In response to Stan Sandler, Bob Harrison wrote:

> ... I will try to explain and will quote facts from the only books i can
find on the
> subject.
Again Bob, please name this source!  You keep quoting "facts" from a source
that you have not named.  I would like to read this source so I can
interpret these facts for myself.

> Food for thought: The Russian queens are 500 U.S. and come without a
> money back warrenty.
BREEDER queens are $500 US.  This is not an exorbitant price in queen
breeder circles.  I paid under $10 for the Russian queens I bought from the
breeders who paid $500 for their breeder queens.  When you present facts in
such a skewed manner to support your views it makes it hard to read what you
write without skepticism.

> The sad truth remains: no resistant strain of bees and varroa
> resistant to our chemicals.
You quoted the ABJ article: "Spivak and Boecking(2000)wrote "despite some
claims to the
contrary,there are no BEEKEEPERS OR RESEARCHERS who have successfully bred a
line of bees
that is varroa resistant."  First off, there was no emphasis in my copy of
the ABJ article.  Again you skew you facts to support your views.  Second,
there was nothing in the article declaring that attempts to breed Varroa
resistance is a hopeless cause.  Gladly, breeders are still striving for
improvement.

> Could small cell size be the answer?
Perhaps it could, I don't believe anyone has counted the possibility out.
What has repeatedly been said is the claims are not back up by scientific
method.  Give me a source for the properly sized foundation, give me a way
to put my bees on it without the stepping down phase and I'll give it a
shot.  I'll conduct some experiments on my own in a few hives in a few yards
side by side for a few seasons and I'll    draw my own conclusions.  In the
meantime I'll continue to peruse IPM methods of control.  Repeatedly stated
on this list, chemicals are not the only game in town!

Aaron Morris - thinking FGMO deja vu!
>