Hi Allen and All:

>(I hope others feel free to write comments or questions about things that are
>not necessarily under current discussion.  New ideas, new comments and new
>questions on old topics are what keeps things interesting.

Perhaps you could be so kind as to update the listmembers on the results of
the fumidil experiment and the "nosema discussion group" that is on your
webpages.  There has been no activity on this discussion group for over a
year I believe.  I thought the discussion was quite promising and it would
be timely to report to the list given the current thread about prophylactic
drug use in North American bees.  Unlike foulbrood and chalkbrood, nosema is
difficult to see without testing (and even *WITH* testing according to the
discussion group and the thread on false positives).

FWIW, I am somewhat skeptical that comb fumigation with acetic acid, and
comb renewal programs are sufficient to solve the problem (although I do not
disbelieve the European experience).  I started over 200 packages this past
spring from New Zealand, and they were shaken from two different beekeepers.
I also picked up another batch of over 200 for other beekeepers.  In both
cases the majority of the load came in excellent condition and some were
very very poor.  It was determined that one of the beekeepers had high
levels of nosema and this was the likely cause.

I believe that bees can probably tolerate some nosema later in the season
and still produce reasonable (but probably lower) honey crops, or at least
that is what experiments that Endel Karmo years ago seemed to show.  But
without fumidil I would worry that nosema would hit the bees hardest in the
early spring, just when we here need to push for a fast buildup for the very
early blueberry pollination.

Regards, Stan