Bob said:

> In my opinion sorry by reporters does little.

The reporter did not say "sorry".
He honestly had no idea that he was twisting Kevin's words.
He simply did not know the subject matter.

> The Australian package industry pays $120 an hour for the 
> inspection which lasts for hours. EACH hive package bees 
> are taken from is inspected.

Bob seems to think that charging $120 an hour for visual 
inspections somehow makes them something more than visual 
inspections.  Given that, I'm selling $500 smokers that 
no beekeeper should be without.

Once again, I must point out that a mere visual inspection, 
no matter how expensive, is completely inadequate to detect 
any of the pests or diseases claimed to be the targets of 
the "inspections".

> Spreading fear is an old concept used by those with an agenda! 

Sorry Bob, no one is doing that. Back in 2001/2002, I made  a few 
predictions about uninspected bee imports and pests and diseases.  
In the opinion of a number of respected researchers, those 
predictions have recently come true.  

I have published over 10,000 words of feature articles this summer
pointing out how they have not proven my prediction correct,
how they could be wrong, and how limited their evidence is.

If this is "spreading fear", I'd sure like to know how I'm 
making anyone feel afraid.  Yes, I STILL think port-of-entry 
sampling and inspections are the only way to assure confidence 
independent of "trust" and other quaint concepts obsoleted by the WTO.

> It seems you have been against the import since the start as 
> you will never need those bees so now you are trying to find 
> a reason say the end of beekeeping will come from the import. 

Nonsense, I've consistently refused to "be against" imports.
All I have ever advocated is the simple approach already used
by the UK and EU, which is to consistently sample, test, 
and keep records.  Are you just making stuff up, or are
you honestly confusing me with someone else?

> There were those in Canada saying the same 20 years
> ago but they had to eat their words.

I've not claimed that the "end of beekeeping" will result,
I have consistently pointed out that there are multiple
diseases and pests found in areas of subtropical Asia
that no one wants, and that the countries where these
problems are found send a lot of spectacularly unseaworthy
cargo ships along the coasts, and then island-hopping 
their way through Malaysia and Indonesia to Australia,
and then past Papua New Guinea, along the Solomon Island
chain, past Vanuatu and New Caledonia, and then across
the rather long and occasionally scary run to New Zealand.

Anyone who has done some sailing in that area has seen
these classic "tramp steamers".  Not surprisingly,
New Zealand's varroa problem started on their
northernmost Island, where the closest ports to
Indo-Asia happen to be, and Australia's Apis cerana
problem appeared near Cairns, not far at all down the
coast of Australia's northernmost tip from the very 
short hop across the island-filled passage between 
Papua New Guinea and the tip.

I've then observed the obvious - that many of these
invasive exotic pests and diseases seem to have no
problem jumping to Apis mellifera from whatever
species of bee originally hosted them.

As for Canada, please explain the multiple cases of 
"queen bee smuggling" from the US to Canada, and 
the assumed much larger number of smuggled shipments 
that were not intercepted.  Why would beekeepers 
risk a $250,000.00 fine?  I don't think it was just
to save on shipping fees.  :)

When someone is willing to break the law to buy your
product, you clearly have a superior product.

> Better stick to baseball!

Baseball?  
3rd game final score - Red Sox 10, Rockies 5

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