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:
Allen Dick <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 27 Feb 2001 22:51:10 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (83 lines)
Here's part of a recent exchange on sci.agriculture.beekeeping
allen
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Fischer" <[log in to unmask]>
Newsgroups: sci.agriculture.beekeeping
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 5:27 AM
Subject: Re: Fischer's Bee-Quick


> Mark said:
>
> > I have just received my sample of Bee-Quick from Dadant's,
> > and it smells to me like it is mostly benzaldehyde.
>
> There is no benzaldehyde in Bee-Quick.
>
> But thanks for the complement.  We worked hard to make
> it smell "familiar" to experienced beekeepers.
>
> > I was somewhat disappointed in this, since Bee-Go is
> > superior to benzaldehyde.
>
> If you try it, you will find that Bee-Quick is superior to
> both of the others at all temperature ranges, and works far
> below the useful temp range of the others.  You can read all
> about it at http://www.bee-quick.com
>
> > Furthermore, I did not find the odor of Bee-Quick to
> > be an improvement over Bee-Go or benzaldehyde.
> > Any comments
>
> If your nose cannot detect much difference between
> Bee-Quick and benzaldehyde, then no one would expect
> you to be able to detect any "improvement".
> Of the over 700 free samples handed out in 2001,
> you are the first to offer this view.  All other
> opinions have been very positive.
>
> But Bee-Go???  We have yet to meet anyone who could name
> ANYTHING that smelled worse than Bee-Go!  For example,
> here is the opinion of Dr. James Tew of Ohio State about
> the smell of Bee-Go (from Bee Culture, Oct 2000, full text
> at http://bee.airoot.com/beeculture/00oct/00oct5.html)
>
>   "The bouquet of this repellent is similar to that of
>   human infant up-chuck and seems to have a half-life
>   of several thousand years. Bees are repelled by the
>   smell.  I am repelled by the smell.  Neighbors are
>   repelled by the smell...  For odiferous reasons,
>   don't get this chemical on you.  Don't put Bee-Go
>   containers in your truck cab.  Don't store it inside
>   a building you care about."
>
> But, your own sense of smell is not something you
> can change, so ignoring personal "odor" preferences,
> all I can offer is:
>
> a)  Bee-Quick does not require expensive Haz-Mat
>     shipping fees. The other two do.
>
> b)  Unlike the other two, Bee-Quick is non-toxic.
>     No gloves or goggles required.
>
> c)  You can test for yourself which "works better".
>
> d)  Bee-Quick washes off with water.  Bee-Go simply
>     won't wash off!  (Married?  Wanna STAY married?)
>
> e)  If you are not completely satisfied, return it
>     for a full refund, just like the label says.
>     (But, wait... yours was a FREE sample.)
>
> f)  Why don't you try it in the apiary before
>     you decide?
>
> Gosh, don't we get any points for handing out free
> samples so that you can make up your mind at
> OUR expense?  Try getting free samples from "the
> other guys"!
>
>     jim
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2