Hi Bob,

I'm in general agreement with you on most of what you say about viruses and
bees.  However, a few points could stand a little clarification.

>
> >Carrick proved bees can handle *all* known virus when healthy and varroa
> are not present.


The above statement is a bit oversimplified.  Bees also become susceptible
to viruses if they are infected by nosema or tracheal mites. Bees also are
susceptible to viruses such as sacbrood even in the absence of
parastites--there have been epidemics of colonies dying from sacbrood in
mite-free Australia. Bees also can be susceptible to a new mutation of a
virus, or a virus that jumps from another species of bee or insect.

>
> >Ball & Carrick proved that if you control varroa you control virus issues.


I've corresponded with Dr Carrick also.  Viruses caused colony kills in
England before varroa was present.  Varroa simply made viruses more of a
constant issue.

>
> >In my opinion a couple years of CCD team looking into virus and CCD is not
> going to change decades or research and experiments by Bailey, Ball &
> Carrick.


No one doubts the conclusions of their research.

>
> >  Could some sort of medicine be developed and fed to bees to prevent say
> KBV. The answer was no!


Unfortunately, you asked the question to the wrong researcher!  There have
been giant steps made recently toward developing an insect virus "vaccine."
I will be explaining in an upcoming article.   However, such a medicine will
still only be a stopgap measure.  Long term, bees need to incorporate
immunity to each virus into their genome, as has been illustrated by recent
research.  This process of bee/virus coevolution has been going on for
millions of years.  The only bees and viruses that we see today are the
offspring of the survivors.

>
> >The answer was to control varroa mites and keep bees healthy with good
> nutrition. reduce bee stress.


Still a good answer, but the genetic component shouldn't be overlooked.

>
> >Most commercial beeks are *now* making their own pollen sub from recipes
> passed through the grapevine and off the net. Using real eggs etc.


Of course they are, and still would even if the absolutely perfect feed were
available over the counter!  Some of the formulations developed by
beekeepers may be wastes of money, and some may be excellent.

Beekeepers can test for themselves.  Problem is, most beekeeper "tests"
neglect to minimize variables and to run a control group.  In my area, we
are reaching the end of any appreciable pollen flow for the season, so I am
setting up a trial of various supplements--commercial and home made.  We
have just finished equalizing 60 singles to six frames of bees, and four
frames of foundation, all in the same yard, all with fresh queens.  We will
be testing four supplement formulations against the control of brewers yeast
and sucrose--a basic well-proven California/Hawaii protein supplement.  I
hope to determine whether I gain any advantage by feeding more expensive
commercially formulated or fancy home recipe supplement in an area where a
minimal natural input of pollen occurs.

>
> >Instead of the CCD team rushing to look at dead hives they need to go and
> look at beeks which have got hives boiling with bees. Sitting their hives
> right next to beeks with hives crashing with CCD and not having problems.


That thought has occurred to the various CCD "teams," and they are doing
just that.  Looking for differences between healthy operations and colonies,
and sick ones.

>
> >Sure many beeks are having problems but just as many are not!


Those that are having problems have taken tremendous financial hits.  They
may be a bit more enthusiastic about finding out what caused their colonies
to die, and hopefully how they can prevent it in the future.  Many of them
felt that they had healthy bees with mites under control, but their colonies
still crashed.

Bob, I don't expect any magic from the CCD research.  Good research
sometimes takes time--try not to get frustrated!   I have seen that recent
research has given us much greater understanding of the state of our bees,
the levels of pesticide contamination and their effects (or lack thereof),
the types of viruses and parasites present, and a better understanding of
colony health and the bee immune system.  I think that the research has been
well worth the cost and effort, and I applaud those researchers who are
diligently trying to answer our questions.

As far as what a beekeeper can do today, you are absolutely right--good
nutrition and minimize parasite levels.  I'd also suggest maintaining some
genetic diversity in your operation, so that if a "new" virus comes along,
you will have less chance of losing all your colonies.

Speaking of parasites, I'm hearing of some sky-high nosema counts (in the
multiple tens of millions) from the Midwest--far higher than what I'm
typically seeing.  Bob, what kinds of numbers are you seeing or hearing of?

Randy Oliver

****************************************************
* General Information About BEE-L is available at: *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm   *
****************************************************