Hi to all on BEE-L

Jim has written some intereting comments that I have been
following. As some of you know, I wear two hats. On one
side I am a biological beekeeper trying to manage bees in a
harmonious state with Nature with out the usage of various
treatments. On the otherside I am president of the Southern
Arizona Beekeepers Association in our state, our states
largest active industry assoc, and therefore I have many
other beekeeper interests to look out for.

Jim wrote some interesting comments:

It also does not really matter if New Zealand and Australia
are allowed to offer queens and packages to US beekeepers.
They are simply examples of a trend, and it is the trend
that is troubling, not the specific countries currently at
issue.

Reply:
This I think is more troubling to some from a competition
standpoint, rather then risk standpoint.I myself see little
problem from competition.

Jim further wrote:
What we should have learned by now, and what should be
considered with care before overturning a law prohibiting
imports of bees and queens that has stood since 1922,
includes the following:

Reply:
First of all, it is my personal belief that the law in 1922
was implimented to cover tracks and pass blame, more than
to prohibit imports of bees and queens, or the USDA would
not have so vigorously brought in bees all those years for
research from outside of our own country from all over the
world.

Jim also wrote:
1)  No one can know what pest or disease will be "serious".
     Anyone who claims to know is a fool. .
.Therefore,reliance on a
     list of "known serious" pests and diseases is fuzzy
     thinking to the point of being willful incompetence.

     Sadly, exactly such a "list" is the primary basis for
the
     pending decision on NZ and AUS package and bee
imports,
     and if left unchallenged, will be the basis for all
future
decisions.

Reply:
Bees on a harmonious system of field management are NO
THREAT. Bees already unbalanced and not in a harmonious
state are though in danger, for they are prone to pick up
maladies due to the very way they are kept and managed.
Such is the state of US beekeeping today. No list can
protect USA bees from maladies if they are kept in stress
induced situations just by the type of field management
they receive daily.

Jim also wrote:
2)  Even when we know a pest is serious, USA beekeepers and
     government regulators lack the strength of character
to
     impose inter-state quarantines, and lack the budgets
to
     aggressively enforce limits on the inter-state bee
movements
     that clearly spread these pests.

reply:
I do not think inter-state quarantines is/are the solution
for it masks the actual field managment practices giving
rise to this situation that beekeepers are doing and
creating themselves!

Jim added:
     It is clear that quarantines at least slow down the
spread of
     pests, moreso when the quarantines can be imposed at
     barrier that cannot be "bypassed" at whim by
unscrupulous
     beekeepers.  Examples would be the Canadian border and
     the New Zealand "line", both which have proven to be
effective. . .

reply:
No barrier has ever stopped a problem, but instead only
made it worse in the long run.

Jim further wrote:
     3)  Different strains of the "same" disease or pest
can be resistant to approved treatments, and can thus be
much more serious as a result.  Which would YOU rather
have?  Varroa that you can control with Apistan, or varroa
that is resistant to both Apistan and Checkmite?

reply:
For the long-haul, no dependency on various dopes that play
out and make a bigger mess to clean up. Beekeepers cannot
afford this.Besides various treatments are not necessary on
bees kept properly to begin with harmonious with Nature.


Jim also wrote:
     Sadly, no one is considering "strains" of diseases or
pests, thereby ignoring basic biology.  So much for
"science-based analyses" as defined in the GATT and NAFTA.

reply:
While much is to be done here, and yes basic biology
relative to honeybees is being ignored, all these various
strains of diseases and pests really are not serious, if
bees are kept on a harmonious system of beekeeping relative
to Nature. I think the problem here, is no one is trying to
keep bees biologically, and it isn't really taught. What is
taught instead are quick fixes and gimmickry that don't
work in a real world.

Jim wrote:
4)  In time, pests and diseases can spread through even the
tightest control systems.  Just ask New Zealand about
varroa.

reply:
Yes, but I think other factors ralative to man were at play
here and not necessarily on the part of beekeepers.

Jim wrote:
 when one exports bee products, one has an inherent
conflict of interest in regard to admiting that one "has"
certain pests or diseases.  This applies not only to
beekeepers, but countries as a whole.

a)  They are asked to "prove" that a tangible risk exists,
     and if they cannot, they are being pressured to
approve
     the imports.

b)  They are apparently limited to considering only "known"
risks,even when very recent history (small hive beetle)
proves that the unknown is much more risky than what is
known.

c)  Once they rubber-stamp their approval on imports, they
are dependent upon the exporting county's controls, since
one cannot inspect packages or queens at the point of entry
     without facilities that simply do not exist.  In the
current case at hand, New Zealand and Australia have shown
the world that
     they could not keep known devastating pests out of
their countries.
     How can we be expected to believe that they can keep
pests in?

Reply:
I think actually, in looking hard, they may be better at it
then the USA! though I don't agree with their recent trends
of doping for shortterm fixes. They were in a position to
go for the long haul and somehow failed, but I could be
wrong as they have held in the North and in the South time
is more lenient.

I must say Jim you have made me look hard here on BEE-L,
from my first look at reading on resistant strains of AFB
and EFB to the above.

It seems they fight to get bees here, we fight to get ours
back into Canada and between states we fight to move bees
interstate, all based on problems of that can arise from
diseases and pests that if the bees were kept naturally
would be no problem.Hence man-made invented problems.

Question: Are we creating the problems for work and
something to do for job security? How big really are these
problems if left to settle out? They either live or die. If
they die (the problems along with the bees) then what is
left simply picks up the pieces and goes on. Drastic maybe,
but in the end I think it is coming to that!

I really see no problems personally with imports of
honeybees, but for others here in S. Arizona I can see
questions as to whether or not competition is perceived.
Right now, Many see it as another source for bees. Is this
good? Depends! As for disease and pests. Again the problems
relate to how one seems to keep bees. If naturally, I see
no problems, if artifially, many can be thought of. But is
this fair to the bees themselves? Without man would there
be problems, I think not.

Sincerely,

Dee





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
http://finance.yahoo.com