FWIW,
A minmalist with only forty hives,I seldom "inspect" my bees, knowing that
almost all the bee problems can be detected and observed by looking at them
closely at the entrance: smell and visiual inspection. Indeed, "You can
observe a lot by *wathcing* them."
An expereinced beekeeper, I beleive, should be able to tell pretty much
what's going on, year-around, inside the hive without having to open the
boxes every cotton-pickin' weekend, especailly under smokescreen, which I
never use. For I too believe that "the bees will make honey *in spite of*
the [freakin'] beekeeper."
For medication, I give them a minimal, once-a-year, treatment although I
now am moving toward non-treatment. Sure, since my livlihood does not
depend on my hobby, I can do this. What's a few dead colonies? You can
always make them up in the spring if you are into the numbers game.
I know it will be impossible, but in my lifetime, I would like to see
NON_TREATMENT worldwide, a true grand experiment in a global scale. (I am
not so naive not to realize that money is the bottom line) What about if we
all STOP doping them altogether?
Why can't we simply let them BEE if we are truly shooting for Natural or
Organic or Raw BeeKeeping? These types of super- and hyper- analyses, this
hair-splitting measuring, poking, turning, electirifying, excessive doping--
strike me as the typical of Western rationalism at heart: we know all
through poking. Almost all aspects of beekeeping intrinsically contains
two opposing answers, at least. Consider the efficacy of the Screened
Bottom Boards, for instance.
Bees ought to be the Masters in beekeeping, not the beekeeper.
Humdinger from Shawnee, Oklahoma
|