James Fischer wrote:

> Alan said:

> > Meantime people are following her ideas and they will either succeed or
> > fail.  If enough succeed for long enough, the demand for proof will fall
> > off.  If not, the idea will just go away over time.
>
> Even with additional anecdotal reports, the central issue will remain
> fuzzy without a clear protocol to attempt to isolate "the bees" from
> "the cell size".  While I agree that anecdotal reports can have an
> impact, they will be described as apocryphal unless the reports
> are consistent, widespread, and positive.

We have many examples of this on this list. Studies by the
inventor/discoverer were presented and sounded great. Others tried it
and reported success on this list. Then a researcher ran independent
tests and found the technique did not work.

I am going to try 4.9 and see what happens. But only in one hive. I have
been running on 5.0 so it should not be much of a problem going down
0.1mm. But my little experiment cost me $30 if it works. Looking at the
economics of just my one hive, if it fails and I had to buy a package of
bees to take their place I am looking at about $100 per hive to see if
something works. And that does not include the lost honey and wax or the
cost of labor. A real trial of 4.9 would easily run $10K+ and I am
probably well toward the low end, since that would only be about 30
hives.

From strictly a cost point of view, it seems to make more sense to
change the bee and not all of the equipment. I know if I were a
commercial beekeeper that is the route I would favor. My equipment stays
the same and all I have to do is requeen, something I would normally do.
Cost and labor are minimized. Instead of $30-$50 per hive I am only
spending a couple of dollars extra for a queen. From a researchers point
of view, that is the proper route, since it is the best for the
commercial beekeeper and the best route for getting funding for
research. And it seem that the researchers have done just that with a
host of different Varroa tolerant bees.

4.9, even if it does work, will be an interesting footnote compared to
the research and success in developing a Varroa tolerant bee. And, as
Jim alludes, this is what I think has actually been done since they
continually say 4.9 is only a part of their management. The bee is a
major part and I think the real reason for their success.

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Me