On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 21:09:03 -0500, Bob Harrison <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>I do hear rumors of ignorant beekeepers using higher and higher doses of the
>old favorites but those telling me never seem to know of the beekeepers and
>it seems only a rumor. Certainly not happening in the circles I travel in.
>
give the Mn dept Ag a call and find out how their shop rag inspections are going this year. I hear
the citations are up over last year. not all of these boys have MN plates on their trucks either. 90%
of the ciations are not published. They news released the big operator last year for show.
>>likewise stressful migratory practices will likely continue $$.
>
>If you do not want China to supply all your food instead of only "little
>Fluffy's" pet food ( how is Little Fluffy doing? Maybe he/she did not die
>but what are the long term effects of the China dog food?)then you better
>hope migratory beekeeping does not end.
All I'm saying is beeks will do what they feel they need to do to bring home the bacon and take
care of their bills. My thoughts have more to do with government funding, CCD and making some
real changes. Bob I know you are smart guy and you don't expect a silver bullet to come out of the
CCD working group where all of a sudden all is well in the bee yard. We probably all agree
beekeeping is in trouble and too many hives are being lost.
So my point is why toss a bunch of CCD money at the problem if mite management is a source of
big pay back and what to do about stressful migratory practices is a Ag policy issue. These seem
like real issues with attainable goals that we should solve or we are just folling oursleves in the
long haui. Meanwhile waiting for the answer to CCD and thinking we're going to fix the plight of
the honeybee if we solve CCD makes no sense to me.
******************************************************
* Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm *
******************************************************
