BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 3 Apr 2013 17:22:02 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (32 lines)
> The initial beebread sampling by the USDA for 2012 from the states
> of Alabama, California, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, New York, South
> Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and Wisconsin found amitraz in 27% of samples (it
> would have been higher if they had only sampled commercial beekeepers, or
> had sampled after treatment).
>

My understanding is that Amitraz breaks down quickly, so that the detection
number is low compared to actual use. It is easy to cover up its illegal
use.

In our Maine Beekeeper's monthly newsletter, This came from Tony Jadczak:

Amitraz, the active ingredient in Apivar, belongs to IRAC Group 19 and is
> highly susceptible to resistance development by Varroa. Over time,
> resistant Varroa will reproduce and dominate the mite population.
> Resistance can be delayed by rotating this pesticide with other Varroa
> controls in different chemical classes.
>

For years it has been in use in across the US with home made illegal
application methods and varying doses which could lead to early resistance.
Remember when Apistan lost its effectiveness and the crashes that followed?

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Maine

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2