>     I remember sitting in a bee meeting several years ago where Allen
> kind of got on his soap box and talked at length about the movement of
> bees and the correlating spread of diseases and problems. As I recall,
> he kind of shook his head and said we need to develop means to get away
> from this type of beekeeping. It has been too long ago now to recall
> specifics of what was said but I recall the intent was to discourage the
> wholesale movement of bees. This appears to be the opposite of what is
> being said now.

That is true.  I remember that meeting well, because it was a turning point in
my life in many ways.  At that meeting I was on the losing side and had to yield
to the majority and trust the wisdom of my fellow beekeepers in a democratic
vote.

It was a close decision, and many did not accept the will of the people and went
away bitter, and some prominent beekeepers were isolated and broken by the
experience.

Some people stand for this, and some for that, and some others try to stand for
what is reasonable in the situation in which they find themselves.  They realise
that there is no sense fighting on after a battle is lost.

In that particular context, we had to either fight the mites or manage a
retreat.  I was for fighting one more battle at that point, because we had all
decided to make a stand and invested a lot in it -- and immediate defeat did not
seem at all inevitable -- with what we thought we knew.  In retrospect what we
knew was wrong.

I think I know a lot of things, but when I am outvoted, I can either say "They
are all wrong." or "They are smart, honest, successful people, so maybe this
will come out okay.  I'd better try to see things their way and at least work
with them."

Somewhat uncharacteristically for me at that time, I made a deliberate decision
to cheerfully respect the majority, and I've never made a better choice.  It
turned out my fellow beekeepers' majority decision was right, when all the facts
were eventually known.  We had already lost the battle.  Mites were more
widespread than we thought and there was no real will to resist anyhow.

When Tracheal mites first appeared in the USA, no one knew how serious a problem
they would be, and before long the decision was made to close the Canada/US
border.  This decision was some time in the making, and involved as much emotion
as reason.  I think I have referred here before to another more private meeting
and how no seemed to have thought of the impact on many of our friends in the
industry -- in Canada, and in the southern US -- if the border were shut.  And,
for that matter no one foresaw how rich it would make other beekeepers in New
Zealand and Australia -- or Hawaii.

As it proved later, the embargo was a case of closing the barn door after the
horse is gone, because the mites were already in Alberta and other places by the
time closure took place, but no one knew that, because the levels were below
detection.

Absolute detection methods were -- and are -- not simple and/or foolproof.  Some
of us believed in these methods more than they proved to deserve and made
decisions based on the belief that we could detect the tracheal mites and manage
their progress overland.  Time proved us wrong.  There were other factors
besides the natural spread of the mites to consider, even with the border
closed.

Anyhow, during the time we saw the border decision coming we all had to decide
how to bet our livelihoods.  Some of us bet on the closure happening and got to
work perfecting wintering.  This was a big investment in learning and material,
but those who foresaw the closure knew it was necessary to be prepared.  Our
government provided some assistance.

Others simply did not believe border closure would ever happen and were caught
flat-footed.  Having killed their bees (and having no knowledge of wintering
even if they had kept them) they had no bees to operate the next year. Many
simply went broke.

Therefore there was terrific political pressure by those who had been left
without bees to re-open the border forthwith and for years after.  On the other
side, those who had foreseen the closure and had spent a lot of money and
resources to learn to operate without incoming American packages saw that their
investment could be quickly lost if tracheal mites were imported and distributed
quickly throughout Canada with packages and queens.  At the time particularly,
and perhaps even at present, tracheal mites can spell mass death to
overwintering bees.  Everyone knew and believed that, at that time.

A schism developed and there were two factions that did not communicate well.
There was a mistrust of one region for another.  Some people made petty
political points on each side at the cost of our unity and in some case,
friendships.  Paul Van Westendorp was in the middle, along with the ABA.

We must remember too, at that time no one had bred tracheal mite resistant bees,
no one even had proven treatments for tracheal mites, so we were both ignorant
and vulnerable.  In fact, disregarding the wintering question, no one even knew
for sure what the effects of tracheal mites would be on bees in Canadian
conditions in spring and summer, except that it would not be beneficial.

Having already done damage to the package operators by closing the border, were
the associations and regulators to now damage the wintering people by opening it
again -- too late for many of the package guys?  Or were they to monitor for,
and control outbreaks and play out the hand they had chosen?

Given that we had chosen, deliberately or not, the path of detection and
control, many of us felt committed to it -- until several influential beekeepers
suddenly were found to have the tracheal mite.  At that point the special
meeting that is mentioned was called. Right during spring work, as I recall.

Everyone got to speak, and the topic went around and around. Lots of arguments
were made, but it was an amazingly civil meeting. Basically, the big guys who
had TM said, "We like the bees we have, and even if they have TM, we don't want
to kill them.  Even the Alberta government gives us full compensation (which was
generously offered) we don't want to kill them".

It was pretty much a standoff, and that is when the soapbox talk to which Leon
refers took place.  I indicated that I thought we could make the plan work, and
that since 99% of us at that time only moved within small areas, the spread
could be managed, and perhaps reversed.

I was personally committed to stay-put beekeeping and, perhaps if everyone else
were to agree, it might have worked.  I don't know, but a few wanted to keep
rolling and being free traders, and we couldn't/wouldn't stop them.  They liked
to go hundreds or thousands of miles.  I don't think it made them more money
than staying home, but it was just their way.

A few years later, the same guys insisted on bringing in varroa and spreading it
around. BUT beekeeepers are beekeepers.  We are stubborn lot who often insist on
doing things our own wrong way, and we respect that in each other.

So, I now move bees up to 250 miles to accommodate the needs of the seed
growers, and I have all the mites.  I still have my friends and I still disagree
with them about what they chose for us.  But we are friends.

allen

>     My question is: What has changed your view on this, Allen? or...was
> I totally off base with my impression of your comments of yore?  :)

?