Peter, I agree.  I have been "maintaining" some hives minimally  for the last 
2-3 years.  I have one hive that has survived for 3 years w/o  any treatment 
for mites, or nothing. I  placed two deeps and a medium  and  let them go.  
This is in the Columbia, SC area.  What you  described is exactly what I have 
done.  I installed 7 packages last year  and am letting them go naturally.  I am 
expecting a heavy loss but if I can  get 1 out of the 7 to survive, then I 
consider I am  ahead.
 
I believe all the treatments that we have been giving our bees has  
artificially kept a lot of colonies alive, i.e. if we quit treating these  colonies a 
good portion will die and the bees will reproduce off the  survivors.  The bees 
are better at understanding what the species need to  do to survive than man 
is with all the our chemicals.    In  essence, I created a semi natural 
environment in the hive, did not harvest any  honey and did not move any supers 
around.  The pollen  stayed intact  where they put it.
 
However, with that said, I am a sideliner and do not depend on my bees to  
make a living.  So, the question is what is cheaper in the long run, to  treat 
and not take the loss initially, or not treat and incur the compounded  expense 
of treating to keep  colonies alive artificially.  The further  down the 
treatment path we go the more variables and uncertain we are about the  colonies 
that we are treating.
 
 
 
Dave M.
 
**************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and 
favorite sites in one place.  Try it now. 
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000010)

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