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:
allen dick <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 5 Jan 2010 09:50:35 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (47 lines)
> There are many ways to select for vigor. These ideas are not new... The article highlights the concept that propping honey bees up artificially is detrimental in the long run. In doing so, we will make them fully domesticated and dependent upon us, incapable of survival in the wild.

It seems that many are confused between 1.) commercial, sideline, and
hobby beekeeping operations where the beekeepers are necessarily
dependant on outside stock due to small hive numbers, priorities,
locale, lack of education, funding, or suitable stock, and/or other
factors and 2.) committed, capable well-equipped and focused breeding
projects which feed into mass production and distribution channels.

In regard to the first group, many beekeepers fancy themselves as
breeding a unique stock and doing marvelous things when they are
actually just living in a dream world, making noise, and going
nowhere.

On the other hand, the second group -- various projects, from the
survival camp to the sophisticated DNA screening/lab-intensive,
Instrumental Insemination groups and many in between -- are actually
doing breeding.  To them, "These ideas are not new".

In the first case, nothing enduring is ever going to come of this
group's activities, no matter how earnest, and their "propping up"
their bees only makes economic sense and will have no net impact on
bee genetics, but will certainly have a huge impact on their bottom
line.  Any needless losses they take are unjustified by reason.

In the second case, this consideration -- vigour, high survival,
flexibility, productivity, and non-reliance on inputs -- is often, if
not always at the heart of the project, since no one wants to develop
a dependant bee.  Taking losses is part of the cost of the project,
and any propping up has to be very carefully considered and justified,
and in some cases -- catastrophe unrelated to the program (vandalism,
storm damage, fire and possible others) it can.

So far, I don't think that Monsanto or similar interests have figured
bee breeding to have any potential as a monopoly.  (Sorry to bring up
that "M" word).

So, I guess I really don't see what the issue is.

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

Access BEE-L directly at:
http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/wa-LSOFTDONATIONS.exe?A0=BEE-L

ATOM RSS1 RSS2