Hello Martin & All,

> and introducing new genes may be harmful.

First let me thank Martin for his post.  Martin adding his expertise to the
list is wonderful!  I for one would welcome new genetic material into the
U.S. gene pool.  I would be willing to take the risk.  About the only
serious talk about our gene pool (U.S.) I attended was at the Portland,
Oregon ABF convention and was given by James Bach now retired Washington
State Apiary inspector.  Mr Bach brought the issue to the front and He and I
talked at length about the subject.   Over the last two decades both Mr.
Bach and myself see the signs of a narrow gene pool in our bees.  I estimate
10 to 20 % of queens most beekeepers order each year lack certain  genes
they had 20 plus years ago.  Signs include:
1. failure to gather honey
2. not prolific
3.running on frames
4. not requeening after swarming
and many others.

>  is such a hit-and-miss event that it may be anywhere from days to
millenia before the right gene evolves in America to cope with varroa, for
instance.
> The way I see it, if someone in the world has a bee strain that has a
>beneficial resistance, controlled scientific attempts should be made to
breed >it with local bees in the hopes of transferring those genes to the
local gene >pool.  Then natural selection can be let to fix that gene, or
managed breeding >can do so in a shorter time period.

Actually the above IS the basis for SMR queens but instead of looking for a
certain *strain* as Martin wrote Dr. Harbo is simply isolating bees with the
SMR gene through testing and then inbreeding to fix the gene.   Success has
been had on the first part of Martins comments.
The second part *in theory* should work to fix that gene in the local gene
pool.   I agree with Martin's *the way I see it* but even though the gene is
fixed in the local gene pool will the gene be able to give SMR enough to
stop using chemicals for varroa in ALL colonies.   I am only a beekeeper and
not on the level of Martin on the topic but believe I ask valid questions.
Martin what percentage of open mated daughters of SMR queens would carry the
same amount of SMR as the breeder queen.   25%- 50%-75%-100%? Surely from
your past research and not involved in the current SMR project you can give
us your opinion or simply a guess?
SMR means - suppressed varroa mite reproduction
Varroa is claimed by the USDA to not be able to reproduce on these bees. The
ads in ABJ claim 100% SMR.
Sincerely,
Bob Harrison
Odessa, Missouri

Ps. In 1923 Rudolf Steiner predicted "mankind would lose the honey bee to
parasitic mites in 80 years because the honey bee has been *bred for profit*
to the point it has become easy prey for viruses and parastic mites". Was
Steiner years ahead of his time as we are only discovering now that viruses
may be the actual cause of the bees demise rather than varroa itself (Norman
Carrick 2001).