Good article, and a useful insight.

> On a semi technical note, even if the standard deviation for same stock 
> queen performance is fairly "high"(which I suspect it is),

Agreed, and we are not just dealing with one population, so the math may be 
impossible and we may have to rely on intuition.

Using just one batch of queens introduces a great deal of uncertainty if the 
goal is to evaluate the stock as a whole for reasons that most of us will 
find obvious, so we usually stagger purchase.  That one thing will make 
batch problems stick out like a sore thumb, and batch problems are not that 
unusual.

Then there is the variation year to year due to breeder selection.  Things 
happen.  I hear for example, that in the Saskatraz project most if not all 
the 'original' queens were winter killed recently.  Winter kill can happen 
for many reasons, not all related to the stock in question, but it will 
definitely steer a program in subsequent years.   I have friends who 
purchase stock form that rather variable pool and do their own selection 
from it -- and are quite happy.  Others are just spooked by the lack of 
uniformity.

Another major breeder was shipping queens infected with nosema, unbeknownst 
to the operator or customers until someone decide to sacrifice some $20 
queens on arrival to discover that fact after performance issues were 
discovered to be widespread.

> Finally, I offer the two step process for judging queens as a practical 
> workable approach for the vast vast majority of beeks who are simply 
> unable to study large numbers to gain hard statistical info.I feel this is 
> especially needed for testing queens from producers who breed for varroa 
> resistance. Queen breeders have been known to  exhibit irrationally 
> defensive behavior in response to certain stimuli (such as criticism of 
> our stock). I think if buyers would use this test it would help to calm 
> our beehavior:)

Fortunately we have sideliners and hobbyists who rush in where commercial 
beekeepers fear to tread and who actually new stocks and will try to work 
without a chemical safety net.  As survivors emerge, others get bolder in 
trying these things.

One of my regular diary readers wrote this the other day:

> One more comment, on the philosophical side. For the past few years, I've 
> been trying to figure out what is the essential difference between a small 
> commercial operation and a large sideliner or hobbyist operation. Your 
> diary was one of the sources I used to hunt for the answer. Interestingly, 
> I think your recent postings have confirmed the answer. The main 
> difference, IMO, is the commercial guy does not take any chances that are 
> not necessary, or at least he has calculated the implications and is 
> prepared to live with them. We see the effect of this attitude in feeding, 
> disease treatment, and culling of dinks.

I cross back and forth across that line.  Some regard these ideas like 
religion, but to my mind, a beekeeper who wishes to remain a beekeeper, 
rather than become an armchair beekeeper and theorist, must be pragmatic not 
dogmatic.

Personally, I wrote a course which included an IPM section a half-decade 
back.  It is amazing how writing a course forces one to learn the topic.  It 
forced me to research and examine the concept, then condense it to simple 
practices.

IPM works and is the best approach I know.  It is the middle ground between 
"Dose everything all the time" and "Let Nature take its course", and 
maximizes economic productivity and sustainability (whatever that may be).

Using selected stocks (ideally more than one) with known resistance or 
tolerance to various pests and challenges is an IPM cornerstone.  Monitoring 
is another.

In IPM, no one aspect can be expected to prevent economic damage for the 
many reasons constantly discussed here.  Stock, management, nutrition, 
monitoring and treatment are all links in a chain.  With luck we seldom get 
to the treatment option, although our hand is on our holster.  The treatment 
option is always there, but we get to know our enemies intimately, since we 
practice restraint and wait until we see the whites of their eyes before we 
shoot..

Maybe someday the SD you ponder will drop, the susceptible tail will be 
truncated and stock alone will be robust enough that we can concentrate less 
on the other inputs, but at this point, we -- as commercials -- need to 
always be on guard against and mitigate  the damage and loss that can come 
from the tail of the curve, even with superior stock.

Hobbyists have the luxury of taking the hits as they come and their reports 
will be the first harbingers of the new day when stock alone can be trusted 
to eliminate many of the treatments.  Until then, those of us who are 
attempting to maximize profit from our bees will have treatments at the 
ready and be quick to intervene when we see a situation developing. 

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

Access BEE-L directly at:
http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/wa-LSOFTDONATIONS.exe?A0=BEE-L