BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Kerry Clark 784-2225 fax (604) 784 2299" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Discussion of Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 24 Oct 1994 10:28:00 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
   Hello Hugo
 
   I hope a better answer to your questions arrives, but I could send a few
   bits.
 
   I remember the range of  8,000 to 10,000: that is the ratio of
   fluvalinate pick up in hive wax, compared to what is picked up in
   "honey". I have  a paper here if you want a reference.
   Much of the fluvalinate in "honey" may be from the minute pieces of wax
   which remain in the honey. I don't remember whether the above figures
   assume wax fragments, or whether the honey was carefully removed from
   cells without the possibility of wax fragments.
 
   The insistent instructions for use of Apistan may well result from the
   type of samples used to secure regulatory approval. If the honey samples
   found to be acceptable were taken from hives treated only before honey
   supers were present, regulators would insist that that practice be
   included in the instructions. I have heard that the company is
   considering an application for approval for Apistan use during the honey
   flow. Indeed I have seen advertising literature,( from Europe I assumed)
   that said Apistan was approved for use any time of year. Not the case in
   Canada.
 
 
   Kerry Clark, Apiculture Specialist
   B.C. Ministry of Agriculture
   1201 103 Ave
   Dawson Creek B.C.
        V1G 4J2  CANADA          Tel (604) 784-2225     fax (604) 784-2299
   INTERNET [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2