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:
James Kilty <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 27 May 2003 22:37:12 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (21 lines)
In message <[log in to unmask]>, Tim
Vaughan <[log in to unmask]> writes
>One could do that if one is willing to forget several normal harvests.
I am unclear how this is so. I am now rearing from my best colonies with
a view to replacing the queens of all poorer colonies as soon as I can
and follow the mite falls afterwards to check which are indeed better.
> But
>I don't have any philosophical or religious hang-ups with using chemicals.
The point is that treating uniformly rather then as needed hides good
quality. If this good quality was added to the set of criteria then
surely the bees would get better. Animal and plant breeders do it. The
best of the best are also very gentle. In your case, if all are gentle,
then further selection would be a bonus. If not, then what do you do?
Requeen?
--
James Kilty

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and  other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

ATOM RSS1 RSS2