Peter Borst wrote:

> However, those of us doing research make a concerted effort to
> eliminate bias and prejudice in our thinking, in order to lend
> credence to our conclusions.

> When I say: "I think the sticky board is the unreliable one", this
> statement is based on hundreds of observations of colonies using both
> sticky boards and ether rolls.


> Bottom line: any method that promises to diagnose a hive *without
> opening it* is bound to fail.

If you want to have an indicator of mite load and when to treat, then
sticky boards are fine. But if you want to determine the actual mite
load after treatment, only the ether roll gives a reasonable degree of
accuracy. Apistan, cumophose, sugar rolls and the like will not give an
accurate mite load since they all have their shortfalls.

So stickey boards are unreliable for mite load after treatment but they
do give an indicator of trouble and mite load before treatment.

So I am still with Peter as the ether roll being the best test for mite
load. But I use stickey boards to watch for trends.

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Me