> Sampling for pests assumes that if a pest does indeed enter, that 
> we have the option of eradicating it where it shows up.  

The limits of sampling are well understood, but even 
with the limitations, one has to admit that doing SOMETHING
is better than what we do now, which is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

Perhaps 100% of packages need to be sampled and tested.
Yes, this would be costly, but less costly than the
total cost of dealing with a new invasive pest or pathogen.

> Unfortunately, in the case of bee mites and viruses, we do 
> not realistically have that option. 

The UK model tracks consignments, and would allow the 
napalming of any yard where diseased queens were shipped.

Don't laugh at my use of the term "napalming".  I'm not
joking.  Eradication is only possible at the yard level,
and it is a very realistic approach to assured eradication.
Yes, it is true that less-robust approaches will fail to
control the spread of the invasive pest.

The association passes the hat to replace bees and gear
at a two-for-one ratio, as the victim needs to be made whole.

*******************************************************
* Search the BEE-L archives at:                       *
* http://listserv.albany.edu:8080/cgi-bin/wa?S1=bee-l *
*******************************************************