it seems to me that there are 2 ways in which researchers 
should be paid/funded to go around and vist commercial 
apiaries that are having problems.

1.  they are hired as consultants by the apiary, just as any 
business would hire a consultant to solve problems....the 
reports and data would belong the apiary that hired them.

2.  they are paid by the govt, and by donations made by 
individuals, corperations, foundations, bee clubs, etc (which 
is i think the model they are working under).  under these 
circumstances, those footing the bill expect that their 
wellbeing is being considered.  if the ccd team is visiting 
queen and package suppliers that are having problems of 
unknown origin and might be contagious, i kind of expect an 
assurance that all such operations have stopped shipping 
bees, and customers that had purchased bees that might be 
part of the contaminated stock had been contacted and they 
are keeping some track on what happens to _those_ bees, or i 
want to know from the ccd team what suppliers might have been 
a problem this season.  if the ccd team is working for, and 
being paid by the apiaries fully and directly, i have no say 
if this will happen or not....but publicly funded research is 
a whole other story.

what's the deal here?  can we be assured that queen/package 
suppliers that had enough problem with ccd that they were 
visited by researchers didn't ship bees to customers that 
were possibly infected?

deknow


-- Jerry Bromenshenk <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Members of the CCD Working Group have seen and sampled CCD operations  since 
almonds, in both the west and the east.  Some were in queen/package  
operations at a critical time.  

******************************************************
* Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at:          *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm  *
******************************************************