> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "allen" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [BEE-L] New work on the small cell front
>
>> Allen that's pure nonsense... I've been out there (Lusby Ranch), and
>> there were SOME AHB, but the majority of the locations I visited were not
>> AHB.
>
> That is very interesting. How do you know that? I've requested evidence
> to disprove the notion, since Africanization seems to be a prevailing
> expert opinion, and never received it. The proof should be simple to
> obtain -- if it were there. I'd be very pleased to be wrong about my
> observations, but I don't think I am.
Allen, you've answered your own question. You, like me, should
travel out there and observe the Bees. It's the only way to be sure
for you. I already have observed them. I spent two weeks observing
them. As I said to you before. Yes. There were one (1) or two (2) Apiaries
out of many that were observably AHB. However since they were the most
distant, in terms of travel, they pose very little threat. The rest were
approched, and often worked without veil, or in most cases gloves with no
problems. (I use gloves to move aged woodware that often has splinters)
That is my observition. I am certainly satisfied. I wouldn't
however assume that this would satisfy you. you really need
to go and see for yourself. That would be the best "proof"
for your purposes.
Tim
>
> The point here, since we were discussing small cell, is that AHB are known
> to, generally speaking, naturally use a distinctively smaller cell cell
> size than EHB. Nobody disputes that AFAIK.
Not the point. The point is I observed small cell Bees without AHB
charicteristics. You need to observe this. That IS the point.
> According to all the expert opinion I have heard and read, partial
> Africanization of an area or apiary as anything more than a transitional
> phase (unless hives are regularly and aggressively and frequently
> requeened with EHB) is not observed naturally, so the conclusion that the
> Lusby outfit 'has a huge AHB component 'is not hard to reach. In fact, it
> appears that you even substantially agreed with me above.
Appeal to "Authority" is no proof at all, as I assume you already know,
it's a classic fallacy. You need direct observation... and such sampling
as you feel necessary to verify your observations.
> If the Lusby operation is an exception, it would be unique for an
> operation which is not importing stock and constantly requeening with EHB
> My understanding is that the question is not too hard to settle
> conclusively if samples are provided to an ARS lab since they have done
> extensive work on the metrics and have impartial experts who have worked
> with bees in many countries.
No. Dee already had people out there sampling. It hasn't solved anything.
The controversy continues. So, since you are calling the question, you
should travel out and confirm your hypothisis.
> Did you also visit the Carl Hayden Bee Lab nearby when you were in Tucson?
> http://www.ars.usda.gov/main/site_main.htm?modecode=53420300. The lab
> personnel are very knowledgeable and helpful. They maintain an apiary on
> site, which the last few times I was there was largely Africanized as I
> recall. FWIW, some of us opened and examined the hives without
> protection. AHB are not always "KILLER BEES".
Nice... but no, I didn't have time... job related.
Nice observation. Interesting conclusion...so,
there are observable AHB which don't exibit
agressive characteristics? You observed this?
Good! Sounds great to me.
> Personally, I have nothing against AHB and think they are a promising bee
> that we must learn to incorporate into commercial stocks. Either we do it
> or they continue to do it for us.
Agree absolutely.
> Lusby stock might be an interesting beginning, but I have never heard of
> anyone finding it suitable for commercial purposes.
Ok you mixed two points together.
1. "Lusby stock might be an interesting beginning".
I Agree.
2. "I have never heard of anyone finding it suitable for commercial
purposes."
This is not true. Dee sells her honey. I have observed it. I have
also observed a commercial level processing facility, and Honey
storage at commercial levels. What I have not personally observed
is her books, as to if she is making a decent profit. However the Honey
sold briskly. It's obvously in demand.
> Again, I would love to hear convincing evidence to the contrary. I keep
> asking.
No, what you seem to be asking for is direct proof. You
need to get out there and see for yourself. Stop asking,
take action.
> I would love to hear a happy ending the 'saga', as Dee called it. After
> all, I did write several favourable articles in Bee Culture on the Lusby
> operation in earlier years based on what I saw at the time and have
> returned since. I'd go back again in a minute.
Good. Everybody changes, so do businesses. When I left she was
in the midst of a substantial renewal of her operation. We BOTH
hope she is successful again?
Yes, I do.
> I've based my opinion on the best facts I can gather and am always happy
> to change it. To do that, I need facts, though, not opinions,
> admonitions, or rhetoric.
You've based your facts on supositions. No recent direct observation
that I can see. The Market discounts such supositions. you'll need
more direct observations to make your points viable.
Go get 'em.
> The proof should be simple.
It is. A plane, bus, rental car ticket, some time, tools, and the ability to
write. It seems you have at least one of these. Go get the rest.
Tim
***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
|
