> > In commercial beekeeping, there
> is a lot of monkey see, monkey do.

From how I see it.

I see some monkey see, monkey do in the new bee and hobby beekeepers.
And some money see, money do in the commercial industry.  
Both are Ill advised practices.

Another, who lost all their colonies last year is
> also
> lecturing on how to manage bees and they have kept bees for
> two years.

I honestly believe it is a dangerous practice to use the above as a criteria for rating who is qualified to lecture how to manage bees. 

To all here,,,
Will the beekeeper that has NEVER suffered a devastating loss please speak up so that you may be recognized as a good beekeeper, sufficiently credentialed for the practice of lecturing others how to manage bees.
 
…I do
> not want
> to use "chemicals" on my colonies either (and I practice
> organic
> farming), but the year I did not treat, I lost colonies. 

Although I have had devastating losses during my years as a beekeeper,  I feel I am still capable of mentoring how to manage bees to others who are learning how to keep bees in my area.  One of the first things I tell them is;  'expect failures' and ‘near  NEVER, will there be found that a single factor alone was the sole cause for a colony loss...or your failure ...etc...’.   ‘…the crash of a colony is like the crash of an airplane… (as in aviation investigations) there are always other contributing factors found in the series of events leading up to the (plane crash) colony mortality... ...expect to look back 6 months or more to find these events.’  

Questions directed at the blaming of failure to treat for a colony loss are:  Why didn’t things promoted on these lists pertaining to ‘what bees need to survive mites’ save them?... such as hygienic behavior, or type of bee, be-it if they were Russians or NWCs save them?  Did these things not fail also? Then how do we justify blaming a singularity event of failure to treat as the 'implied' cause when other essentials for bee survival may have failed? 

I also object to implication that failure to treat =’s lost colonies.  This type of statement IMO, contributes to the new bees practice of ‘monkey see monkey do‘ by fostering a fear for losing colonies.   The implication also tends to mitigate the fact that other factors may exist which play a role in colony loss, which goes against the rules of how to make a proper diagnosis of bee maladies and mortalities by widening the focus to all contributing factors.  But I will agree, that failing to ‘treat colonies’ in a manner that promotes good health plays a direct role in colony survival. 

Best Wishes,
Joe




 



      

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html

Access BEE-L directly at:
http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/wa-LSOFTDONATIONS.exe?A0=BEE-L