[log in to unmask] wrote:
>
> DW>From: D Warr <[log in to unmask]>
>   >Date:         Thu, 19 Dec 1996 17:52:48 +0000
>   >Subject:      Old insects
>
> DW>Why is it that the direct ancestors of insects found in resin 42 milion
>   >years old, will today die out in large numbers from the attack of a Varroa
>   >mite of equal pedigree. Surely in all that time similar threats have been
>   >dealt with successfully?
>
> We are assuming everything written on varroa is the Word from Above,.
>
> Actually beekeepers in many areas do well without chemical control in
> spite of varroa which seem to reach a certain level maybe 4%-8%+- and
> does not cause the collapse of the hive as many report., This varroa
> loss is mostly based on antidotal reports after the fact and has not
> or can not bee duplicated under controlled conditions.
>
> My own opinion has not changed and that is that much of the disastrous
> loss seen by so many, and I include myself, is nothing more then a
> re-manifestation of a reoccurring age old problem beekeepers have
> reported for at least 100 years. I suspect it may be viral in nature,
> and comes and goes depending on many variables found in our bees
> environment, one of which may indeed be the varroa mite but not limited
> to it.
>
> In any case a beekeeper must use the best of his own value system and
> decide if prevented treatment for varroa is the way to go. Most I fear
> have jumped on the chemical merry go around which is par for
> agricultural in general and a reason why beekeepers have and continue
> to suffer massive loss from pesticides each year as farmers have a
> right to protect themselves from perceived pest treats the same as
> beekeepers.
>
> Socially it can not be all bad as jobs are created when we buy
> chemicals, stock holders get dividends, publishers receive
> advertisement income, seller's make mark ups, and science and regulators
> get theirs along with governments. And if the loss of bees continues its
> only because beekeepers misused the product, or did not read or could
> not read directions and has nothing to do with the efficacy of the
> products which is based 100% on good faith, ours,...in all of the above.
>
> All of this brings to mind the beekeeper/queen breeder at UC Davis, a
> student from Greece who was working on varroa research that demonstrated
> the disastrous effects they would have on his queen rearing at home
> because of the loss of drones. The research was technically correct in
> all respects with the exception it never has happened in spite of the
> varroa and the efforts of beekeepers to eliminate drones as the host.
>
>                         ttul, the OLd Drone
>
> (c) Permission is granted to freely copy this document
> in any form, or to print for any use.
>
> (w)Opinions are not necessarily facts. Use at own risk.
> ---
>  ~ QMPro 1.53 ~ http://fly.hiwaay.net/~bparris/Christmas.html
Synpathy for those who still think that Varroa is harmless is forcing
me to disclose a statement which I have been maintaining secrete for
several months! I strongly disagree. Varroa is capable of causing
catastrophic losses to beekeepers. I have been performing SCIENTIFIC
research with honeybee mites for 13 years, (I started in Europe). After
many trials and tribulations through massive losses of colonies every
year to the little red devil, Mr. Varroa, I will soon reveal the
"fruits" of my research, possibly at the 54th Annual Convention of the
American Federation of Beekeepers in Norfolk, Virginia (USA). I can
prove, that untreated, Varroa decimates and devastates entire otherwise
healthy colonies in brief periods of time. I also can prove that I have
developed a:
    NON-CHEMICAL, BEE-FRIENDLY, NON CONTAMINATING,
ENVIRONMENTAL-FRIENDLY, FOOD-FRIENDLY and very ECONOMIC method to
eliminate Mr. Varroa from our beehives. My methodology does not employ
any of the known chemicals or other medicaments presently in use!
Rejoice beekeepers!