Ron/Eefje van Mierlo wrote:

> But, why are you still only discussing the application and application
> methods of chemicals?

Because OA is an approved use in many countries and it works.

> Your attitude as observed by me is:
> It can only be any good and we will only try and use it if it comes
> from a chemical plant.

Actually, if you look through the archives you will find many of those
who recently posted about Apistan and OA are in the forefront of
non-chemical beekeeping.  Just look at any of Allen Dicks, Bob Harrisons
and my posts. The desire is for non-chemical beekeeping.

> Why are you so desperately supporting the chemical industry?
>
I have stock in the wood bleach industry. Intend to become rich when
everyone buys wood bleach.(Just kidding but I could not resist.)

>  so at least take the cleanest alternatives available!

Since both OA and Formic Acid occur naturally in honey, how should we go
about removing them from honey? Plus, neither OA or Formic seems to be
around in any concentrations greater than naturally occurring 30 days
after application. So it is probably the "cleanest" of the mite
treatments. Cannot say that about thymol, which many "natural"
beekeepers use, since "thyme is a natural plant so thymol is a natural
product"- straight from the chemical industry. Thymol is actually more
dangerous than OA in the concentrations used yet is championed by
natural beekeepers.

This seems to be a consistent in the organic movement. Unnatural natural
pesticides are fine as long as they come from nature. Forget that you
will not find those concentrations in nature. I was a member of one of
the most influential State organic groups in the US and the stuff that
was legal for organic use was often more dangerous than the pesticides
bought at the local garden store. But it was "natural". Many in the
movement agreed with me, but recognized that much of the movement is a
faith and had little use for science or reality.

> Worth discussing?

Most of us have been there and done that (and, obviously still doing
that). The whole issue of chemical/natural has been vigorously discussed
here on the BeeL including small cell beekeeping (where are you now
Dennis?). The larger problem with most natural beekeeping is the lack of
good scientific studies; reproducibility in all climate zones and all
bee races;  labor intensive, such as drone cell trapping or multiple
applications; and  not as effective as approved chemicals.

If small cells are the answer, they would have been accepted throughout
the industry, but I have yet to see a good northern study except those
conducted by Dennis M. and even he would agree that they are not as
rigorous as a well funded study. (I have used small cell, but 5.0. They
seemed to work for a while.)

It goes without saying that all beekeepers want to reduce or eliminate
all treatments. I think you will find we are all kindred spirits here.
My problem is that many who have touted natural methods are not keeping
bees anymore for obvious reasons, but new ones arise to play the same
seductive pipe.

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Maine

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and  other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::