Thinking Aaron is right.  Its the ideas and the people at Apimondia or any
other beekeepers meeting that are valuable.  I must have seen more than two
hundred people that I've met and talked with over the years.  Agreeing with
Aaron - "Thinking, it doesn't get better than networking!"

I enjoyed meeting Allen and Aaron and the other BEE-Lers in Vancouver.  I
wish I'd had more time to sit down and talk with them.  Too many people to
see.  It was nice to be able to meet in one room Monday night and put faces
to names, and share ideas about the list, its content and direction.  I say
again.  Aaron and Allen are doing a superb job of maintaining its content
within reasonable rules of professionalism,  tolerance, diversity and
opinion.  I laud their efforts.

Here are a few comments from my perspective in reference to Allen and
Aaron's list of gleanings from the Congress:

1.  What I learned:  I heard quite a few ideas and small pieces of
information on:
a) create your own future - "The future is not in your rear view mirror."
b) new Buckfast genetic material hasn't been introduced to the U.S. in
recent years
c) Scientific observation that colony behavior is affected by plant oils
d) "Bee Calmer" as advertised in Bee Culture, has no remedial affect on HBTM
or Varroa
e) Queen sources vary in susceptibility to Nosema
f) Queen cells are randomly distributed in a hive of bees
g) Queens and brood are not affected by fluvalinate residues
h) Bee fat body protein levels increased with consumption of pollen
i)  20 percent of beekeepers are on line, 50% are over 50 years old
j) ideas about publishing news and ideas in the bee press
k) approximately 20 percent of beekeepers subscribe to bee journals
l) Varroa on Cerana is not reproductive on A. mellifera
m) Treatment research is finding bits and pieces of new information
n) Clinical knowledge about bee venom therapy, its liabilities and questions
of jurisprudence is improving.

Much of what was presented in the sessions has been previously published.

2.  What I didn't learn:
a) Economic thresholds for HBTM, Varroa or Nosema.
b) Answers to the so-what question resulting from scientific research.  (The
practical knowledge Allen was looking for.)

3. You often learn more at beekeepers meetings because you hear more
practical and useful information that might be useful to you in the apiary.
Your statement that you learn more at Alberta Beekeepers Convention or an
ABF meeting is fair Allen.  It is because scientists feel they are crossing
the borders of their profession when they attempt to translate scientific
knowledge to practical applications (so-called technology transfer).  They
leave that to the "extension specialists" however most of these folks have
the same inhibitions.  Bee management is not a college course you know.  It
takes at least five years of looking, seeing, questioning, cogitating, idea
evaluation, refining observation techniques, and some study to develop a
"sense" of successful bee management principles.  This scientific
environment is the genesis of the feelings among beekeepers that much of
research is not relevant to reality and just
supports the scientist's career and retirement not beekeepers' livelihoods.
Beekeepers feel powerless to participate effectively in steering research to
practical solutions.  I think that is why beekeepers haven't
enthusiastically and monetarily supported research.  There is a perception
of a disconnect between the scientific community and their ultimate
customers.  Canadian apiculture has formed a closer  relationship between
the scientist and industry which I've watched develop with gratification.
Beekeepers fund more science in Canada.  But some beekeepers still have a
disconnect mind-set.

4.  Allen says "scientists show up and give us the latest magic bullet
without expressing their deepest thoughts and misgivings."  I'm not sure
that magic bullet is the right phrase.  I'd just say the latest information.
Their deepest thoughts and misgivings are beyond their professional
boundaries.  They present data or science, not their thoughts and the
implications to beekeeping.  One reason is because they only know a vary
narrow slice of the available knowledge on any one
subject.  It is not to their benefit to know all the implications of all the
scientific data and the likely or practical impact on bees or bee
management.  I only know of three who have ever talked about the things they
observe while conducting their studies.  Their business is to seek new
knowledge, conduct science and publish it.  That is why Allen "came home
with more questions than answers."  I often do the same.

Aaron, cogitate is a word.  My dictionary says it means: to think seriously
and deeply about; ponder; meditate; consider.

5.  Knowledge about Varroa is increasing but not much is of practical value.
I've often said that beekeepers will have tolerant stock before science can
understand the mechanism (genetic or otherwise) and develop strains of bees
that will be of practical use in the apiary.  The tolerance trait may be
recessive, like HBTM tolerance, requiring expensive monitoring, development,
and maintenance of the stock.  Any practical impact may be 20 years in
coming because it will probably take that long for the genetic factors that
result in tolerance to become spread around in our genetic pool given the
fragmented approach to genetic improvement.

6.  Marla Spivak's comments that a breeder should leave one apiary untreated
for disease is of course ideal (better than a few colonies).  It is the
quickest way to identify strains of bees tolerant to HBTM or Varroa.  But
then they should be propagated, monitored for undesirable traits and
behaviors, selected for desirable traits and behaviors, propagated for the
consuming beekeeper, and further monitored and tested for further
improvement.

What to do if the colonies start to 'go south?'  Marla "seemed at a bit of a
loss and we never did get an answer that I could understand."  I don't think
she can answer this question for three reasons: a) she may not have thought
it through enough to prepare a succinct reply, b) her speaking time wouldn't
allow for a complete or coherent response, c) the requested answer lies
across her professional boundary as described above.

The answer I would prescribe is:  Define and measure the risk of colony
losses as soon as sufficient information is available, their number, time of
year, colony characteristics, the short and long term impact on the apiary,
the whole operation including economics and management, and on the future
direction of apiculture in North America.  This activity would take some
cogitation, a knowledge of business and economic principles, a sharp pencil,
and a willingness to look at the cold hard facts.

7.  Mechanisms of mite resistance:  I didn't hear the talks on this subject
but I gather from what I've heard and read previously that their comments
probably reflect the leading edge of knowledge.  This means that no one is
prepared to give us a good word picture of all the possibilities, the
probability of each one, and certainly not the final answer.

8.  Economic threshold:  I don't think anyone can accurately define this
threshold because the science has not been done.  To do so I think would
require a definition of colony health, which hasn't been done to my
knowledge.  It would also require the definition and measurement of the
various impacts to a colony from variations in nutrition, brood survival,
the colony and hive environment, the impact of migratory movement,
pesticides, colony management, and management economics.  These and several
others would all impact mite survival, population levels and hence the
economic threshold.

9.  The consensus that killing all the varroa, or nearly all, in a hive is a
bad idea.  Integrated pest management (IPM) theory suggests that you don't
aim at killing 99 percent of a pest because you will have too small a
population remaining.  A small population is believed to build up tolerances
to pesticides more quickly than larger populations.  Instead, IPM requires
several ways of treating pests, each accomplishing some level of control.

10.  The only way to monitor mite populations when you have apiaries
scattered around the country is to sample a representative number of
colonies, or sample representative apiaries.  Of course the more apiaries
that are sampled, the more accurately the data reflects the probability of
determining the variable levels of mites in your operation.  If you can
consider the bee colonies in an apiary or several apiaries in an area to be
homogeneous then you could probably randomly take a one to five percent
sample and come up with reliable data.  The higher the percentage the more
reflective the results.

11.  The five species of Varroa information begs the so-what question.  It
is nice to know because you can more accurately define the subject
population and conduct studies more pertinent, perhaps, to resolution of
mite questions.  But leaving apiaries untreated will bring the information
sought for more quickly.

12.  I had a Molson Canadian.  I don't care for meads at all.  I like
Guiness since I first tasted it in Northern Ireland in 1994.

13.  "The Israeli hive platform thingy." I don't see it as practical for
economical reasons alone.  One story brood nests don't work here in
Washington State except with poor queens.  The device requires increased
management to remove brood from a crowded brood nest (but to where?).  You'd
need a boom or forklift to lift the supers so that you can add and work in a
second brood nest.

Jim

James C. Bach
[log in to unmask]