Hi Allen, Randy and Mr Bond (xxx-007)

> At any rate the post was an expression of opinion, and thus really not
> debatable IMO.  We can argue with facts, but how can we argue with opinion?
>
>
We do not need to argue, we can always have a gentle conversation using
logic instead of actual facts. Out of this logic conversation we could end
up arriving to some conclutions.

Keeping the Neonics out for a moment, I tend to agree with Mr Bond in the
sense that on both mayor papers the researchers arrive to the same
conclution, that is, with a rather small sample they find Nosema ceranae
plus a virus (IAPV in the first one and IIV in this second one) as markers
or cause of CCD. On both paper they also found many other patogens present
in the hives.

Therefore the one actual conclution we need to asume as truth is the
necesity of keeping Nosema ceranae under control.

From other information we have available, there is a proven link between
varroa and viruses. Therefore, as well as keeping Nosema under control, we
need to keep Varroa under economic/biological threshold (what ever that is
for a given season) as the only way we have at present to control viruses.

From there on, we can only have opinions as to which is the third stressor
that will make our colony to collapse (suposing nosema and varroa are not
under control). For sure insecticides are a permanent toll on the colony
biology. But also we have other potential stressors: weather factors,
nutrition, poor beekeeping practices, genetics, etc. That many other factor
that only each beekeeper can do the proper evaluation and no mayor finding
will solve the problems to each and everyone.

In our case, just by controling varroa and nosema, plus improving nutrition,
we manage to decrease mortality from over 40% to less than 5% in the past 4
years. The mayor improvement came after controling Nosema with fumagilin.

The other mayor factor, for me not considered in the different publications
availables is the micro-siting of the colonies. As we move during the year
within the same  macro-locations, we have been permanently evaluating the
development of each colony within that macro-location, each year eliminating
those micro-location where the colonies to not develop properly.

There is a mayor diference between two sites that are say 20 meters apart.
After this 6 years of observation I have arrived to certain patterns,
certain minimun requirement for a location to give the
colony those conditions that allows it to have a good development. At the
same time, if those conditions are not met, the colony can not develop
properly or simply crash in a couple of weeks.

Probably those minimun requirements are site dependant and therefore there
is not point on developing further the idea, but in short we need to create
the ideal microclimate around each colony. For this microclimate it is a
must to avoid wind chill factor, particularly on those locations/time
where/when there is a big diferential between the actual temperature and the
dewpoint temperature, particularly when the colony might be  wet (ie. not
parafin dipp under rain).


-- 
Juanse Barros J.
APIZUR S.A.
Carrera 695
Gorbea - CHILE
+56-45-271693
08-3613310
http://apiaraucania.blogspot.com/
[log in to unmask]

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

Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm