Lloyd Spear wrote:
> "Would I be correct in saying that if America had to face varroa again with
> the benefit of hindsight that America would not have used chemicals so
> liberally?"
>
> IMHO, I don't think so.

There are many posts in the archives about letting nature take its
course, and Lloyd's comments about commercial beekeepers in the US
condenses them nicely.

Had chemicals not been used, there would be no commercial operations in
the US. Chemicals gave a respite for other methods of control to be
developed. If you looked at any of the literature at that time, all knew
it was only about ten years before resistance happen, and it came right
on time. Now we have many different controls because we had time.

If someone really wants natural controls so that bees can adapt, they
should not treat with anything (including so called natural chemicals
that never appear in such concentrations in nature and are manufactured
in chemical plants!), should not manipulate cell size or in any way
"interfere with nature". That includes swarm management, raising of
queens, purchasing queens and other "unnatural" techniques. Otherwise,
it is not natural. Or is natural beekeeping really an arbitrary drawing
of boundaries where some "unnatural" management is fine?

If so, my natural beekeeping boundaries include the use of thermonuclear
weapons (the sun is thermonuclear, hence I am natural).

Species do not always adapt, otherwise, when we go to our bee yard, we
would have be vigilant for the occasional T Rex.

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Maine

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and  other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::