Bob H. and I can agree on one issue:
 
If a bright side CCD is helping our beekeeping industry by making us take  a
long look at the way we keep,medicate and feed our bees!
 
And, I'd add, the industry (and researchers) need to stop making  excuses for 
bee losses.  Bee losses are telling you something.  I'm  from a cattle 
industry (beef and dairy) background.  If we had  routinely lost 20% or more of our 
cows, we'd have been considered very poor  cattle men, and probably would not 
have remained in business.  
 
By excuses, I mean taking the easy way out  = picking your favorite  culprit 
of the day.  In the 60s, early 70s, pesticides killed the majority  of bees.  
In the 90s, mites killed bees, or mites and viruses.   In recent years, its 
new pesticides, and because of some bad batches of HMF in  California earlier 
this year, its now HMF.   If not, the new  nosema.
 
And, when none of these fits, the driver left the truck in the sun or its  
toxic honeydew.
 
All of these can and are causes of bee losses.  But, common sense says  
pesticide usage hasn't diminished, and some beekeepers in specific regions of  the 
U.S. have been very vocal about this -- yet most beekeepers that I know  have 
assumed for the last couple decades that they somehow WERE  routinely not 
exposed to the same chemicals - until the CCD. Why are  pesticide kills occasional 
nowadays, with more and I'd contend, riskier  chemicals being used in recent 
years?  Because its mites that kill bees, as  everybody knows - or thought 
they knew.
 
The CCD has brought some regional favorites - causal agents- to  light.  
Toxic honeydew - or just poor nutrition from honeydew - seems to be  real in some 
areas at some times -- but where's the proof?  So far, its  always been -- my 
dad told me, another beekeeper told me.  
 
In some cases, honeydew was blamed  for the CCD when that region  produced no 
honeydew (at least not that any plant industry or other beekeepers  know 
about).  I'm sure that there are regions with toxic plants -- but just  because 
bees fail in a region doesn't prove its from a toxic plant source.  
 
Maybe someone ought to sample, find out once and for all - is it real, or  is 
it a myth?  Is something else in the area causing the problem?  For  example, 
MT beekeepers are concerned about death camas - and I'd say its a fair  
question.  But the patch of death camas next to my 60 colony research yard  never 
gets any visits.  Our beekeepers want to prove me wrong, and I hope  they do - 
but my bees are at no risk from this plant.
 
So, I will now continue picking on Bob, who said: "I haven't read the CCD  
report "
 
Bob, why not read the report?  I'd have thought you'd be one of the  first to 
grab a copy.
 
Bob also said: "I can say when at the American Beekeeping  Federation meeting 
and we all compared notes one of the things we came to  realize was that the 
beekeepers using only sucrose had good bees without CCD  problems."  Did you 
ask all of the beekeepers at the ABF whether anyone had  fed only sucrose and 
yet, still experienced the CCD?  The answer we've been  getting is Yes.
 
That said, we at Bee Alert/UM are sampling for HMF residues, just in case -  
but I no longer think this is the main issue - maybe it is in a few cases.
 
Unfortunately, the response that Bob found at ABF may be a perturbation of  
the sample size, mixed with some correct information.  I don't know that  
anyone will argue that HFCS is the best food for bees - but it may be better  than 
starvation - maybe not.
 
Our surveys, and remember, we've been in a lot of states and have received  
input from a lot of beekeepers indicate that HFCS is NOT, in many cases, a  
factor.   It may contribute (as another stressor), but we've got  beekeepers who 
have never fed HFCS with the CCD problem.  We have bees that  had great stores 
of honey and natural pollen, STRONG bee populations, and the  bees crashed 
with CCD.  And feeding with sucrose does not necessarily  protect the bees from 
CCD.
 
Note, no one wants a simple fix more than I do, but it just isn't  happening. 
 
 
Good beekeepers and bad have the CCD -- and by bad beekeepers, I mean lack  
of mite control, lots of illegal chemicals, etc.  By good, I mean new comb,  
little or no chemicals.  Nothing jumps out of the surveys and hive  inspections 
- there's no simple solution or smoking gun.
 
Getting contradictory information is part of this overall problem.  I  asked 
colleagues going to the Canadian National meetings to ask about CCD in  
Canada.  Several said: We've not seen this, and no one at the meeting said  that 
they had seen it.  But, one of the speakers at the Canadian meeting,  talking 
about the problem in the U.S. had several Canadian beekeepers come up  later and 
admit to the syndrome.
 
So, in the meantime, in my usual stubborn way, we will keep plugging along  - 
and all of the other members of the CCD are putting forth a concerted effort  
to get at the source of this problem.
 
Jerry
 

-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and  other info ---