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:
Tim Arheit <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 28 Jul 2003 23:28:43 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (24 lines)
At 09:55 PM 7/28/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>and probably the California queen breeders that
>are the source for the NWC's also (input, anyone?).  I have read some
>analyses of Coumaphos effects on queens.  The bits that I've read don't look
>good.

Not only is use of Coumaphos a problem over time, contamination of new
foundation made from old wax is increasing.
I can't say I've seen any of these problems, but then most of my comb is
new, I don't use coumaphos, and I use plastic foundation (originally due to
it's other benifits).

What do the big beekeepers use?  Do most use the big commercial drugs?  Do
any use IPM and alternate treatments? (FGMO, formic acid, mite solution/bee
calmer, wintergreen oil or other)  I see many different things used
successfully by small beekeepers, but I understand some are probably just
impractical for larger operations (like fogging hives every week)

-Tim

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and  other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

ATOM RSS1 RSS2