huestis' wrote:
>
> I think we have come full circle here on the above subject.  As far as 4.9
> cell sizing is concerned no one seems to want to collect the data. How can
> it speak for itself?

I figured out the other day what it is that bothers me when people say this.
It seems that we have proponents of 4.9 cell size complaining that *other
people* will not do studies on their pet theory.  Is there some reason why
the 4.9 proponents can not perform such studies themselves?

I don't expect a hobbyist with 4 hives to be able to do a meaningful study
(although a group of hobbyists together might be able to) but certainly
somebody with a larger operation, like the Lusbys for example, could choose
a couple yards to be half small cells and half regular cells, treat all
hives identically in all other respects, and measure the results.

> The fact that the Lusby's haven't used any treatments
> of any type on 4.9 in in over six years give it at least some merit.

If Dee and Ed have productive, manageable bees that survive varroa without
treatment that is indeed an accomplishment and I would sure like to
understand both if and how that is done.  Currently, I am not aware of
anything stronger than gut feel saying that small cell size contributes to
that success.  It could equally well be that their breeding program has been
very successful and that small celled comb is irrelevant, no?

Frank.
-----
The very act of seeking sets something in motion to meet us;
something in the universe, or in the unconscious responds as if
to an invitation.  - Jean Shinoda Bolen

http://WWW.BlessedBee.ca