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:
Peter Armitage <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 27 Sep 2017 11:41:33 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (12 lines)
2010 sampling and testing of our bees here in Newfoundland indicated we were free of European Foulbrood at the time.  However, 2016 test results for EFB as part of the Canadian National Honey Bee Health Survey were positive for 2 of 5 apiaries tested.  I know that EFB is generally considered far less destructive to colonies than AFB as well as a relatively minor management problem (with spring requeening and oxytetracycline typical management options).  

What I'm curious to know is why EFB is considered serious enough in the U.K. and Switzerland to warrant classification as a "notifiable" disease?  See for example http://www.nationalbeeunit.com/public/beekeepingFaqs/europeanFoulbroodEfb.cfm
I don't believe the disease is notifiable in any North American jurisdiction, at least those that use notification as a management tool.

Does any one know the history of this? Why the differences in approach to managing EFB?

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