nuc out of the removed populated nuc-size brood box. Of course, this will take beekeeping skills to assure that the queen remains with the original nuc, and moving the removed top nuc-size brood box will require an additional top and bottom (a cardboard nuc box could fit the bill here, which could also negate the need for a second nuc-size brood box). Just take the 5-frames out of the top nuc-size brood box and insert into the cardboard nuc box, replace the removed frames with foundation frames and cart the cardboard nuc box away. This still requires beekeeping skills which I assume the couple does not have, in an area where beekeeping is discouraged. So no matter how you look at it, this is simply a BAD IDEA! Tell them so! Aaron Morris - thinking good neighbor beekeeping! ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 11:01:53 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?windows-1252?Q?Steve_Noble?= Subject: Re: Pollinator Protection Act of 2007 Introduced into the Senate Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Once again Jim provides entertaining, well honed, logic with its low ph designed to cut right through the crap. Only this time, as is often the case, the appearance of logic is created by skillfully dissecting out and displaying only part of the picture. What is absent from Jim’s reasoning this time is mention of the reality that in the world of government research money, like all forms of government funding, it’s a free for all out there; it’s every scientist and farm group for themselves. That’s just the way it is. Not only that, it’s usually really hard to get funding via the legislative process, especially by means of a stand alone bill. It is the nature of legislation, especially funding bills, to automatically come with coat tails. It is SOP in Washington to grab onto those coat tails because it’s a hell of a lot easier to ride the coat tails of a bill that has momentum than to create a separate bill and enough momentum for it to make it through the gauntlet. I admit, I haven’t really followed this Pollinator Protection Act, but frankly I would be surprised if it made it through with out earmarks from some much more unrelated areas than Native Pollinators. The fact is that beekeeping research is and always has been under funded. So has research into native pollinators and entomology as a whole. It is understandable that beekeepers would want everyone else to keep their hands off their research funding bill; to keep it strictly on task. But it’s not despicable of those interested in native pollinators to want a piece of the pie. They have a harder and more strictly environmental argument to make for deserving research money. Their argument, like many environmental arguments, is more difficult to relate directly to economic interests. This may be the chance of a life time for them. Everyone knows what a raw deal the Native Pollinators got when the European Honeybees came to North America. Give them a break, Jim :>). Steve Noble ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 10:37:20 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Scot McPherson Organization: McPherson Family Farms Subject: Re: Keeping a colony in a nuc year round. In-Reply-To: <9D95C2906FCCE04F836ECA17C4CE092114C18158@UAEXCH.univ.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Aaron, There are NYC beekeepers you know, some of them operate at a profit with hives on rooftops and balconies, and sell their honey for an absolute premium. I think there was even an article about urban beekeeping in one of the two US magazines in the last 6 or so months. I can't see any reason why they can't do what they want, they might not get the results they want in sustainability, but if they don't mind replacing the bees if they don't make it through winter, I can't see anything wrong with their plan. Good neighbor beekeeping doesn't mean abstaining, it means taking all the precautions necessary to ensure someone doesn't get hurt. It is not good neighbor beekeepeing to just cave in and get rid of your bees, but to educate educate educate and make friends of your neighbors. Caving and getting rid of your bees isn't beekeeping nor is it good neighbor practices, it's called allowing yourself to be bullied and continuing to set a precedence of bullying between residents. Better to work together and develop a honey bee awareness program so that your friendly neighbors can come together with you when one neighbor has reservations. I even think there was another article about that in the MAGs too about developing a honey bee awareness/appreciation group before moving bees into a neighborhood or city. It certainly helps when you end up going to court or nuisance hearing to have a group of support that shows that a number of people want the bees, not just you as an individual. Sorry I don't agree with what you say here, and I think it is important for beekeepers to smartly expand and educate and develop appreciation for honey bees, instead of clustering in tight and getting pushed out everywhere. Scot McPherson McPherson Family Farms Davenport, IA ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 14:35:47 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: K&W Jarrett Subject: Re: Pollinator Protection Act of 2007 Introduced into the Senate MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > I agree that the individuals are a pretty harmless bunch, but > they are persistently single-minded and self-serving. Gee Jim, sounds like your describing most beekeeping industry here. Gee, has anyone ever heard of CCD. Keith ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 17:29:54 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Mike Stoops Subject: Re: Keeping a colony in a nuc year round. In-Reply-To: <20070629.043058.24851.1@webmail11.dca.untd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit "waldig@netzero.com" wrote: >>...any reason why you would need to restrict swarming. >>>Losing bees in swarming in apitherapy is no issue. What I did not mention is that the couple lives in one of the 5 boroughs of NYC where beekeeping is discouraged and neighbors can get upset over swarming bees or just seeing bees period. [[[To thwart buildup in the spring you might restrict the bees egress to maybe one day in three. That would really slow down buildup and with a nuc, probably stop any swarming tendencies. Just an idea. Mike in LA --------------------------------- Be a PS3 game guru. Get your game face on with the latest PS3 news and previews at Yahoo! Games. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 04:34:40 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: C Hooper Subject: Propolis Extract May Help Protect Skin from UVB Damage MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Propolis Extract May Help Protect Skin from UVB Damage Development of Topical Functionalized Formulations Added with Propolis Extract: Stability, Cutaneous Absorption and In Vivo Studies International Journal of Pharmaceutics, Article in Press http://apitherapy.blogspot.com/2007/06/propolis-extract-may-help-protect-skin.html Abstract: Propolis, which is a natural product widely consumed in the folk medicine, is a serious candidate to be applied topically due to its outstanding antioxidant properties. So, the purpose of this study was to develop stable topical formulations added with propolis extract in an attempt to prevent and/or treat the diseases occurring in skin caused by UV radiation… ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 08:35:31 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Lionel Subject: Re: Comparing LC to SC for varroa..... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dee said;;;;;But I would suggest feeding back honey and not syrup even if you have to buy honey from another beekeeper or store even. I cannot believe anyone would advise buying honey from a store and take the chance of getting spores of AFB, especially to feed weak hives. This is dangerous. Lionel ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 10:02:26 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Scot McPherson Organization: McPherson Family Farms Subject: Re: Comparing LC to SC for varroa..... In-Reply-To: <000a01c7bb1b$87d31fe0$15ebbad8@D98T9541> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This has been a disagreement for quite a LONG time. Some of us contend that feeding honey and not going to give your bees AFB, and some of us contend that this is a great way to give your bees AFB. Take all advice with a grain of salt, and do what you feel is right. If you are afraid of AFB from honey then don't do it and keep your own honey for that....but then again, how do you know whether your honey is AFB free? There is just as much chance of AFB being in your honey as in other's honey and you not even knowing it. AFB is everywhere, and some bees handle it well and you never ever know its there, and others don't handle it well and those are the ones that they make the pictures from... Scot McPherson McPherson Family Farms Davenport, IA ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 10:34:36 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Almer's Apiary Subject: Re: Keeping a colony in a nuc year round. In-Reply-To: <20070628.131822.29408.4@webmail16.dca.untd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Why not let the bees grow at their own pace. Monitor them and give frames of brood and bees to beekeepers that are trying to build up. An announcement at your next beekeepers association meeting that free (exchange) frames of bees are available would likely lead to a healthy list of names willing to come and get them. Just a thought! Bob Fanning Beekeeper Huntsville, AL USA ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 10:09:36 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: randy oliver Subject: Re: Pollinator Protection Act of 2007 Introduced into the Senate Comments: cc: Joe Graham , Kim Flottum MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > You bill yourself as the "thoughtful beekeeper", so why not think this > through a bit? Thank you Jim. I do prefer to think, rather than spew. Indeed, my keyboard doesn't even have a "shred" function, nor even a "pointing the finger" key! I highly respect your knowledge of the bee business, and your logical mind. Unfortunately, sometimes I'm not sure if your posts are based in fact, or upon which side of the bed you got up on! : ) I've spoken to people who were at the hearings, and who have spent time with the congresspersons and staff involved. I also have a call into Congressman Hastings staffer, and expect a reply today. In short, the impression that I get from speaking to those who actually know, is that most congresspeople don't have a clue about the bee industry's importance in agriculture, nor the problems we face. We as an industry have very little clout in Washington. In reality, the native pollinator people hardly hopped onto our coattails--on the contrary, they have a funded lobbyist who has greatly aided the beekeeping industry! I just received a note from a major player in our industry on this issue (I'm not quoting him by name, since I haven't asked him permission): Hello Randy, The native pollinator supporters have been tremendous HELP. They are responsible for organizing the hearing this past week on the importance of protecting pollinators, including bees, to ensure adequate wildlife habitat. The North American Pollinator Protection Campaign (NAPPC) and the Co-Evolution Istitute have actually recruited as many or more co-sponsors for the Bee Research Legislation and Habitat protection legislation as the honey bee organizations and their members have - at least so far. ...The other witnesses also said good things that will benefit honey bees and native pollinators. Also attached is the Blumenauer pollinator habitat protecion bill filed late Thursday. If you can get your Congressional Rep to co-sponsor this, and the Hastings bill (funding for CCD and other bee and pollinator research, HR 1709) then that would be great. Take care, xxxxxx So Jim, now that you've bitten the hand that's feeding us, what next? The native pollinator people have read your (and Kim Flottam's) dissing of them. I hope that they realize that your personal vendetta doesn't necessarily reflect the views of informed beekeepers. To the Xerces Society, let me publicly say THANKS for your help! > So we still need the funding, just to find out if it is "natural". On this point, we are in agreement. The native pollinator people are helping us in a big way to obtain this funding. > If so, how would also funding UNRELATED research on "native bees" make it > any more palatable to those who would think funding work on the clear and > present danger at hand was a "waste"? Jim, Xerces did indeed add verbiage, but it was to the purpose of adding support to the bill, not taking away! (Jim, how can you take away from nothing! There is nothing, unless the bill passes). Farmers don't give a diddly squat about beekeepers--what they care about is pollination, no matter who does it. Any "clear and present danger" in their eyes is simply a potential lack of pollinators of any stripe. That is, if there is any real "clear and present danger" (didn't you suggest out of the other side of your mouth that CCD might disappear?). And what in the world makes you think that research on native bees would be unrelated to honeybees? If CCD is a natural phenomenon, it may well be affecting them as well! The staffers say that no one in the bee industry is talking to them. They are hungry for information, and really want to help us. Every beekeeper should be contacting their representatives, asking the government to aid our industry with good research funding, pesticide regulation, and habitat protection. > there are those who feel that CCD is a natural phenomenon that will likely > recur, and then "disappear" again. > Funny, I'm the one who mentioned that possibility first. > http://bee-quick.com/reprints/serial_killer.pdf (Bee Culture, June 07.) I hate to spoil the music when one is tooting their vainglorious horn, but this idea hardly occurred to you first...do you often wake up both irritable and delusional at the same time? > I stand by each and every one of my prior statements. Then I suggest that the beekeeping industry not stand with you. Instead, we should contact our representatives, and ask them to work hand in hand with the native pollinator people to provide funding for more habitat conservation incentives (not penalties), and bee research of all kinds. If CCD has a nutritional factor involved, the set aside forage acreage would be of great benefit to all species. Ditto with pesticide issues. Jim, we likely have more in common with native pollinators than has occurred to you. I doubt that you have any good recipes for crow, but perhaps the rest of us could help the hard-working native pollinator people for helping us in this time of need! Randy Oliver Thinking ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 11:57:09 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: randy oliver Subject: Re: Pollinator Protection Act of 2007 Introduced into the Sena Comments: cc: Joe Graham , Kim Flottum MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear Jim, I am fully aware that one crosses keyboards with James Fischer at their = own risk! I hope that this discussion does not degrade into a waste of = Bee-L space with meaningless repartees. I hold you in high esteem. My hope is that you will use your = considerable intellect, writing skills, and connections in the industry = to further the advancement of these bills through congress. Rather than = insulting our allies, constructive and positive action on your part = could greatly benefit the industry. Respectfully, Randy Oliver ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 19:41:05 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.com" Subject: Re: Keeping a colony in a nuc year round. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>Queen laying restriction will encourage swarming instinct, not restrict it. I am not sure about this. In many European countries where periods of nectar shortage are very predictable and long, beekeepers with bees that don't slow down brooding use 'frame cages.' The queen is often allowed to lay only in 4 frames and the colony will maintain a good size field force that's mostly idle for the duration. Swarming is said to be a thing of the past. [I have not tried this myself.] >>Perhaps the better thing to do is keep 4 mating NUCs instead of a full frame nuc. I like this idea! I wonder if a 2-frame nuc would be as good. Honestly, I never tried maintaining queens in such small structures for extended periods of time. A 2-frame nuc in a 5-frame hive body (the rest of the box closed off to the bees during the busy season) could be given additional 3 frames in the second part of the summer in order to establish a sufficient overwintering cluster... >>Swarms are undesirable but a small swarm is better than a large one in urban conditions. Indeed. The smaller colony would be much easier to inspect [if only to cut out swarm cells once a week]. The wife said she was very interested in learning about bees. >>Maybe a stupid idea, but I think it would work for your friend's needs and give him/her a constant supply of bees... Not at all. Thank you!! Waldemar ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 19:58:31 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.com" Subject: Re: Keeping a colony in a nuc year round. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>1) They just want to keep some bees for stinging. I'm assuming then that they are not beekeepers of any sort. Aaron, I forgot to mention that the wife [who needs the stings] expressed an interest in learning about bees. She suffers from some sort of lower back pain that's not due to spinal problems. She's been through countless tests - still w/o a root cause. Only one anti- inflamatory drug and bee stings relieve the pain. The drug has side effects and so the stings are preferable. >>2) They will be trying to confine bees to a nuc box, year round. That's difficult even for seasoned beekeepers. True. She could learn and could advise her. >>...NYC where beekeeping is discouraged. STRIKE THREE! This is simply a BAD IDEA! Actually backaward NYC prohibits beekeeping. I believe the city can fine you $2,000 for breaking the ordinance. Shame on NYC. Progressive cities like Paris encourage beekeeping and NYC is paranoid. I think progressive cities should encourage and develop responsible beekeeping. Even set aside lots or rooftops exclusively dedicated to beekeeping. Mayor Bloomberg says he wants to make NYC the greenest city in the US in the next decade. This could be a part of it. >>Get a closed nuc box (one with a hole drilled in the front for access/egress, cut a plastic queen excluder to the proper size and insert it so the queen will be restricted to one or two frames with no access to the entrance hole. Another great idea! Gotta love this list. :) This approach is workable. [The only negative is the drones will be trapped, if they will raise any drones at all. This may be the price to pay though.] >>...might keep the population down sufficiently to thwart swarming. Then again, nature always finds a way. Didn't you read _Jurassic_Park_? You mean like bees moving an egg passed the excluder to raise a virgin on the other side of the fence? [Did not read Jurassic Park but did see it on the big screen.] Waldemar ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ******************************************************