Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=UTF-8 |
Date: |
Sun, 25 Feb 2018 02:41:07 +0000 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Message-ID: |
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
quoted-printable |
Sender: |
|
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
> For THIS LIST in order to
promote accurate communication I propose
> that we all agree that any hive
manipulation, chemical application
For example, according to Paul's proposed
definition above, if I make splits in order to
prevent swarming or
to increase my number of
colonies, I'm not "treating", but if I do
the
exact same thing with the aim of
reducing varroa, I'm "treating". And
what if my primary purpose is to prevent
swarming, but I'm aware of
the side
benefit that the broodless period after my split may help
control varroa? Am I treating or am I not
treating?
Sorry Anne but yes. Your treating. Paul is right on target! Our discusions here are about actual mechinisms. , not the feel good need to keep everone included. To donthat we have to have actual standard. Any reasonably serious beekeeper trying to acually work on the genetic side of the issue would reconize a brood break or requeen event as a complete start over for the desired outcome.
This is not about honeysales or facebook gloating its about real discussion of the sciene, genetics, and potential mechinisms. For that we need a firm line
***********************************************
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
|
|
|