>
>
>> As Gavin pointed out, if anything, the recent pesticide study points  to
>> the most frequent and highest levels of chemicals being those used by
>> beekeepers.
>
> Not sure that's the message the beekeeping industry wants to  send to
>> the public.
>
>
> Here is the beekeeping industry answer and has been since the start of
> CCD.
>
> All chemicals used in a bee have will show on the mass spec. Fluvalinate
> has been used by U.S. beekeepers as a legal mitacide for over 20 years.
> Coumaphos for 12 years.
>
> You put the above out for BEE-L discussion (with the implication that the
> industry has something to hide. ).
> question:
> Why would not fluvalinate & coumaphos be the highest level of chemical
> found
> in a bee hive? These are LEGAL treatments and sold to beekeepers still!
>
> Also please explain why beekeepers which have NEVER used fluvalinate or
> coumaphos report CCD? CCD is still being seen in hives which have never
> had those legal chemicals used.

The industry has never disputed the study findings ONLY the conclusions
based on hypothesis of *exactly* how significant the levels are to the
current hive loss.

We know the LD50 of those LEGAL approved chemicals on bees in beeswax. From
reading study results few wax samples reached LD50 levels (some did) and I
can say from my experience unless LD50 is reached the bees seem to do fine
in many of those boxes. Years ago I had a different opinion (based mainly on
researcher hypothesis) but time has shown the hypothesis that CCD is
influenced greatly by the levels of beekeeper applied chemicals is highly
suspect.

I would bet money that if a hive with high levels of those chemicals in wax
but yet under the LD50 were installed with bees the bees would survive quite
nicely. LOGIC is on my side.

Fact:
I changed ALL the comb in my brood boxes with comb which has NEVER seen
those chemicals.
Bell Hill Honey still runs comb which saw YEARS of use of both.

It appears i wasted a bunch of money. Although our brilliant handlers of the
millions in CCD research money were not receptive to my idea of research
*on a simple test easy to use field test*  which the commercial beekeeper
could do to test the levels of those chemicals in brood wax I think such a
test would be helpful.

However the money was given to  Harvard (4 million dollars) to *try* to
build a hive of robotic bees!
Because the money was borrowed and will be paid off by our grandchildren
what did those robotic bees cost. CREATED 2 NEW JOBS is being reported in
the stimulus reporting.

Possible future news report:
In the year 2015 half the crops needing pollination went without bees and
China refused to send bees to help crises. Instead only import the food we
eat..

Chemical companies blame beekeepers for the current problems!

Government answer lies in robotic bees being experimented with at Harvard.


> Sincerely,
> Bob Harrison
>

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html

Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm