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:
James Fischer <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Fri, 3 May 2002 01:21:16 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (29 lines)
Lloyd Spear said:

>...So, while Peter Borst is correct in stating that no researcher has
> stated that screen bottoms can be used as a sole control,
> several [researchers] continue to be of the view that they
> will be useful as part of an IPM strategy.

...and the most important part they play is the part of an easy-to-use,
low-cost, non-invasive monitoring tool.

One cannot control what they do not measure.  This is one of the most
basic and fundamental truths that lead to IPM approaches.

It does not matter if one's treatment approach involves the use of miticides,
organophosphates, powdered sugar, FGMO, essential oils, flame throwers,
sacred crystals, or short-range, low-yield tactical nuclear weapons.  Regardless,
you need to know when the mites are getting out of hand, and you need to
know what impact your attempt to treat has on the mite population as
represented by "unmedicated mite fall" after treatment.

I have not heard anyone claim that a screened bottom board alone could
keep mite populations in check.  The various bee supply dealers have
done a good job of bending over backwards to not "oversell" screened
bottom board conversion kits, using language similar to that of the breakfast
cereal companies  ("...part of this healthy breakfast...").


        jim

ATOM RSS1 RSS2