>DB may have said:
>re: the recent exchange of information on tartatic acid I am not
>interested in a prolonged debate on this subject but  I would not term
>Leslie Bailey of the Rothamsted Experimental Station an isolated
>researcher
 
I have to 2nd that. I have met, talked and worked for short times with a
lot of good research scientists
and research administrators. Some whom the beekeeping industry had little
interest in because we  beekeepers have very narrow vision when it comes to
research and want the "silver bullet" and basic research does not work that
fast. Dr. Bailey is in my book as one of the best bee scientists I have
read or met, beekeepers today are better off for what he has done and
written or would be if they have read him. What impressed me the most about
him was his ability to see the big picture while others in research have a
much narrower view being more concerned with their own research and have no
idea of the big picture. This is not to say he is rong or rite about
"tartaric acid" as used in any bee feed formula as with all things in
beekeeping there are as many variables as beekeepers working. I would not
personally bet any money against any lab work or its results as reported by
Bailey or his co-workers.
 
On the addition of so called active and inert ingredients to bee feed, it
would be easy to pass off the different opinions as "different strokes for
different folks", but I learned early on that with the keeping of bees this
is not always the case and not worth the effort to change peoples opinions,
especially beekeepers as there is nothing we won't argue about, such as
cane vs beet sugar or one race of bees vs another.
 
One thing is clear what works for you in your area is what you should use.
I try, and I think most other beekeepers also try to tell the story of what
they see in their area. I try not to be judgmental or promote what I see as
the best for all. (I sometimes fail at this.) I am fast to admit that some
of what we do, or some cases a lot of what we do is at cross purposes to
the results we would like to have such as good healthy bees all the time
and pockets full of honey money...
 
 
 Here in California because there are more honey bees restricted in a
smaller area then any other place in the world more supplemental feeding of
sugar is done then any place else in the world. More sugar is used here by
bee feeders then some countries in the world use in their total canning
season.  There was a time years long past when bag sugar was used here in
California. Those day's are only a remembrance for most. Having had the
experience of unloading a few car loads of bagged sugar and mixing and
feeding it to bees I can report without any reservations that there is
nothing better then liquid HFCS for bee feed. I am sure that many will
report how they do well with dry sugar or even pure honey, but most who do
when asked also say they have never used HFCS, usually because it is not
available, or priced out of sight because of  high transportations cost, or
in some cases government cane sugar programs that keep political barriers
of one kind or another up making the use of other sugars unattractive. Some
places still shoot you and your family if you don't follow the government
line.
 
Here in the US because of smart early political actions corn refiners were
able to keep HFCS from being considered by our government regulatory
officials as just more sugar in liquid form which in most ways it is. They
have been able to build to overbuild as many HFCS plants as they can afford
which has greatly reduced the number of beet and cane sugar plants and the
acreage devoted to the growing of them, and increased the total acreage
devoted to corn. So far this has been OK for the consumers as competition
has keep the price reasonable if not cheep. When the price of all liquid
sugars are the same, HFCS is the choice of most bee feeders, or a blend of
inverted sucrose and HFCS which some believe is the cream da la cream of
bee feed.
 
There are times when some would want to feed dry sugar. If this was the
normal event in my own apiary I would take the time and expense to mix that
dry bag sugar with the dry invert fondant sugars that are available. The
cost would be higher, but 50 # of dry invert fondant sugar should be enough
if mixed in a small drum mixer with 200# of regular dry sugar to save a lot
of bees from burning out inverting the regular dry sugar. This is very good
from nuc's that do not have replacement bees hatching out, and also good
with hives that are to the "quivering or cold" stage of starvation as they
can get the benefit of this type of sugar blend without repeated trips to
the well for water which is not always possible.
 
>> contribution to clarify the issue is quite welcome. However, I
>> wonder whether the two beekeepers who criticized the use of tartaric acid
>> ever tried it to confirm if it indeed causes what an isolated researcher
>> stated. Unfortunately it is plenty of pseudoscientists out there writing
>> and confussing the mind of beekeepers.
 
I would not presume to criticize how any beekeeper uses any sugar, but
wonder why bother with this type of feed which was abandoned here in
California by most for feeding bees many years ago? At the same time I am
sure what others are doing is best for them and I would most likely be
doing the same if I were in their position and all else were the same, (or
the price of HFCS sugars increased dramatically).
 
IMHO,  Andy-
(c)Permission is given to copy this document
in any form, or to print for any use.
 
(w)OPINIONS are not necessarily facts. USE  AT OWN RISK!