Hi to all on BEE-L Jim has written some intereting comments that I have been following. As some of you know, I wear two hats. On one side I am a biological beekeeper trying to manage bees in a harmonious state with Nature with out the usage of various treatments. On the otherside I am president of the Southern Arizona Beekeepers Association in our state, our states largest active industry assoc, and therefore I have many other beekeeper interests to look out for. Jim wrote some interesting comments: It also does not really matter if New Zealand and Australia are allowed to offer queens and packages to US beekeepers. They are simply examples of a trend, and it is the trend that is troubling, not the specific countries currently at issue. Reply: This I think is more troubling to some from a competition standpoint, rather then risk standpoint.I myself see little problem from competition. Jim further wrote: What we should have learned by now, and what should be considered with care before overturning a law prohibiting imports of bees and queens that has stood since 1922, includes the following: Reply: First of all, it is my personal belief that the law in 1922 was implimented to cover tracks and pass blame, more than to prohibit imports of bees and queens, or the USDA would not have so vigorously brought in bees all those years for research from outside of our own country from all over the world. Jim also wrote: 1) No one can know what pest or disease will be "serious". Anyone who claims to know is a fool. . .Therefore,reliance on a list of "known serious" pests and diseases is fuzzy thinking to the point of being willful incompetence. Sadly, exactly such a "list" is the primary basis for the pending decision on NZ and AUS package and bee imports, and if left unchallenged, will be the basis for all future decisions. Reply: Bees on a harmonious system of field management are NO THREAT. Bees already unbalanced and not in a harmonious state are though in danger, for they are prone to pick up maladies due to the very way they are kept and managed. Such is the state of US beekeeping today. No list can protect USA bees from maladies if they are kept in stress induced situations just by the type of field management they receive daily. Jim also wrote: 2) Even when we know a pest is serious, USA beekeepers and government regulators lack the strength of character to impose inter-state quarantines, and lack the budgets to aggressively enforce limits on the inter-state bee movements that clearly spread these pests. reply: I do not think inter-state quarantines is/are the solution for it masks the actual field managment practices giving rise to this situation that beekeepers are doing and creating themselves! Jim added: It is clear that quarantines at least slow down the spread of pests, moreso when the quarantines can be imposed at barrier that cannot be "bypassed" at whim by unscrupulous beekeepers. Examples would be the Canadian border and the New Zealand "line", both which have proven to be effective. . . reply: No barrier has ever stopped a problem, but instead only made it worse in the long run. Jim further wrote: 3) Different strains of the "same" disease or pest can be resistant to approved treatments, and can thus be much more serious as a result. Which would YOU rather have? Varroa that you can control with Apistan, or varroa that is resistant to both Apistan and Checkmite? reply: For the long-haul, no dependency on various dopes that play out and make a bigger mess to clean up. Beekeepers cannot afford this.Besides various treatments are not necessary on bees kept properly to begin with harmonious with Nature. Jim also wrote: Sadly, no one is considering "strains" of diseases or pests, thereby ignoring basic biology. So much for "science-based analyses" as defined in the GATT and NAFTA. reply: While much is to be done here, and yes basic biology relative to honeybees is being ignored, all these various strains of diseases and pests really are not serious, if bees are kept on a harmonious system of beekeeping relative to Nature. I think the problem here, is no one is trying to keep bees biologically, and it isn't really taught. What is taught instead are quick fixes and gimmickry that don't work in a real world. Jim wrote: 4) In time, pests and diseases can spread through even the tightest control systems. Just ask New Zealand about varroa. reply: Yes, but I think other factors ralative to man were at play here and not necessarily on the part of beekeepers. Jim wrote: when one exports bee products, one has an inherent conflict of interest in regard to admiting that one "has" certain pests or diseases. This applies not only to beekeepers, but countries as a whole. a) They are asked to "prove" that a tangible risk exists, and if they cannot, they are being pressured to approve the imports. b) They are apparently limited to considering only "known" risks,even when very recent history (small hive beetle) proves that the unknown is much more risky than what is known. c) Once they rubber-stamp their approval on imports, they are dependent upon the exporting county's controls, since one cannot inspect packages or queens at the point of entry without facilities that simply do not exist. In the current case at hand, New Zealand and Australia have shown the world that they could not keep known devastating pests out of their countries. How can we be expected to believe that they can keep pests in? Reply: I think actually, in looking hard, they may be better at it then the USA! though I don't agree with their recent trends of doping for shortterm fixes. They were in a position to go for the long haul and somehow failed, but I could be wrong as they have held in the North and in the South time is more lenient. I must say Jim you have made me look hard here on BEE-L, from my first look at reading on resistant strains of AFB and EFB to the above. It seems they fight to get bees here, we fight to get ours back into Canada and between states we fight to move bees interstate, all based on problems of that can arise from diseases and pests that if the bees were kept naturally would be no problem.Hence man-made invented problems. Question: Are we creating the problems for work and something to do for job security? How big really are these problems if left to settle out? They either live or die. If they die (the problems along with the bees) then what is left simply picks up the pieces and goes on. Drastic maybe, but in the end I think it is coming to that! I really see no problems personally with imports of honeybees, but for others here in S. Arizona I can see questions as to whether or not competition is perceived. Right now, Many see it as another source for bees. Is this good? Depends! As for disease and pests. Again the problems relate to how one seems to keep bees. If naturally, I see no problems, if artifially, many can be thought of. But is this fair to the bees themselves? Without man would there be problems, I think not. Sincerely, Dee __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com