I've been enjoying this thread.  Several things have stuck me about the
discussion:

1.  Although, as some point out, there are laws about AHB and they thus see
matters as black and white, it is apparent to most of us that --  when we
examine the issues, the science involved, and the sampling  --  we are
finding ourselves in a grey area.

2. The second is that, with few exceptions, the posts on the topic have
been respectful of those on opposite sides and writers have stuck to the
arguments without trolling, posturing or name-calling.

3. Those who are participating are providing facts as well as opinion.

4. Opinion is a very large factor in the AHB debate, and it looks to me,
when we examine what the scientists and the lay people say, that there is
more opinion than science.

Although there has been some very good work done, the science and the
sampling are both spotty and inconclusive.  What exactly can be called
'african' genes or non-african genes is not absolutely clear.  What is
clear is that defining areas as 'africanized' and non-africanized is a very
arbitrary designation which does not take into consideration the degree or
nature of the AHB presence or even the nature of the particular 'AHB'
strain.  AHB is apparently a designation that covers a wide range of bee
stock with varying characteristics.  There are a lot of assumptions
underlying the wole structure of beliefs about AHB, and many of them are
beginning to appear quite questionable in light of new knowledge about
bees.

Although there are laws and regulations, I am seeing more clearly every day
that in many cases the science and methodology are simply not available to
back up the laws to a level where they can be upheld if anyone challenges
them. Although it is easy to legislate against movement or harbouring of
AHB, the most fundamental enforcement tools -- definition and
identification are lacking or seriously flawed.

Under 'reasonable doubt', a basic principle of Western criminal law, the
rules -- no matter how good intentioned -- become basically unenforceable
without clear means of identification.  Although high-principled statements
can be made, attempts at application and enforcement can only be arbitrary
and thus subject to question even -- and especially -- by law-respecting
citizens.  Junius wrote a long time ago, "The subject who is truly loyal to
the chief magistrate will not submit to arbitrary measures".  Civil
disobedience is considered by many respectable philosophies to be a *duty*,
rather than a right, when confronting an unjust law.

In science, the burden of proof is on anyone wishing to put forward a new
theory, not on the scientific establishment to defend the current
structure.  In Western law the onus is normally on the government to prove
its definitions and methods in restricting freedom, not on the citizen
going about his business.  In politics no proof is needed; any statement
that is repeated often and appeals to the masses might as well be true,
since -- true or not -- people believe and act on it.

Inasmuch as this AHB question is a matter of all of these: law, science,
and politics, we have conflicting paradigms.  In legal matters, such as
definition and detection of AHB, the law must prove its case without
reasonable doubt.  With the current state of science this is difficult.  If
we wonder why many scientists are very careful what they say, this conflict
between law and science may be at the root. When we add in politics as a
third component, things get even more difficult.  In the AHB question, we
have law, politics and science all in play.  No wonder there is no win/win
solution apparent and those who could speak the truth better than most
remain silent.

What will be the ultimate outcome?  I expect that since all the most
effective players are neutralized that the question will be settled by
semi-trailers and pickup trucks and billfolds.  I predict the three
establishments will remain statemated, and that the people will decide the
way they always have: by doing what they please, with or without official
sanction.

allen
http://www.internode.net/honeybee/diary/