Randy you criticize me correctly.  I am bad with supplemental files in "Science" because I am old and I am in a rut....I like the way most papers are published, and have been published for most of a century...with all the materials and methods right there in the paper, and most of the data too.  I don't like the Science approach and I haven't gotten used to it yet.  Mostly I don't read Science...I like Nature, and I like the journals in my field.


But to say I am too biased with one point of view regarding neonics is rather like the pot calling the kettle black.


I understand you are tired of hearing about the neonics.  You have made up your mind about them and you're convinced there are many more problems to deal with of greater importance.  You might be right...but I think you are chasing a chicken-and-egg problem.  Ultimately it is impossible to cure a complex syndrome without addressing all the variables.  All you'll do is manage more and more, until beekeeping is just one long arduous management...feed, treat, feed, split, move, requeen, treat, etc.


As far as your question about queen producers reporting problems:  Well, I don't expect any will!  They don't hang on to all those queens for 90 days...they sell them as soon as they are mated and they see brood.  Instead, let's ask the question:  Out of the number of mated queens sold, what percent are turning out to be good ones?


Christina

             ***********************************************
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