> since it wasn't the bees, there were only TWO other
> possibilities... the mites were different OR the life 
> style of the bees was different. That is, smaller 
> colonies and more swarming. 

I guess someone (even Dr. Seeley himself) could repeat 
Seeley's test(s) using tree-hollow "bee gums", or hives 
with limited space (such as a single medium super), and 
allowing the hives to swarm as they wish, if they thought
that "the secret" could be "management" rather than
"the mites".

No, wait - if we stop and think slowly, we can already
prove to ourselves that small cavity sizes and constant 
swarming would be unlikely to make much difference by
themselves:

a) Both factors are common aspects of "beekeeper neglect".

b) We clearly have a lot of that out there.  Always have.

c) Those hives don't magically survive any better than
   "well-managed" hives, in fact, they crash at a higher
   rate than well-managed hives.

Therefore, if "neglect" allowed hives to survive varroa,
we have had several decades to notice this, and it
would have stuck out like a sore thumb.

There ya go - one Gedankenexperiment, on rye, hold the 
mayo.

> They just won't transfer to commercial beekeeping.

Or even hobby beekeeping.  Putting out constant swarms 
is about the fastest way to end up having beekeeping 
banned or regulated in one's town or county.

******************************************************
* Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at:          *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm  *
******************************************************