Hi Bob,
>    Sorry, I'm a little confused and maybe haven't been paying as much
> attention as I should. What is the erroneous assertion that you are
> correcting, or theory that you are disproving? Has the Tucson bee lab been
> claiming that they have developed a bee that is immune to varroa?

Dr. Erickson at a meeting Ralph attended made the statement that he
allready had bees at the Arizona bee lab which had acceptable levels of
varroa tolerance at 12 -16 mites per 100 bees.
Now go to my post of Monday April 17th for my response to Ralphs post
and we should all be on the same page.

>    Tolerance and resistance are not the same thing as total immunity, it just
> means that the hives can withstand higher loads of mites, go longer between
> treatments, or require less toxic treatments. Even the Russian bees—which
> have been coevolving with varroa for 150 years—are coming with to us with the
> caveat that we should treat with formic once a year.

Maybe there is a logical explanation as to why when the lab had a open
house April 13th. the hives Dr. Erickson was talking about had strips
and paddies in. I have got conformation from those in attendence on
April 13th that was the case. I believe the research is worthwhile and i
believe Dr. Erickson is a excellent researcher. In my post i said in my
OPINION 12 to 14 mites per bee is not acceptable and if it is why did
those hives have strips and paddies in when those researchers from other
countries toured the lab. My information comes from another country by a
person which was there.
My only point is not to put down the lab or Dr. Erickson but to discuss
if he really has got bees which will survive Varroa likes he claims. I
believe at 12-16 mites per 100 bees he needs to go back to the drawing
board. Thats not the result beekeepers were hoping for. At least not me!

Bob Harrison U.S.A.