I have a copy of the "ABC etc" copyright 1913.  After reading that book it really is remarkable about all the good intentioned ways people think up to "improve" the hobby when those same issues were well studied over 100 years ago in many cases.  The big exception of course is varroa which was barely a brand new species at that time and it would be many years before it got to the US.

One example is the current rage with small cell foundation.  Cell size and cell bottom shape had been well studied by 1913.  Foundation was produced with a 5.1 mm spacing for the simple reason that it was best accepted by the bees.  This was backed up by historical measurements that showed this to be the natural size European bees produced for worker brood.  Over the next 20 odd years there was a lot of work looking at larger brood cells with the idea if a larger bee could be produced it would have a longer proboscis enabling it to access flowers only bumbles can generally use.  Success was moderate at best and the fad went away.  Yet today the big fad in back yard bee keepers is to go in the other direction to unnatural small cell sizes for some reason I am totally unable to grasp.  Maybe next decade a guru will come along and large cells will be the fad again?

Back in 1913 foundation was viewed as perhaps the most important advance in bee keeping since Langstroth discovered the concept of bee space which allowed him to build hives with removable and interchangeable frames.  Foundation solved all kinds of problems minimizing the work involved in bee keeping.  Yet today another fad among back yard bee keepers is to go foundationless for reasons I am totally unable to grasp.

Is there something in our society that says all older work is meaningless and should be thrown out automatically and replaced with some new idea just because the person has read zero history on the topic?  I have nothing against innovation.  In fact doing experiments is fun for me.  I run all plastic foundation in wood frames and view it as a real improvement over wax foundation.  The all plastic frames are a nice idea to test and I find I do not like them nearly as well as wood.  An example of a idea I feel is a bomb.  I am in the north and run enough volume in both production hives and nucs so the bees always have lots of stores so I do not have to worry about constant inspections to check feed levels versus mainly single deeps 100 years ago.  I think antibiotics to treat EFB are a great improvement over the hoops people jumped thru 100 years ago attempting to deal with the problem.  I think controlling mite levels is as important for my bees as controlling parasite levels on any animal is important.  I am not a happy camper when my dog brings fleas in the house and deal with them also.  But, not by rubbing the dog with rhubarb leaves which I saw recently proposed as a hive addition to treat mites.  

I have not had any luck with crystals probably due to wrong source.  I do find chanting nonsense calmly while working the bees is a great help.  In a management course I took once this was recommended as a solution to problems when all else had failed as it was a socially acceptable way to talk to yourself.

Dick NE Ohio

             ***********************************************
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