From MAILER-DAEMON Sat Feb 28 11:01:22 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 66B70490A4 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:52:23 -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 n1SFkpJD016612 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:52:23 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:52:18 -0500 From: "University at Albany LISTSERV Server (14.5)" Subject: File: "BEE-L LOG0710D" To: adamf@IBIBLIO.ORG Message-ID: Content-Length: 136356 Lines: 3315 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:03:35 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re CCD "...Australian honeybees may not be the source..." MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > But [Kevin] Hackett [USDA ARS] says there is so far > no firm evidence the Australian bees are the source > of [the IAPV] virus... I can't verify this report anywhere, but if it is an accurate quote, I guess Kevin finally got around to actually reading the paper at issue. :) The interesting thing here is that we had USDA researchers putting their names on a paper that attempted to draw exactly that conclusion, presenting the Australian IAPV finds as if they were somehow significant, and we had two US Senators calling for a ban on imports as a direct result. Now the USDA (as a whole) appears to be backpedaling even more than the authors of the paper did in the press conference for the paper (listen to it here - http://www.bee-quick.com/reprints/ ) All this over a paper that did nothing more than simply confirm the preliminary findings presented by another team back to the "CCD Working Group" as a whole back in April 2007. I wonder if Kevin will join me in apologizing to Australia on behalf of at least the USDA ARS for disparaging Australia's exports so quickly and based upon so little actual data. Or maybe the US Trade Representative's office has Kevin's arm twisted up between is shoulder blades on this issue under their so-far usual policy of viewing bees as a mere poker chip to be used to placate Australia and New Zealand, not worth the trouble of doing anything about, regardless of the fears expressed. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 21:25:23 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Brian Fredericksen Subject: Re: CCD "...Australian honeybees may not be the source..." Comments: To: "J. Waggle" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit If CCD never resurfaces we could file this news story under "who cares" ....... IMO they might be wasting a bunch of time trying to figure out something that will never happen again. Its still the wild west yet in US beeland so anything could happen and how would we trace a problem back when there is no oversight, no records just a free for all. If the poop hits the whirling blade we can have everyone fill out an index card with some information and call it data. I mean last winter no one apperently turned the truck around worried about their bees getting CCD. If the Big One hits someday, the semi's will be merrily rolling along on the way to the pot o' gold in CA almonds anyhow and then merrily heading back in every direction to insure a complete dissemination of the new Problem in a few weeks tme. If anything the system we have in place is effiicient! The number of upper midwest citations for blue shop rags was notable this year especially in NoDak. Should be a news release coming soon implicating some very visible migratory beeks. In the meanwhile many unsustainable practices continue and we await the next migratory honeybee crisis. This time the media is ready to report every piece of misinformation and deflect the attention away from the real issues. Here in the Heartland I am hearing most beeks say their bees look great this fall, better then last year. What a strange season we had this year weather wise up here, we had a record warm June followed by a serious drought in July and then record monsoon rains in Aug-Oct (20-35 inches). The alfalfa is still growing up here since we have not had a killing frost yet and its almost November. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 08:18:55 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Chris Slade Subject: Re: Mongralizing makes bees hot MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit A hybrid is a mongrel of known and approved parentage. Chris ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 05:25:30 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: C Hooper Subject: US Apitherapy Products Firm Earns 'Good Manufacturing Practices' Certification MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Beehive Botanicals Earns GMP Certification http://apitherapy.blogspot.com/2007/10/us-apitherapy-products-firm-earns-good.html Beehive Botanicals of Hayward, Wis., recently achieved Good Manufacturing Practices certification by the NSF under new standards established specifically for dietary supplements. (Each Beehive Botanicals product includes bee-collected pollen, royal jelly, propolis, or honey.)… ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 09:15:47 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Mongralizing makes bees hot In-Reply-To: <5E05EAAF.51F003A4.0211D779@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Chris Slade wrote: > A hybrid is a mongrel of known and approved parentage. > > If you mean man's approval, then no. The salamanders in California are hybrids even though not approved , nor parentage known at the time of their discovery. Their parentage had to be traced. The definitions of both are nearly identical so one man's hybrid is another's mongrel. All depends on how much you are willing to pay for the product. Both infer a mixed race. Mongrels just have more of them until they become distinct and become a new breed. Then they are "pure" and can have hybrids instead of mongrels. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 14:36:45 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dave Cushman Subject: Re: Honey Bee Breeding, Revisited In-Reply-To: <471753D5.1040903@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi P-O Sorry about the delay, I have a rather large backlog as a result of the National Honey Show in UK. On an off-topic note, I was pleased to meet Michael & Kirsten Traynor, who I believe frequent this list. I hope this discussion is not becoming polarised, into 'for and against', because I believe in 'horses for courses' and one horse may suite your course better than mine. > I hope you don't refer to Buckfast as "Italian hybrids", I certainly, do not consider Buckfast as a hybrid, I use the term 'synthesised bee' to describe them. > And no, mixes between races > don't produce hot bees if both lines are gentle to start with. This has not been my personal experience in UK. > Buckfast is here among most considered the gentlest of all races...and > the race that best can handle mixing with other races without getting hot. In the first place you cannot claim Buckfast as a 'race' in the established meaning of the term, but again in UK, I have found quite bad degeneration of Buckfast or AMM in the first cross between the two, to the extent Buckfast bees, deliberately bought in to provide safe handling for beginners on a course, became evil followers and stingers upon crossing. This has occurred with several versions of Buckfast, several versions of AMM, various Ligustica type mongrels and supposedly 'pure bred' Carniolans. > When it comes to gentleness my criteria is bees that never fly up in > your face. Agreed, this is one of my reasons for choosing AMM. A sting on the hand if you move too fast is tolerated. Why ? I do not wish to tolerate it, nor would I expect it in well refined stocks. I wish to be able to work quickly without any special precautions. In another post on this thread... > This will mean demand for easy managed bees suited for larger operations will increase. Those bees that need swarm preventive actions etc, that takes longer time to manage will not be suitable. Exactly ! For me these criteria are met by stable well behaved AMM, as luck would have it, the indigenous bee of the area I live in, I wish I were a young man again and I could re-live all the enjoyment I derived from breeding such bees. I admit there are other methods of breeding that can be followed, the one adopted by Murray McGregor has a great deal going for it, again if I were a younger man, I would like to see large scale trials of both methods compared in detail over a large number of seasons, but that is 'pie in the sky'. 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: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 08:23:54 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: Mongralizing makes bees hot MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Chris wrote: >A hybrid is a mongrel of known and approved parentage. hybrid: 1.an animal or plant produced by a male and female of different species. mongrel: 1.The progeny produced by crossing different breeds or varieties of plants or animals. I think I have to agree with Bill that both have about the same meaning. bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 14:56:44 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.com" Subject: Re: Mongralizing makes bees hot Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Mongrels may be hot for a couple of generations but eventually should stabilize. The goal should be to have a diverse, stable population where colony characteristics reproduce true from one generation to the next. Take the feral dogs of India. They originated from different domestic dog races but, over a course of many years of free reproduction (open mating), there is now a prevailing shape and size in the dog population [although you can still find different colors.] You can take these feral dogs and start selective breeding to get back to the 'pure' races. You may not get healthier dogs but you will get races that please certain people. Humans often tend to breed animals to have/resemble human characteristics. I believe the same happens with bees if there is a sufficient genetic diversity for a selective process in a given environment to go well. Waldemar ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 16:12:12 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Chris Slade Subject: Re: Mongralizing makes bees hot MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bob, No they don't have the same meaning, using your definitions. All the 'hybrids' under discussion are of different strains or 'breeds' of the species Apis mellifera and are thus, again using your definitions, are 'mongrels'. Chris Bob writes: hybrid:1.an animal or plant produced by a male and female of different species. mongrel:1.The progeny produced by crossing different breeds or varieties of plants or animals. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 12:33:21 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Tom Elliott Subject: Brewers yeast MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT I have had extremely good results using brewers yeast as a pollen supplement. I have a bag I have had for several years. I store it in a coolish room off my garage, but it is not refrigerated. My reading, here and elsewhere, suggests that dried yeast will degrade with time if not refrigerated. Is there anyone here who can tell me, or direct me to information, what changes specifically take place in brewers yeast. What amino acids are lost with these changes? Also what specific balance of amino acids do honeybees require? Tom Elliott Chugiak, AK ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 18:53:48 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: Mongralizing makes bees hot In-Reply-To: <5E05EAAF.51F003A4.0211D779@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Chris: A hybrid is a mongrel of known and approved parentage. Reply: Okay then: Approved by whom? Individuals liking what they are working with? Association liking what they are collectively working with? At what level does association then overseeing and hearing about such then give greater approvals if such do exist? Individual researchers working with bees they like? Group or board of researchers working with bees they like and have put together artificially or even open mated? What is hybrid here and mongrel here by category...aka simple or complex or other? Just thinking. Sincerely, Dee A. Lusby __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 06:45:17 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Mongralizing makes bees hot In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Chris Slade wrote: > All the > 'hybrids' under discussion are of different strains or 'breeds' of the species Apis > mellifera and are thus, again using your definitions, are 'mongrels'. > > Actually, that is exactly what they are, even the specific "pure" races of bees. If you trace them back they are a mix of earlier bees and on and on. We do not call them mongrels since they are now stable and "pure". Mongrel would not be a term used by someone in a scientific study but mixed race would. Even then it is a lazy term since DNA would give an inkling of the racial origins. Mongrel is actually a disparaging term for what others would call a cross or hybrid. It infers bad or inferior characteristics, like hot bees, which you can also get with a hybrid. Look at the Buckfast hybrid. It is a mix of many different bees, a classic definition of mongrel. But we know its parentage, so we can be nice and call it a hybrid. The interesting thing here is that the term 'mongrelizing" is also used disparagingly for the local mixing of bee stock, while all the threads on the offspring of breeding a bee for local conditions is looked at favorably. Both are actually the same. It all depends on the prejudices of the observer and their choice of language. A good bee is a product of the beekeeper's fine breeding methods and a hot bee is a product of mongrelization. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 07:31:39 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: CCD "...Australian honeybees may not be the source..." MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Brian said: > If CCD never resurfaces we could file this news story under "who cares" ....... > IMO they might be wasting a bunch of time trying to figure out something > that will never happen again. Still in denial? You should see my e-mail and voice mail. Just October's pile clearly indicates that CCD never went away, and has become more obvious as fall has arrived. No matter what anyone might say, this many people can't all be wrong or lying at the same time. Glad to hear that you don't have any symptoms, though. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 19:35:50 +0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: P-O Gustafsson Subject: Honey Bee Breeding, Revisited In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > I hope this discussion is not becoming polarised, into 'for and > against', because I believe in 'horses for courses' and one horse > may suite your course better than mine. Hi Dave, Agree, all beekeeping is local... and I think we have had this discussion going since the times of the BeeNet :-) For some reason Buckfast is not considered useful in the UK, while used with good result in other parts of Europe. I will not try to convert any of you UK guys, only give my view to others on the list. > A sting on the hand if you move too fast is tolerated. > > Why ? I do not wish to tolerate it, nor would I expect it in well > refined stocks. I wish to be able to work quickly without any > special precautions. In real life this is not possible. With hundreds of hives using open mating there will be a difference between colonies, also in gentleness. If I was to select mainly for this trait it's possible, but what will happen to vitality with so much inbreeding that will be needed to achieve this? I don't need that extreme gentleness, I need vital bees more that can survive in the ever faster changing environment. Without the difference there is nothing to select for, and we will not be able to improve the bees. In all breeding programs with bees (except the Starline-Midnight program that were real hybrids) the difference will gradually decrease until they are almost even. Then what? Can we happily lean back and think we solved it by just maintaining the "good" stock? Or should we continue to try improve our bees by introducing new genetic material and let nature decide what is best suited for the bees now and here? Bugs and diseases soon travel as fast as money around the globe, bees need a way to adopt to that. I believe greater genetic diversity is essential. I don't see race purity as a mean to achive this, rather an obstacle in the bee's development. Evolution is not going to stop, why should we think the races that were developed ages ago in a totally different situation would be the best today? -- Regards P-O Gustafsson, Sweden http://beeman.se ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 05:47:27 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: C Hooper Subject: Honey: Its Effects on Anxiety and Memory in Adult Rats MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Honey: Its Effects on Anxiety and Memory in Adult Rats Presentation by Lynne Chepulis and Nicola Starkey, University of Waikato in Hamilton, New Zealand http://apitherapy.blogspot.com/2007/10/honey-its-effects-on-anxiety-and-memory.html Background: * Cognitive ability is one of the main functions known to decline with age - oxidative damage * Hyperglycemia involved in brain damage * Link between glucose intolerance and diabetes with cognitive impairment * Low glycemic foods may help to prevent this Honey: * Has a low glycemic index * Many honey's have high antioxidant contents * Antioxidants offset oxidative damage in the brain * Previously honey has been shown to significantly decrease weight gain, improve HDL cholesterol and blood sugar levels * In people, honey consumption increases serum antioxidant content Aim: * To investigate whether long term feeding of honey can offset age related cognitive decline in rats * Formed part of a larger study which examined other biochemical and physiological measures… ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 15:21:54 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dave Cushman Subject: Re: Honey Bee Breeding, Revisited In-Reply-To: <471F3C26.5070105@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi P-O > For some reason Buckfast is not considered useful in the UK, > while used with good result in other parts of Europe. I have no particular problem with Buckfast principles, but I have never yet seen what I would class as good performance, by Buckfast in my area of UK, They were very gentle bees about 30 years ago, but the more modern versions are not as good (my opinion). I do not have experience of them in Europe, where I know they sustain a strong band of followers. >> A sting on the hand if you move too fast is tolerated. >> >> Why ? I do not wish to tolerate it, nor would I expect it in well >> refined stocks. I am probably nit picking on this point, once you get to an adequate degree of gentleness, you can turn your attention to refining other points. I also take you point on inbreeding, which I am suspicious may have occurred in some of my stocks in the past, but never got around to proving it, it certainly did not show as any lack of brood viability. > I need vital bees more that can survive in the ever faster > changing environment. I agree entirely, but I hold that such adaptability is shown in greater measure by AMM than any other race. > Without the difference there is nothing to select for, and we will > not be able to improve the bees. In all breeding programs with bees > (except the Starline-Midnight program that were real hybrids) the > difference will gradually decrease until they are almost even. Then > what? Can we happily lean back and think we solved it by just > maintaining the "good" stock? Or should we continue to try improve our > bees by introducing new genetic material and let nature decide what is > best suited for the bees now and here? Sorry about the long quote... As a breeding process advances the increments of improvement become smaller, but such a process is never 'finished', because conditions, pests and other factors change we must steer our programs to slightly different goals, sitting back and thinking we have achieved our aims will soon be by-passed by reality and we will have wasted valuable time. > I don't see race purity as a means to achieve diversity (I hope my re-ordering of your words has not offended, or changed your meaning and intent) Too many people equate racial purity with 'sameness' or limited diversity, it is possible to have a very broad spectrum of diversity within a large population that is stable, I do not see it as an accident that the AMM indigenous area is larger than that of any other race, I believe it is a representation of the diversity and adaptability of that race. Such large populations allow the freedom to change course more easily when conditions do change. 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: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 10:51:15 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "Peter L. Borst" Subject: Mongrels & Hybrids MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 06:45:17 -0400, Bill Truesdell wrote: >Chris Slade wrote: >> All the 'hybrids' under discussion are of different strains or 'breeds' of the species Apis mellifera and are thus, again using your definitions, are 'mongrels'. Bob wrote: >Actually, that is exactly what they are, even the specific "pure" races of bees. If you trace them back they are a mix of earlier bees and on and on. Not true. First of all, a "hybrid" originally meant a cross between species like the mule (horse x donkey). It has been expanded to include crosses of any sort of different breeds or cultivars within a species like the Cockapoo (Cocker Spaniel x Poodle) or hybrid corn (Southern dent x Northern flint). The words cur, tyke, and mongrel are generally viewed as derogatory in North America, whereas in the United Kingdom "mongrel" is the unique technical word for a mixed-breed dog. The various so-called races of bees were first identified in specific locations. They had existed in these locations for thousands of years and therefore were given names which identified a distinct type with particular characteristics. An example: the Tellian bees, a North African race, found north of the Sahara from Libya to Morocco (Apis mellifera intermissa). To say that bees within these populations are also hybrids is to reduce the term to mean absolutely nothing. -- Peter L. Borst Danby, NY USA 42.35, -76.50 picasaweb.google.com/peterlborst ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 08:14:41 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: Mongralizing makes bees hot In-Reply-To: <471F223D.8090100@suscom-maine.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Bill writes: We do not call them mongrels since they are now stable and "pure". Reply: What is stable and pure with usage of IA and closed population breeding methods so that after 15,20 or more years they then fall apart or are so weak that they are not worth anything for really doing like real pollenation work or production? What is stable with limited sources for factory farmed bees that then are scattered to the 4 winds? What is really stable and "pure" by the way?......and if it is not, then going back to basics again: There are yellow bees and brownish, and black and older deeper orangish bees, and they transition in and transition out of various zones naturally with simple mixing only, not what man does. Dee A. Lusby __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 10:38:21 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: CCD "...Australian honeybees may not be the source..." MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Jim & All, >No matter what anyone might say, this many people can't all be wrong or lying at the same time. Could you give us some areas if not outfits effected as I just completed a week long trip through Nebraska, Iowa , South Dakota and have not heard from those beekeepers of any die offs with CCD symptoms. These were large outfits 1,000, 5,000, 2500, 6000 and 8,000 hives. Best bees in years. All these outfits had lost 50% and up of their bees to varroa in 2004/2005. The 6000 hive ran 100% Australian and the 2500 ran 40-50%. Thrilled with the bees and pictures in my December ABJ article. I have been on the phone recently with many California, Nevada and Utah beekeepers. No CCD here. The best bees I always look at are in the larger operations. Always has been. Not to put down the two hive hobby beekeeper (are these the beekeepers contacting you?) but many seem to always be losing hives to every cause thinkable but beekeeper neglect. A couple years ago a certified master beekeeper brought us some deadouts to put bees in. We could smell the AFB without even looking. We said we can't put bees in those boxes and he argued until we showed him what AFB looked at in his boxes. He had passed the test for master beekeeper but did not have a clue what AFB looked or smelled like. I called many beekeepers in California and only found that a beekeeper in the central valley was finding deadouts (but my source said nothing new for the beekeeper) and that the hives of a large commercial beekeeper from North Dakota had been arriving in California only on about four frames of bees but not deadouts. What are you hearing Randy O.? I think I have got the most commercial beekeeping contacts of authors of bee magazine articles and have just finished an article concerning CCD for the December issue and the above is all I have found. Are others on the list hearing of CCD losses? Sincerely, Bob Harrison -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 12:10:51 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jerry Bromenshenk Subject: Re: CCD "...Australian honeybees may not be the source..." MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sorry Bob, but we have heard, seen, and sampled new outbreaks of CCD in large commercial operations in the west. So far, spotty, but enough to be worrisome. We've sampled in the SW and in Idaho, talked to folks who suffered CCD last year, saw it again mid-summer in Colorado, and are hearing reports of localized problems in other western states -- and no, these aren't hobby or side line beekeepers by anyone's definition. I hope these are the only cases that we see, but as people pull honey, we're getting reports. Jerry ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 11:44:25 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: CCD "...Australian honeybees may not be the source..." MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Sorry Bob, but we have heard, seen, and sampled new outbreaks of CCD in large commercial operations in the west. So far, spotty, but enough to be worrisome. Are you talking about Lance? Lance was on my list to call but have not yet? "Worrisome" might be of some interest but in the Dakotas all but one beekeeper I spoke with had their crop pulled and extracted. The problem die off ( 25% CCD of deadouts ?)started in August/Sept. last year and here we are almost the first of November. >We've sampled in the SW and in Idaho, talked to folks who suffered CCD last year, saw it again mid-summer in Colorado, and are hearing reports of localized problems in other western states -- and no, these aren't hobby or side line beekeepers by anyone's definition. The hives which survived (CCD or SSDD) last winter did not rebound until late spring this year. Slow buildup and would not take syrup. Some said they did not rebound until dropped in the Dakotas (Colorado etc.) but look great now. I am going to go out on a limb and predict the problems last winter are not going to happen this year. Beekeepers have told me things they did not tell the CCD team because they know I will keep their secrets and many beekeepers flat killed their bees last fall with bathtub treatments and over dosing plus keeping their bees on heavily contaminated comb. Those beekeepers are wiser now! >I hope these are the only cases that we see, but as people pull honey, we're getting reports. I hope so too! bob Beekeeper stupidity: "Doing the same old thing over and over and expecting a different result!" -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 11:50:14 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: Mongrels & Hybrids MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bob wrote: >Actually, that is exactly what they are, even the specific "pure" races of bees. If you trace them back they are a mix of earlier bees and on and on. Bill said the above not Bob. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 13:48:10 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jerry Bromenshenk Subject: Don't Tell MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bob No, I'm not talking about Lance, nor many of the folks with CCD problems last year. Despite wishful thinking, Lance and Hackenberg aren't the only beekeepers with these problems. We've a new group of failing colonies in operations that did not have the problem last year, as well as at least two repeats. And, I just got an urgent phone call. Another east coast operation going down, hundreds of colonies lost. And, many of these were in the Dakotas earlier in the year. Your don't tell advice to beekeepers is fine, if you don't want to find a solution. Failing operations need to be sampled if we are ever to resolve this thing. I agree with a need for confidentiality. Outing individuals with problems serves no good purpose. Hiding the problem obstructs resolution. We've some NHB and Almond Board funds to look at CCD. Can't get all around the U.S., but we can pick and choose some operations to sample. We will look at a broad screening for virus, and we will be looking at in-hive chemicals. To all Bee-L readers - if you depend on your bees for your primary income and have been in the business for several years or more, and are having a problem with bees abandoning hives, please contact us. Jerry J.J. Bromenshenk Bee Alert Technology, Inc. 1620 Rodgers St, Suite 1 Missoula, MT 59802 406-541-3160 (business phone) P.S. Hope to see some of you at the Alabama bee meetings this week. ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 11:08:37 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Grant Gillard Subject: Re: CCD "...Australian honeybees may not be the source..." In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Brian wrote: "The number of upper midwest citations for blue shop rags was notable this year especially in NoDak. Should be a news release coming soon implicating some very visible migratory beeks." So what is this practice? I use blue shop rags, but perhaps in a different way. Grant Jackson, MO __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 14:18:34 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Chris Slade Subject: Re: Amm [Was: Honey Bee Breeding, Revisited] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 22/10/2007 00:10:59 GMT Standard Time, waldig@NETZERO.COM writes: And how many lbs of honey does your single super hold? About 25 extracted. Chris ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 15:31:50 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Mongralizing makes bees hot In-Reply-To: <443770.23326.qm@web51605.mail.re2.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dee Lusby wrote: > Reply: > What is stable and pure Italian, African, Black, Caucasian, etc.. Read Peter's post. Once the bee is stabilized in an area they are no longer hybrid/mongrel or whatever. They are distinct. We are not discussing 10s of years but thousands. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 14:41:19 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: CCD 2007 (was Don't Tell) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >We've a new group of failing colonies in operations that did not have the problem last year, as well as at least two repeats. I would sure like to speak with these guys. I have been asking every beekeeper I contact and can't seem to find these beekeepers. >And, I just got an urgent phone call. Another east coast operation going down, hundreds of colonies lost. And, many of these were in the Dakotas earlier in the year. East coast? A clue! >Your don't tell advice to beekeepers is fine, if you don't want to find a solution. I don't give don't tell advice! However most U.S. commercial beekeepers know what they tell me stays with me. If I betrayed their trust I would get the same information you get most of the time! > Can't get all around the U.S., but we can pick and choose some operations to sample. The small number of samples which led to the Penn State conclusions is almost laughable. ONE AUSTRALIAN SAMPLE PACKAGE! Their conclusions about Australia/ IAPV virus is laughable. Their documentation of virus for which the only solution we already know is a big waste of CCD research money in my opinion and I will go on record as saying I oppose giving Penn State money for virus research. No cure for virus! Period! End of story! The reason Bailey was never given only minor research money. "Control varroa and you control virus" WORKS FOR ME! I am afraid (my opinion) that if Penn State continues to blame Australia (their hypothesis which they seem to hold onto (current ABJ) despite all the best research minds saying only weak hypothesis and IAPV could have been here for decades or is simply a variation of KBV) they could lose some of their research funds through a lawsuit. 16 times in the Science article they point the finger at Australian imports as the source of IAPV which is totally unprovable. How did IAPV get into Australia from Israel? There have been no imports? Maybe IAPV (both U.S. & Australia) came off a off a container ship like we have received most our pests here in the U.S.! Maybe IAPV has been around for a 100 years and now we are just finding the virus? I agree completely with Jim Fischer! The Science article is the worse bee article ever published! Science should have never published the article without at least reading the information! Australia is still waiting for an apology ( as advised by Jim Fischer in his Bee Culture article). Penn State defending a flawed article is not helping! >We will look at a broad screening for virus, and we will be looking at in-hive chemicals. Forget the virus issue! In the new ABC XYZ only three pages are devoted to virus. In my opinion a single page would have been enough. >To all Bee-L readers - if you depend on your bees for your primary income and have been in the business for several years or more, and are having a problem with bees abandoning hives, please contact us. I agree with Jerry! If you are having the above problems contact Jerry. bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 19:32:57 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: Mongralizing makes bees hot In-Reply-To: <471F9DA6.5070102@suscom-maine.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Bill: We are not discussing 10s of years but thousands. Reply: Good then, for then we are not talking bees put together in the USA or modified either, just bees in original homelands from what you are saying. Dee A. Lusby __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 20:45:31 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "carimona@GMAIL.COM" Subject: Re: CCD "...Australian honeybees may not be the source..." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 11:08:37 -0700, Grant Gillard wrote: > So what is this practice? I use blue shop rags, but perhaps in a different way. > they are frequently used as a delivery medium for off label mite treatments. they take a while for the bees to "digest" so they tend to last more then 2 weeks. while not defending the practice it works quite well if the active ingredients are rotated and the overall system is cheap. for large operations an occasional fine is still way cheaper then say buying tubs of Apiguard for 3000 hives. lately the trick is getting a straw buyer to obtain the insecticide. some state dept of Ag's are monitoring the purchase of Tactic and Maverik. its become an annual game of cat and mouse. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 04:58:59 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: C Hooper Subject: Croatian Propolis has Stronger Antimicrobial, Antioxidant Activity than Brazilian Propolis MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Croatian Propolis has Stronger Antimicrobial, Antioxidant Activity than Brazilian Propolis Antimicrobial and Antioxidant Activity of Propolis from Croatia and Brazil: a Comparative Study Planta Medica, 2007; 73 http://apitherapy.blogspot.com/2007/10/croatian-propolis-has-stronger.html The source of the plant material from which honeybees collect propolis has the influence on its chemical profile, and consequently on biological activity. The aim of present study was to compare antimicrobial and antioxidant activity of ethanolic extracts of propolis collected from hives in Croatia (continental part) as typical poplar-type, and in Brazil (Minas Gerais region) as typical green or alecrim-type of propolis… ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 11:40:36 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.com" Subject: Re: Amm [Was: Honey Bee Breeding, Revisited] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>And how many lbs of honey does your single super hold? >About 25 extracted. 6 of your supers is about 150 lbs. That's a pretty good number especially, I think, under the UK conditions. We have not heard of other UK beekeepers' averages... :) so there is no baseline. Waldemar ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 17:25:30 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Chris Slade Subject: Re: Amm [Was: Honey Bee Breeding, Revisited] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 25/10/2007 13:36:13 GMT Standard Time, waldig@NETZERO.COM writes: We have not heard of other UK beekeepers' averages... :) so there is no baseline. That wasn't an average. It was a few exceptional hives in an exceptional year. Over the years my average is about 45lbs. The good year it was 60lb and this year probably <20. Chris ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 22:29:06 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: CCD 2007 (was Don't Tell) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bob positions his views as "in agreement" with mine, when there is much he presented that I cannot call "accurate". I think Jerry B. has made it clear that CCD continues to be a real and significant problem for an expanding list of operations from tiny to huge, spread hither and yon about the lower 48 states of the US, so I'll skip all that. > 16 times in the Science article they point the finger at Australian > imports as the source of IAPV which is totally unprovable. It is not "unprovable", it was just not supported by the specific data presented in the paper, so it has not YET been proven. It is perfectly possible to do a more craftsman-like job of looking at the genetics will full sequencing (rather than all the mucking about with mere fragments), and compare just how "close" the IAPV claimed to be found in US bees is to both the IAPV claimed to be found in Aussie bees, and the IAPV known to have been found in bees in Israel. Note that I do not agree that we have sufficient evidence at this point to even support a claim that anyone has found IAPV itself anywhere except Israel. It is just as likely that what has been found as been the genetic "scars" of exposure to the virus, inherited from ancestors who were exposed to the virus itself. (You'd have to read the Sela paper in the journal "Virology" [July 2007 issue] to grock this point.) Sela's description of IAPV included rapid die-offs of both adult bees AND larvae. So, if the US colonies said to "have IAPV" actually had IAPV, why did they have no IAPV symptoms? How did this all mutate into "CCD"? The key word here is "mutate" - viruses do it all the time. Please also note that while the apparent intent of the authors of the paper clearly was, as Bob noted, to "point the finger" at Australia, the paper does stop short of making the specific and overt accusation itself. (I think the appropriate term here is "plausible deniability". The only thing that is drowning out all the backpedaling on this point is the loud denial that anyone made any accusations at all. Uh huh, suuuure.) > How did IAPV get into > Australia from Israel? There have been no imports? You've got it backwards. The rumor mill (unverified) is that Israel imported Aussie bees, and based upon Sela's initial pre-publication findings, quietly stopped ordering Aussie bees. I have not verified this, as it really doesn't matter. (If the rumors are wrong, I will apologize in advance, and will thank whoever can explain the Israel/Australia connection.) > Maybe IAPV (both U.S. & Australia) came off a off a container ship > like we have received most our pests here in the U.S.! This is a valid scenario, one that seems more credible when one realizes that the authors of the "Science" paper neglected to do any multi-variate analysis of their data, but instead, merely presented a single-variable analysis. If one looks at the data in the "supplement to the paper published in the journal "Science", one finds that any colony with BOTH Nosema apis and Nosema ceranae was doomed, while colonies that only had one kind of Nosema or the other would survive. This cheap-and-dirty "multi-variate analysis" has yet to be performed on all the data, so it is impossible to know if I am right, or all wet on this. > Maybe IAPV has been around for a 100 years and now we are just > finding the virus? Hard to imagine that this would be the case. Lots of people have looked at bee viruses for years. Bailey (UK) Judy Chen (USDA-ARS Beltsville) have done enough work to have "no way of missing this". > I agree completely with Jim Fischer! But I don't agree with many of the further leaps you take beyond what I have said. What I have said since 2002 about this entire issue (Imports, Exotic Invasives, Inspections, etc) is all available here: http://bee-quick.com/reprints/ My basic point is that the paper in "Science" did not offer data to support the claims made. I would call it "sloppy work". But this does NOT mean that I disagree with the claims made by the authors of the paper. I find some of the claims compelling. I just wish that the data provided supported the claims. I said a long time ago that the overt symptoms of CCD meant that this "just has to be a virus". It spread too quickly and hit to hard to be anything less than a virus. In other words, my problem with the paper is that it proves nothing, and settles no relevant issue one way or the other, and thereby loses any right to "make claims" or "draw conclusions". > The Science article is the worse bee article ever published! No way. There's been worse. Much worse. (We could have a competition to find the worst, that would be fun.) > Science should have never published the article without at least > reading the information! Of course the information was "read". It was reviewed by people with credentials. The problem is that it was not reviewed by anyone who knew very much about bees, so even basic things like the use of the terms "samples", "hives", "yards", and "operations" were inconsistently used, and confusing in the final article as published. > Australia is still waiting for an apology (as advised by Jim Fischer > in his Bee Culture article). I would not advise them to hold their collective breath, as the current posture being adopted by the authors of the paper and USDA-ARS is "we never said anything of the sort". Strictly speaking, they are correct, but I'm sure they can hear our eyeballs rolling when they try and say it with a straight face. > Penn State defending a flawed article is not helping! Is Penn State "defending" something somewhere? Sorry, I've been busy with other things, what have I missed? Can someone e-mail me a scan or a pdf of whatever it is? Meanwhile, its the bottom of the 5th, 2-1, Sox. Go Sox! :) ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 11:54:04 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.com" Subject: Re: CCD 2007 (was Don't Tell) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>I said a long time ago that the overt symptoms of CCD meant that this "just has to be a virus". It spread too quickly and hit to hard to be anything less than a virus. Has the possibility of a fungus been ruled out completely? Some of the [earlier] CCD reports mentioned bee samples covered by unusual 'mold.' There was a speculation they could have succombed to a fungus. I think either a virus or a fungus could have been slowly spreading w/o overt symptoms over some time only to 'bloom' when the bees' weakened immune systems allowed it to explode in numbers. It's a sea of germs out there that normally does not threaten the host unless it's been weakened. Waldemar ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 02:34:31 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.net" Subject: Re: Amm [Was: Honey Bee Breeding, Revisited] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>That wasn't an average. It was a few exceptional hives in an exceptional year. Over the years my average is about 45lbs. The good year it was 60lb and this year probably <20. I assume this is mostly due to your local weather conditions since it's been mentioned here that Amm outproduces other bees there. I wonder if an unlimited broodnest would increase your yields - has it been tried? They will raise more brood vertically than horizontally. I was somewhat skeptical about the info at first but tried it this year and saw my yields double to an average of about 265 lbs. I saw great increases in a course of 2-3 days with so many bees. [Made keeping the nests from getting flooded with nectar tricky. Two empty medium at a time ahead of time were helpful.] Rainy weather influnce seemed greatly lessened. The above figure includes 40lb after a migratory move to goldenrod which failed miserably due to a late season drought. In a favorable goldenrod season, my guess is they could bring in 100-200 lbs here. They have brought up to 120 lbs to a double deep with an excluder. Waldemar Long Island, NY ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 09:28:45 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: CCD 2007 (was Don't Tell) In-Reply-To: <000001c81777$fd3e8860$0201000a@j> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit James Fischer wrote: > I think Jerry B. has made it clear that CCD continues to > be a real and significant problem for an expanding list > of operations from tiny to huge, spread hither and yon > about the lower 48 states of the US, I see a problem but I do not see how significant it is. From all the "data", which is not that good and mostly SWAGs from researchers (involved or not), CCD losses are about 2-5% of colony losses across the US. Those numbers are not significant in view of the confirmed difficulty of pinning down losses to CCD alone or at all. Compared to losses from mites, losses from CCD are minimal (unless you are the beekeeper). If there are losses this year, they should appear now, in the fall, when clusters start to form. This is also the time that losses from Varroa are peaking. Varroa is a viral problem, so CCD, if it is viral, will also peak at this time. The problem, as noted often on this list, is with beekeepers who can tell the difference. Varroa loss implies management, while CCD does not. It is basic human nature to point the finger elsewhere. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 23:36:34 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re CCD "...Australian honeybees may not be the source..." FACT CHECK! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have traded several levels of back-and-forth e-mails with both Kevin Hackett (USDA-ARS) and the reporter who wrote the story as reported by ABC (Australia) news that started this thread. I'm going to call the story an example of very poor reporting, rather than anything else. The reporter freely admitted to not having done his homework on CCD, and was unaware of the implications of the paraphrasing he did. (He is a freelancer in DC who sells the occasional snippet to ABC Australia.) While the specific quotes attributed to Kevin are accurate, Kevin took extreme exception to the paraphrasing, and the (mis)characteristation of the role of USDA-ARS. He stressed that they will provide "results" to USDA-APHIS, and let USDA-APHIS come up with their own "recommendation" as to what, if anything, to do about imported bees over the short term and long term. Kevin is standing firm on the lack of any specific claim of causality, and standing firm on the lack of any specific accusation that "IAPV came to the US from Australia". So, I think Kevin would like me to stress: 1) There is no proof that IAPV causes CCD. 2) There is no proof that IAPV came from Australia to the USA. While the road to settling (1) may be a long one, Kevin feels that the work they are doing on stored samples may clarify (2) over the short term. The punch line here is that the same folks who took exception to my use of the phrase "only the sketchiest evidence links Australian exported bees to the problem" are now working nights and weekends to get some more evidence to confirm or refute the sketchy evidence published so far. If any of the above surprises anyone, realize that Kevin is not a ventriloquist, and the authors of the paper published in "Science" are not dummies. The only way to avoid further embarrassment is for all concerned to circle the wagons, and blame "the press" for "jumping to conclusions". As someone who might be mistaken for "press" if the sun were in your eyes, I think I should state on behalf of AP, UPI, Reuters, Science Magazine, the New York Times, and the Hearst, Gannett, Tribune, and Knight Ridder newspaper chains that they didn't leap - they was PUSHED! :) Meanwhile, Australian bees are "available now" according to an ad in the November "Bee Culture", implying that USDA-ARS had better work quick. Sadly, bees imported from overseas have never been "inspected" prior to export with anything more than a glance in the general direction of a few hives, as I point out in my article in the same edition of Bee Culture: http://bee-quick.com/reprints/beepocalypse.pdf While I am perhaps the biggest fan around of this sort of "train wreck", the impending situation at hand scares even me - the potential for collateral damage is too high, and there are just too many ways to screw up here. Top of the 8th, 2-1 Red Sox. (Excuse my excitement, but if they win the World Series, this will be the 2nd time in not just my lifetime, but also in my father's lifetime AND my grandfather's lifetime that the Sox have won the World Series.) ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:24:39 -0300 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Juanse Barros Subject: Re: CCD 2007 (was Don't Tell) In-Reply-To: <4721EB8D.9070207@suscom-maine.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Take care with Nosema Ceranae, you are leaving this one out of the cake!!! -- Juanse Barros J. APIZUR S.A. Carrera 695 Gorbea - CHILE +56-45-271693 08-3613310 http://apiaraucania.blogspot.com/ juanseapi@gmail.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:35:25 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Chris Slade Subject: Re: Amm [Was: Honey Bee Breeding, Revisited] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 26/10/2007 14:02:05 GMT Standard Time, waldig@NETZERO.NET writes: I wonder if an unlimited broodnest would increase your yields - has it been tried? They will raise more brood vertically than horizontally. Generally it is frowned upon in the UK to extract from combs that have contained brood. Chris ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2007 13:02:45 +0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Detchon Subject: Beepocalypse MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Jim,=20 I understand that you are not advocating for a ban on imports of bees = from Oz to USA, but having read your link to the Bee Culture article, = http://bee-quick.com/reprints/beepocalypse.pdf I am highly offended that you are so disrespectful of our very strict = biosecurity protocols for both import and export of bees and bee = products. You stated "The document (Health Certificate) flatly states that = Australia is free of three kinds of undesirable bees, and five different = pests and pathogens. This is true only if Australia is actually looking = for these bees and pests", and "No actual tests for any pathogens or = diseases are done and none of the listed diseases and pathogens can be = confirmed without lab analyses." To say that we do not inspect or test = for these problems is NOT TRUE. For example, here in Western Australia, = my bees (and those of another 99 beekeepers, ie 100 beekeepers per = annum) are annually inspected on a random basis for all those problems = you described. In addition samples are collected for laboratory analysis = of bees, brood and honey. As well the inspectors remove one complete = frame of sealed brood for inspection and testing back in the laboratory. = Virus sampling is part of the protocol. This testing programme is very = expensive, and who do you think pays? The beekeepers of course, all of = us, collectively...by means of an annual "Fee for service" levy which we = all pay on an annual per hive basis when we pay our annual registration = fee!There are many beekeepers unhappy about the payment which currently = is $1 per hive, for commercial operators. However the single hive = backyarder gets slugged $27. (Our governments work on the "User Pays" = philosophy, and since, as far as I am aware there are currently no = exporters of bees from WA to USA, you can see we pay a high price to = maintain our reputation in case someone like yourself wants proof that = we are what we say we are!) Behind the scenes, the states departments of = agriculture are very diligent in policing Biosecurity protocols, which = in turn are then checked and certified by the Federal agency AQIS. The = visual inspection about which you are so concerned, is in fact the last = in a whole chain of checks and inspections which underpin our = Biosecurity status, and despite your claims, is certainly not the only = safeguard used to protect the buyer from the risk of importing something = nasty from the antipodes! Your apology would be much appreciated. Peter Detchon Western Australia (which IS free from varroa, tropilaelaps, apis cerana, = european foulbrood, small hive beetle,and amazingly enough GM broadacre = crops, none of which is accidental!) ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2007 05:30:09 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: Re CCD "...Australian honeybees may not be the source..." FACT CHECK! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello All, In my opinion sorry by reporters does little. For two decades those bees were imported into Canada and thousands of hives were brought south into the U.S.. Reputations were hurt for what? The CCD team was pushed to find something to show for their effort regardless if their conclusion needed further research to be a viable hypothesis! >Meanwhile, Australian bees are "available now" according to an ad in the November "Bee Culture", implying that USDA-ARS had better work quick. The information I get is that there is not enough proof Australian hives are anything more than a valuable beekeeping tool to certain beekeepers to do the nations pollination. The import we go on I have been told. > Sadly, bees imported from overseas have never been "inspected" prior to export with anything more than a glance in the general direction of a few hives, as I point out in my article in the same edition of Bee Culture: This is totally FALSE! Maybe if you spent more time on beekeeping research and less on baseball you would get your facts straight. Go back and reread my articles! Your lack of information amazes me! I have shared many times the high quality of the Australian inspection service. Its like comparing a corvette (Australia) to a model T.(US). The Australian package industry pays $120 an hour for the inspection which lasts for hours. EACH hive package bees are taken from is inspected. Pictures in my first article! There is not a *queen import area* in the world on par with the Australians. What about the other import? Did the IAPV virus come in with the USDA-ARS import of Russian bees? How do you know? Were the queens checked? Spreading fear is an old concept used by those with an agenda! It seems you have been against the import since the start as you will never need those bees so now you are trying to find a reason say the end of beekeeping will come from the import. There were those in Canada saying the same 20 years ago but they had to eat their words. Better stick to baseball! bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2007 08:08:49 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Southwest Bee Supply Owner - Jim Hawk In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit This is to let you know that long time owner of Southwest Bee Supply (since 1980s) Jim Hawk died last night in Phoenix, Arizona at the Mayo Hospital hospice after a long battle with liver cancer. Jim will be sorely missed. Dee A. Lusby __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2007 08:09:01 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: C Hooper Subject: Propolis Component Kills Cancer Cells MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Propolis Component Kills Cancer Cells Constituents of Brazilian Red Propolis and Their Preferential Cytotoxic Activity Against Human Pancreatic PANC-1 Cancer Cell Line in Nutrient-Deprived Condition Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry, Article in Press http://apitherapy.blogspot.com/2007/10/propolis-component-kills-cancer-cells.html In this study, the MeOH soluble extract of Brazilian red propolis was found to kill 100% PANC-1 cells preferentially in the nutrient-deprived condition at the concentration of 10 ?g/mL… ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2007 16:13:32 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Mike Carrington Subject: Re: Propolis Component Kills Cancer Cells? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable What is 'MeOH'? I can't find 'Me' listed in the periodic table. Mike ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2007 20:07:07 -0400 Reply-To: John Britt Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: John Britt Subject: Re: Propolis Component Kills Cancer Cells? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Mike, MeOH is methanol = CH3OH. Methanol is a common organic solvent for extracting material for natural product drug discovery. John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Carrington" To: Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 7:13 PM Subject: Re: [BEE-L] Propolis Component Kills Cancer Cells? What is 'MeOH'? I can't find 'Me' listed in the periodic table. Mike ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 00:10:15 +0000 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Gavin Ramsay Subject: Re: Propolis Component Kills Cancer Cells? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > What is 'MeOH'? Methanol, methyl alcohol. Similarly,= Hi Mike=0A=0A> What is 'MeOH'? =0A=0AMethanol, methyl alcohol. Similarly,= EtOH is ethyl alcohol or ethanol. =0A=0AGavin ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2007 13:47:09 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.net" Subject: Re: Amm [Was: Honey Bee Breeding, Revisited] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>I wonder if an unlimited broodnest would increase your yields... >Generally it is frowned upon in the UK to extract from combs that have contained brood. The idea of an unlimited broodnest is not to extract from the broodnest. Once the brood rearing gets under way in the spring AND a honey dome is set-up in the upper broodnest, the supers are put on. The honey dome keeps the queen laying in the spacious broodnest while surplus nectar is moved to the space in the supers. It worked for me well this year. The trick was to keep the broodnest from getting nectar-bound during quick spurts in nectar gathering. I think a lot of nectar was getting 'dumped' in the broodnest during the day and was moved up to the supers during the night. Provided there were enough supers and enough bees. You may want to set up one hive like this as an experiment. I'd most interested in your results. Waldemar ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 01:06:20 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: Re CCD "...Australian honeybees may not be the source..." FACT CHECK! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bob said: > In my opinion sorry by reporters does little. The reporter did not say "sorry". He honestly had no idea that he was twisting Kevin's words. He simply did not know the subject matter. > The Australian package industry pays $120 an hour for the > inspection which lasts for hours. EACH hive package bees > are taken from is inspected. Bob seems to think that charging $120 an hour for visual inspections somehow makes them something more than visual inspections. Given that, I'm selling $500 smokers that no beekeeper should be without. Once again, I must point out that a mere visual inspection, no matter how expensive, is completely inadequate to detect any of the pests or diseases claimed to be the targets of the "inspections". > Spreading fear is an old concept used by those with an agenda! Sorry Bob, no one is doing that. Back in 2001/2002, I made a few predictions about uninspected bee imports and pests and diseases. In the opinion of a number of respected researchers, those predictions have recently come true. I have published over 10,000 words of feature articles this summer pointing out how they have not proven my prediction correct, how they could be wrong, and how limited their evidence is. If this is "spreading fear", I'd sure like to know how I'm making anyone feel afraid. Yes, I STILL think port-of-entry sampling and inspections are the only way to assure confidence independent of "trust" and other quaint concepts obsoleted by the WTO. > It seems you have been against the import since the start as > you will never need those bees so now you are trying to find > a reason say the end of beekeeping will come from the import. Nonsense, I've consistently refused to "be against" imports. All I have ever advocated is the simple approach already used by the UK and EU, which is to consistently sample, test, and keep records. Are you just making stuff up, or are you honestly confusing me with someone else? > There were those in Canada saying the same 20 years > ago but they had to eat their words. I've not claimed that the "end of beekeeping" will result, I have consistently pointed out that there are multiple diseases and pests found in areas of subtropical Asia that no one wants, and that the countries where these problems are found send a lot of spectacularly unseaworthy cargo ships along the coasts, and then island-hopping their way through Malaysia and Indonesia to Australia, and then past Papua New Guinea, along the Solomon Island chain, past Vanuatu and New Caledonia, and then across the rather long and occasionally scary run to New Zealand. Anyone who has done some sailing in that area has seen these classic "tramp steamers". Not surprisingly, New Zealand's varroa problem started on their northernmost Island, where the closest ports to Indo-Asia happen to be, and Australia's Apis cerana problem appeared near Cairns, not far at all down the coast of Australia's northernmost tip from the very short hop across the island-filled passage between Papua New Guinea and the tip. I've then observed the obvious - that many of these invasive exotic pests and diseases seem to have no problem jumping to Apis mellifera from whatever species of bee originally hosted them. As for Canada, please explain the multiple cases of "queen bee smuggling" from the US to Canada, and the assumed much larger number of smuggled shipments that were not intercepted. Why would beekeepers risk a $250,000.00 fine? I don't think it was just to save on shipping fees. :) When someone is willing to break the law to buy your product, you clearly have a superior product. > Better stick to baseball! Baseball? 3rd game final score - Red Sox 10, Rockies 5 ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:10:08 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?windows-1252?Q?J._Waggle?=" Subject: 1892 - Henry Alley, Prophesizes CCD. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit “…I tell you frankly that sooner or later, sooner most likely, your apiaries will be depopulated and ruined…” -(Henry Alley 1892) The reason Henry Alley says “in-breeding” In a letter to The Homestead November 25, 1892 Des Moines, Iowa. Henry Alley writes: =====Start===== A Warning. (Henry Alley, American Apiculturist.) Do the bee keepers of this country, who are introducing those five-banded bees and queens, yellow clear to the tip, realize what they are doing? Have they forgotten the story of the fearful loss of bees all through the West and northwest In the winter and spring of 1892? Can not they learn anything from such costly and dearly bought experience? It seems not. The call still continues by many who order queens for those five-banded bees. Now, friends, I tell you frankly that sooner or later, sooner most likely, your apiaries will be depopulated and ruined, and you will be ready to retire thoroughly disgusted from the bee business; your complaints that "bees are doing nothing" will be heard as long as you persist in Introducing such a strain of bees as you are pleased to call five-banded Italians. Throw such worthless bees to the dogs, and you will soon have reason to say, "My bees wintered well and have stored lots of honey." Did you ever get an imported queen whose worker bees were marked with five yellow bands and whose daughters were yellow clear to the tip? Of course you have not. Every queen that ever reached this country from Italy produced three banded bees. Five-banded bees are produced by in-breeding. Every experienced bee-keeper knows the deteriorating effects of such a method of propagation. In-breeding destroys the constitution, vigor and all that goes to make up the life of a well bred, hardy and vigorous animal. I know of nothing in the animal or Insect kingdom that more thoroughly illustrates the debilitating effects of inbreeding as a colony of those five-banded Italian bees. They are too lazy to sting or to resent an insult of any kind; they will not oven keep out of each other's way. True, these bees are handsome and beautiful to look at. I want something beside beauty to fill the bill for me so far as getting profit from an apiary. Give me beauty if it is not at the expense of other qualities. Do our large honey producers boast of having their hives stocked with five-banded bees? Did you over hear one of thorn say he could show the handsomest bees to be found In the world ? Does Mr. A. E. Manum, of Vermont, one of the largest honey producers in the world, advertise queens that will produce five-banded bees? I think his advertisement reads thus: "Leather-colored queens for sale" Don't you know one of those leather colored queens are worth one hundred of those yellow-clear-to-the-tip sort. They surely are. What a novel sight it would be to see a crate of fine honey made by those five-banded bees! Did any one ever see anything of the kind? Most of those follows who keep such beautiful bees report bad weather and bees doing nothing. is this not correct? Why don't our larger honey producers introduce five-banded bees into their apiaries? Well, why don't they? Why can not our younger and smaller apiarists profit by the experience of the prominent and larger bee-keepers? In my experience in rearing Italian queens I have found that "breeding" queens whose daughters were more or less black at the tip, striped and leather colored produced the most reliable and hardy, as well as the most superior honey-gathering bees. The fact is, that such markings as black at tip, striped and leather-colored indicates hardiness and vigor; while the pale yellow which reaches clear to the tip, means a delicate, puny constitution, and short existence. I hope I have said enough here to satisfy the readers that it is not to their interest to rear or to introduce queens that produce five-banded bees. As surely as you do it, your apiaries will be ruined, and you will soon give up keeping bees in disgust. Purchase queens of those dealers who rear the common, or in fact, I might say the typical and real Italian bees. Pure, profitable and the best strain of Italian bees are not five-banded. The queens vary in color from quite dark to golden yellow. Do not complain to the dealer of whom you purchase the queen that she is a hybrid. If the bees are good workers, the queens prolific, you certainly have a queen worth all you paid the dealer for her. On the other hand, if the queen is unprolific and fails to fill the hive with bees, or those that are poor honey-gatherers, you have good reasons for complaint and for demanding other queens to replace all Inferior ones. =====End===== Best Wishes, Joe Waggle ~ Derry, PA ‘Bees Gone Wild Apiaries' http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/HistoricalHoneybeeArticles FeralBeeProject.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:37:34 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?UTF-8?Q?Peter_Borst?= Subject: unlimited brood nest Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Waldig wrote: >The idea of an unlimited broodnest is not to extract from the broodnest. Once the brood rearing gets under way in the spring AND a honey dome is set-up in the upper broodnest, the supers are put on. When I did beekeeping in California (1974 to 1990), most of the people I knew ran bees in deeps with no queen excluders. There was no attempt to keep the honey and brood separate. In fact, a lot of beekeepers would "undersuper". With no excluder, this is practically an invitation for the queen to move into the supers. So, you *really* had an unlimited brood nest. A good colony would be in five or six deeps. As the honey came in, the honey would force the queen back down. Pulling honey always involved finding some brood in the supers. This would be pretty obvious because the fume board doesn't work as well on supers with brood in them. At this point, I would either swap the broody frames for full honey frames, or wait and set the brood onto colonies back at the honey house. Personally, I always top supered (less work) and so the queen would usually be kept down by the honey barrier you describe. Unfortunately, sometimes the colony would fill in too much of the lower brood nest, and these frames would have to be moved up by the beekeeper. That's why some prefer to put the empty supers under the full ones, to prevent the hive from getting "honeybound". I never noticed any bad effect from having honey stored in brood combs. On the contrary, the bees seem to prefer to put honey in old combs, given a choice. The old frames are much less prone to blow out in the extractor, too. Of course, I understand that with the widespread use of miticides, many people want to segregate the brood combs from the honey supers. Still, being able to use the same frames for honey or brood is handy. Pete ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 12:28:13 -0400 Reply-To: lloyd@rossrounds.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Lloyd Spear Subject: Unlimited Brood Nest MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Peter Borst said "Still, being able to use the same frames for honey or brood is handy." Peter, as you know, commercial beekeepers here abouts pretty exclusively use excluders to keep the queens out of honey frames. Some do it so they don't have to mess with brood while extracting, and some because they think that if our (sometimes) fine spring/early summer light honey gets put in black comb it will darken the honey. Disadvantages of using excluders include a greater tendancy of the bees to swarm (unless the brood nest is very large), and in years with a slow trickle of honey the bees will tend to pack the brood nest and never get into the supers. This year was one of those for myself. I have been always using excluders on my extracting hives, and never using them on my comb honey hives. My brood nest is usually a deep and a medium, so is fairly restricted. I ran across a commercial guy this year (1,000 hives) that runs the same brood nest as I do, but in late April he puts on two drawn mediums with no excluders. Then in mid-June he runs the bees (including the queen) out of the supers with a repellent, puts an excluder under the lower medium, and adds another super or two. He claims this controls his swarming and since he first pulls supers in early August it lets him have brood-free frames for extracting. He also claims that putting light honey in black cells has no effect on the honey color. "The color of the nectar that goes into the cell is the color of the honey that comes out". Were you able to get light honey from your dark frames in California? Do you think the light honey stored in dark cells got darkened? 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: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:28:28 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: 1892 - Henry Alley, Prophesizes CCD. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello All, Henry Alley 1892 Jim Fischer 2007 Same mentality! Italian bees are the problem! migratory beekeeping is the problem! beekeepers are the problem! import bees are the problem! Researchers say send money and we will solve the problem! congress says they will legislate away CCD! I have not been able to find any CCD this fall but fall is not over yet! I have found some SSDD. Industry stronger than in years and thinking almond pollination. bob Bob ponders: "if man evolved from monkeys and apes why are there still monkeys and apes?" -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 13:05:08 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?windows-1252?Q?J._Waggle?=" Subject: Re: 1892 - Henry Alley, Prophesizes CCD. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Bob Harrison wrote: >Hello All, > >Henry Alley 1892 >Jim Fischer 2007 >Same mentality! LOL, Bob you very brave! > Italian bees are the problem! But please read again, as Henry Alley 'as I understand the article' puts the blame on "in-breeding" of the Italian bee, and not the Italian bee itself. Best Wishes, Joe ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 13:11:48 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?windows-1252?Q?J._Waggle?=" Subject: Re: CCD "...Australian honeybees may not be the source..." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Jim writes: >Still in denial? >You should see my e-mail and voice mail. >Just October's pile clearly indicates that CCD never went away, >and has become more obvious as fall has arrived. Not sure that I am in denial,,,, But I don't know how a pile of e-mail and voice mail indicates that it was CCD, or that CCD never went away. Where is the ‘diagnosis’ in the equation? This is probably more a reflection of a <>, rather than any evidence of CCD being the actual cause. So far, I have seen just about every succumbed colony in the USA being blamed on CCD. CCD has become the 'convenient diagnosis' for every colony death ranging from queenlessness to mismanagement to what ever. And has provided a great source of material for the bee mag writers. It is human nature to find an explanation for the unknown cause of death. In 1912 for example, beekeepers in Illinois suffered a severe decline in nectar flow and subsequent great bee mortality. Lacking a sure diagnosis it was explained by some that “… the weather made the bees lazy.” The more I compare “CCD” to previous bee mortalities, the more it shows as a rather minor event, a natural occurrence, over blown out of proportion by blogs, news hype and discussion lists. I'm strongly with Bob on this, 'the industry is strong'. Brian Writes: >… we could file this news story under "who cares" ....... I would file it under, “been there done that”. "CCD", seems to be a minor event when compared to kills of the past: In accordance with reporting every colony collapse as CCD, we must include the following die-offs as CCD events. Especially the 1794 instance in Edinburgh which IMO is highly symptomatic of CCD. 950, 992 and 1443 Ireland In Ireland, there was a “great mortality of bees” (Flemming G (1871) 1794 Edinburgh, Midlothian “The following extraordinary instance of the industry of Bees, happened this season in a bee hive the property of Mr. John Scotland, Merchant, Dunfermline. ...What is very remarkable, when the hive was smoked, there were not above 200 bees in it.. 1872 Wisconsin Janesville, “—A gentleman, in Fond du Lac, who usually keeps a great many bees, states that at least two-thirds of his bees died last winter. He thinks that from two-thirds to three-quarters of the bees in the county have died this year.” 1879 Illinois “Extraordinary Mortality among Bees… One large bee raiser in this State who had 220 swarms of bees has now only eighteen, and the other who had over 800 swarms has now not a single healthy hive of bees. It has been ascertained by correspondence that in New York and the New England States over 60 per cent, of the bees have died,..” 1885 United States "The season of 1884-85 stands out in the history of American beekeeping as one of terrible devastation" (BEEKEEPING (1915) By E.F. Phillips Pg. 343) 1885 Iowa “…with great unanimity they denounce the honey dew as the cause of the unexampled and ruinous losses of bees during the past winter. One bee- keeper loses fifty-one out of fifty-three colonies, and the two left, are miserably weak. Others have lost ninety-five per cent…” 1904 United States "During the winter of 1903-04 probably seventy percent of the bees in New England died." (BEEKEEPING (1915) By E.F. Phillips Pg. 343) 1904 Wisconsin “Hard on the Bees. Bee keepers report that the present winter has been an exceptionally hard one on the swarms, and that as a consequence there will be a great loss to keepers….” 1905 Texas “…Hard Winter and Too Much Rain Curtails Industry.…. …Phillips, president of the Nueces Valley Beekeepers’ Association, states … Last winter the beekeepers suffered a loss, of probably 50 percent of their stock, and the rains during the spring have been detrimental to the honey flow in the flowers up to this time.” 1910 United States "....in 1909-10 the loss was probably fifty per cent in the northeastern United States." (BEEKEEPING (1915) By E.F. Phillips Pg. 343) 1910 Nebraska “… The News learns that all, or nearly all, of the bees in this part of the state were killed by the severe winter. The owners of a large number of hives on examination find that the bees died In the early part of winter. This means a shortage in the honey crop. There is now and then a hive where there are a few live bees and in some instances a hive or two, out of many, escape, but the slaughter was the worst known in this section for years.” 1912 United States "The winter of 1911-12 was also one of heavy mortality, the actual death of colonies costing the beekeepers in the eastern United States millions of dollars." (BEEKEEPING (1915) By E.F. Phillips Pg. 343) 1912 Illinois “The honey crop In central Illinois, will be light this season, due to the fact that many of the Insects were killed by the severe temperature of last winter. “ 1917 California “…Winter losses of bees range from 10 to 15 per cent, and in some states the loss was almost 50 per cent during the winter of 1916-17,…” 1996 New York “Two ferocious mites are decimating a bee population already weakened by two straight harsh New York winters….” "It's devastating." Just ask commercial beekeeper John Earle of Locke, who lost 70 percent of his 900 hives to the mites…” Best Wishes, Joe Waggle ~ Derry, PA ‘Bees Gone Wild Apiaries' http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/HistoricalHoneybeeArticles ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 11:30:26 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: randy oliver Subject: Re: Re CCD "...Australian honeybees may not be the source..." FACT CHECK! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi All, Re sampling: "It should be noted that inspection based on sampling always involves a degree of error. The acceptance of some degree of risk that the pests are present is inherent in the use of sampling procedures for inspection. Inspection using statistically based sampling methods can provide confidence that the incidence of a pest is below a certain level, but it can never prove that a pest is truly absent from a consignment." from http://www.aphis.usda.gov/import_export/plants/plant_exports/downloads/draft_ispm_sampling_consignments.pdf The bottom line question is, "What options you have once the missed pathogen inevitably slips through?" If you have a reasonable probability of success in eradicating it once it enters, then sampling and imports make sense. On the other hand, if it is likely that once the pathogen enters, that it will be quickly disseminated throughout the commercial bee population, then there is no chance of stuffing it back into the box, and we will then have to deal with pathogen in perpetuity. As far as the pathogens that we are speaking of--viruses, tropilaelaps, etc--once individual slips through, it is unlikely that we will ever be able to contain them. Randy Oliver ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 14:02:07 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: CCD tonight on 60 minutes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I doubt will be anything new to us but thought I would post. bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 17:55:18 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?UTF-8?Q?Peter_Borst?= Subject: Re: Unlimited Brood Nest Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lloyd Spear wrote: >Peter, as you know, commercial beekeepers here abouts pretty exclusively use excluders to keep the queens out of honey frames. I know three beekeepers in particular that each have around 400 colonies and overwinter in Tompkins County and neighboring counties. One uses excluders and the other two don't. The ones that don't use them use all deep frames, although one is starting to add mediums into the mix. Most of the commercial beekeepers I see using excluders put them over the first box these days. >Were you able to get light honey from your dark frames in California? Do you think the light honey stored in dark cells got darkened? Well, I grew up in San Diego, home of the legendary Black Button Sage (Salvia mellifera). This honey, when pure, has NO color. Not much taste either. Also, White Sage (Salvia apiana). I knew a lot of old timers who ran nothing but black old combs, all deep frames, no queen excluders. As far as I could tell, the extra light honey was never harmed by the black combs. Pete ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 16:33:56 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: CCD "...Australian honeybees may not be the source..." MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello All, I just was told there recently was an newspaper article in the last three days of a bee die off in Florida. I have got a call in to Florida to confirm. Can a list member confirm? bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:32:20 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Chris Slade Subject: Re: unlimited brood nest MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 28/10/2007 15:37:10 GMT Standard Time, peterlborst@GMAIL.COM writes: On the contrary, the bees seem to prefer to put honey in old combs, given a choice. Or is it that they prefer to put the brood in new comb? Chris ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 17:56:36 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: CCD tonight on 60 minutes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello All, Finally a decent CCD program! My take for those which missed the 60 minutes program: quotes: Dave Hackenberg "We made it through this year but what about in the future" Marla Spivak: "If we have another die off many beekeepers will go out of business" Jeff Pettis when interviewed: The word Australian or IAPV never was said: No die off so far. I agree last year had a dieoff and those effected were hurt deeply however many outfits were not effected. This year there is no big dieoff (except in the mind of Jim Fischer) this year. Jim Fischer email box full of CCD reports? Two sides presented: Dave Hackenberg in the piece blames pesticides for CCD. Jeff Pettis is not so sure (as there would be nothing to research and only Bayer to fight in my opinion). The piece said many beekeepers blame Bayer and I certainly fall into place with those beekeepers. These new pesticides present problems for honeybees! The researchers in the piece say it will take YEARS to solve the last die off mystery. I remind researchers that YOU have never solved any of past dieoffs so we really doubt you will be able to solve last years. Document yes but solve I doubt! Which is basically the view Jeff Pettis takes in the piece. CCD caused by many things and no single thing or simple combination of things. No Australian import finger pointing now! No mention of IAPV by name! Would others which watched add there comments? bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 20:48:28 -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: CCD "...Australian honeybees may not be the source..." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Greetings list, Coupla questions; For Randy Oliver How does; “some degree of risk that the pests are present is inherent in the use of sampling procedures for inspection” arrive at; “once the missed pathogen inevitably slips through?" In other words how do you jump from a “degree of risk” to an “inevitability”? Also, I would like to know what is of more risk to you as a pollinator of almonds, viruses that come from Australia or the ones that come from Michigan via Florida with stopovers in Idaho and Arizona with mutations along the way? For Jim Fischer In the quest for freedom from risk, at what point does the level of certainty required become a de facto ban on imports? If what Peter Detchon said about the rigor of inspections being done on the Aussie side is true, and then on top of that you add very rigorous inspections on the American side would you not be well into the red as far as profitability goes for imported Australian bees? Also, who has more at stake in making sure no bad stuff gets through, the people whose livelihood depends on selling bees to U.S. beekeepers or overworked and under funded U.S. federal inspectors like the ones who were watching toys from China? Let’s assume that the mother of all pathogens threatening bee kind is not more likely to come from without the U.S. than from within. I mean who’s to say a colony of San Diego Africanized bees carrying some deadly virus won’t hitch a ride on one of those Princess Cruise ships headed for the South Pacific, fattening up on leftover maraschino cherry juice all the way? Honestly, I’m not for or against importing bees from Australia. I just think that if you don’t want any risk at all from imports, then you should ban them, period, end of discussion. But then how safe will you be? It’s clear to me from this discussion that no one knows what the risk is, or how to assess it. But neither does anyone know how much safer we are if we do ban imports, because no one knows if the risks from bees and bee pathogens that are already here is at least as great as that from Australian imports. The reason we don’t know these things is because it would cost to much to find out. That is also the reason you will most likely not see a rigorous inspection regime accompanying imports of honey bees. Australian package producers would just go out of business. I think. I Guess that’s more than a coupla questions Steve Noble Go Rockies. sniff… sniff…. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 21:49:34 -0500 Reply-To: james.fischer@gmail.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: Beepocalypse MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Peter took issue with my Nov 2007 Bee Culture article, "Beepocalypse Now?" http://bee-quick.com/reprints/beepocalypse.pdf: > I am highly offended that you are so disrespectful of > our very strict biosecurity protocols for both import > and export of bees and bee products. While I agree that Australia's biosecurity protocols for the IMPORT of bees and bee products are strict and work well, please understand that the USA had exactly the same protocol (NO IMPORTS ALLOWED WITHOUT A QUARANTINE PERIOD) until Australia came along and demanded "market access" under the WTO's non-existent biosecurity rules. But I fail to see how printing and explaining a one page export document could offend, or be "disrespect". I also noticed that you did not attempt to argue with the facts I presented, so I can only conclude that the facts themselves are to blame here. If it helps at all, I was also offended by the facts as they stand. Deeply offended. I have said before that Australia's IMPORT biosecurity, as it is described ON PAPER, is a good model for what the US should implement for all imported goods. As for exports of bees, the bee export certificate says what it says, and is not open to subjective interpretation. > You stated "The document (Health Certificate) flatly states that > Australia is free of three kinds of undesirable bees, and five > different pests and pathogens." I did. It does. > "This is true only if Australia is actually looking for > these bees and pests" That's self-evident - one certainly won't find that which is not being sought, will one? OK, perhaps you think I was too harsh. Well, let's see if I was. Let's take Australia's claim that it is "free of Apis cerana", for example. How's that Apis cerana invasion going? >From what news I get from Australia about it, things don't appear to be going very well at all: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/05/05/1915185.htm May 5, 2007 - "The Department of Primary Industries says it has found an exotic species of bee on a yacht in the Cairns harbour, in far north Queensland." http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/05/07/1916257.htm May 7, 2007 - "The hive was found in the mast of a yacht that had been docked in the far north Queensland port for two years." http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/05/14/1921807.htm May 14, 2007 - "The Queensland Opposition says the response by the Department of Primary Industries to an incursion of exotic bees in Cairns, in the state's far north, has been a disgrace." http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/05/17/1925218.htm May 17, 2007 - "A second hive of suspected Asian honey bees has been found on the waterfront in the far north Queensland city of Cairns in less than two weeks. The hive, inside a cable reel at a boat yard in Portsmith... was located LESS THAN 100 METRES from where the first hive was found nearly a fortnight ago." http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/09/25/2042826.htm Sept 25, 2007 - "The sixth Asian honey beehive has been found in far north Queensland, nearly five months after the pest species was first found. The quarantine watchdog says chances are it was the last nest." That's an interesting quote in the most recent report - "CHANCES ARE IT WAS THE LAST NEST". Well, if they stopped looking, it certainly will be the last nest they find, won't it? It doesn't sound to me like there's much motivation to keep looking. I'm not sure one wants biosecurity managers thinking this way at all. So, I don't think I was anywhere near as harsh as the Queensland Opposition Party members who called the effort "a disgrace". When your own elected officials critique a government program so harshly, I'd conclude that my little article is in fairly respectable company. Yet, somehow, we still get these official-looking documents claiming that Australia is "free from... Apis cerana". Somehow, recent events do not inspire confidence. When does Australia at last admit that it is NOT free of Apis cerana? Six different hives found over a summer does not seem to be sufficient. How much of the Top End has to be infested before Australia is not "free" of them? How many hives of Apis cerana have to be found before those doing the looking realize that "chances are, it is NOT the last nest"? Given Australia's track record with Small Hive Beetle, and the fortnight (2 week) delay between killing of the first Apis cerana hive, and the discovery of the 2nd hive within shouting distance of the first, I see a pattern. The subsequent finds as the summer dragged on tended to make the pattern hard to ignore. But I'm not worried about Apis cerana as much as I am worried about the pests and diseases of Apis cerana, which seem to have no trouble jumping to Apis mellifera. > "No actual tests for any pathogens or diseases are done > and none of the listed diseases and pathogens can be > confirmed without lab analyses." Yes, that is what I said, and it is an accurate statement as applied to Australia's exports of live bees to the US. > To say that we do not inspect or test for these problems > is NOT TRUE. For example, here in Western Australia, > my bees (and those of another 99 beekeepers, ie 100 > beekeepers per annum) are annually inspected on a > random basis for all those problems you described. Western Australia does not export any bees, so tests done to 100 randomly selected hives spread hither and yon across Western Australia's 976,790 square miles don't say anything about the exports. Western Australia's hives are nowhere near the specific apiaries from which bees are exported, and inspecting one hive in every 9,767 square miles on average seems a little less than rigorous. That's like inspecting one and only one hive in each of the following US States: MA = 10,555 sq mi VT = 9,615 sq mi NH = 9,351 sq mi NJ = 8,722 sq mi Using the same logic, one could argue that a random set of 100 people going go to their doctors for regular check-ups and testing as healthily prove that there is no human disease or sickness anywhere in Western Australia! That would be utter nonsense, wouldn't it? > as far as I am aware there are currently no exporters > of bees from WA to USA, you can see we pay a high > price to maintain our reputation in case someone like > yourself wants proof that we are what we say we are! Allow us to help. The USDA Beltsville Bee Lab will run samples of bees and/or comb through their standard battery of tests for beekeepers WORLDWIDE at no charge. Read this for the specifics: http://www.masterbeekeeper.org/pdf/diagnosis.pdf Yeah, its my tax dollars working for you, but its the least I can do, if $27 a year in random years is too large a burden to know about specific diseases and pests. Given the program as described, how did Small Hive Beetle escape detection for "at least a year" (as admitted here http://www.zeta.org.au/~anbrc/small_hive_beetle.html) until it had gotten into the domestic queen and package producers, and spread to New South Wales and Queensland? Small Hive Beetle is an obvious external pest of bees, easy for even the novice beekeeper to detect. As it escaped detection for at least a year, and spread far and wide before it was detected (not by any official effort, but by a beekeeper slightly more alert than his peers) you can understand how I remain somewhat unimpressed. > Behind the scenes, the states departments of agriculture > are very diligent in policing Biosecurity protocols, > which in turn are then checked and certified by the > Federal agency AQIS. I'm not sure what any of the above has to do with running bees through standard lab tests, but I am certain that any specific tests on the hives from which exported bees come from would have been mentioned by now. Funny how no one has mentioned any data being available, even in the face of rather pointed questions from US Senators, and during the high-profile forum of Apimondia. > The visual inspection about which you are so concerned, is in fact the > last in a whole chain of checks and inspections which underpin our > Biosecurity status, While these tests may "underpin" your "biosecurity status", these tests are NOT done on the hives from which exported bees are bred and shaken, so they say nothing about the actual bees that get shipped. If any tests have ever been done on hives in the operations that export bees, the results of these tests have not been made public, nor has Australia offered any assurance that such tests will be done in addition to the so-called "visual inspections". Given the hints and clues provided by two different teams of researchers working independently (the first team announcing preliminary results in April 2007 at a Working group meeting, and the second team, announcing preliminary results in the journal "Science"), there is cause to be wary of further imports of bees. I don't think the solution is to simply ban the imports, but sampling and testing is clearly required on both ends of every shipment, if for no other reason that to protect the innocent from accusations. > I understand that you are not advocating for a ban on > imports of bees from Oz to USA Don't be so hasty to assume that I will not change my mind. My position has remained unchanged since before the first bees arrived at our ports - imports should be allowed, but only with sampling and testing of every pallet. This has not been done on the US end yet due to the fact that bees don't get no respect. But the discovery that the assurances made by Australia about the exported bees are based upon nothing more than a dangerous mix of hubris and "visual inspections" prompts serious reconsideration. Unless such tests on both the exporting and importing ends of the process can be implemented quickly, I have no choice but to join the voices calling for an outright ban. Without such tests, there are fingers being pointed. With such tests, we would have facts. I can't speak for you, but I'd rather have facts. > Your apology would be much appreciated. Apology? But you confirmed the facts and the conclusions presented in the article! I owe you a thank-you, and co-author credit in the next article I must now write as a result of the revelations you offered. The title will be "Hubris". I should also thank you for explaining the rigorous testing program that tests, on average, one hive every 10,000 square miles or so in Western Australia, and explaining that this testing program is intended to "underpin" your "biosecurity status". What we need is tests that verify the actual health of the specific bees that are exported. Game 4 - Bottom of the 4th, 1 - 0 Baaawstaaaan! ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 13:17:07 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: Unlimited Brood Nest Comments: To: Lloyd Spear MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Lloyd & All, All beekeeping is local and many methods to keep bees. I offer an opinion. >Disadvantages of using excluders include a greater tendency of the bees to swarm (unless the brood nest is very large), This is mostly an old wives tale. Commercial beekeepers return wet supers to hives so bees will move into supers. Bees have got little reason to move into dry supers or supers with foundation. Supers do not help overcrowding if the bees do not move into the supers. Queens under a queen excluder have plenty of room to lay in two deep broodnests (more than enough for a prolific queen) UNLESS the brood nest is plugged with honey/pollen. A problem common to over feeding the winter before! Over feeding bees is common with new beekeepers. >and in years with a slow trickle of honey the bees will tend to pack the brood nest and never get into the supers. The answer in my opinion is prolific Italian queens. Another answer is the Immirie shim above the excluder or at least a top entrance to supers. Reduce the bottom entrance and open wider the top entrance above excluder in severe cases. > Then in mid-June he runs the bees (including the queen) out of the supers with a repellent, puts an excluder under the lower medium, and adds another super or two. Old outdated method but has been around for years. > He also claims that putting light honey in black cells has no effect on the honey color. "The color of the nectar that goes into the cell is the color of the honey that comes out". I get paid by the light color of my honey and have found the opposite. There is one exception which is if you put a super of dark comb on and pull and extract in a week or so little difference is noted. Leave light honey in the old dark brood comb for a couple months and you will see a difference. At least I did and one reason I continually rotate out old super comb which has had brood in it. A common method in the Dakotas is to use deeps of foundation , get drawn and use as supers for three years, and then rotate into the brood nest. The old wives tale that queens prefer dark comb does not hold water for the most part. Bees can clean and polish a cell of new comb faster than old dark comb. Research has shown 45 minutes for a dark cell and about half as long for new comb. I personally want the most prolific bee I can find. Plug those cells with eggs! Not a picky queen which looks and hardly lays. I hive tool those queens! Sincerely, Bob Harrison Most posts rejected lately about BC article. I think the same must be happening for Jim Fischer! Moderators know best! -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ******************************************************