In a message dated 18/08/04 13:35:25 GMT Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

<<As far as bees surviving quite well in the wild, true. But the  key word
is survive. If we operated on that principle (which has been  championed
on this list in the past- by those who not longer post) we would  be out
of beekeeping quite early. Or we would "survive" but not get the  best
out of our bees. That is especially true for northern beekeepers who  are
faced with harsh winters and short summers. We have to practice the  most
efficient beekeeping or we will be marginal or end up with a lot  of
empty equipment.>>



Yes, but the beekeeper's bee has a number of  advantagesover the feral one;
autumn feeding, regular requeening (sometimes),  etc. If they survive in what
are basically fairly hostile climates there's not  much wrong; my aim is to
take those bees and (hopefully) enable them to do  better. Actually the reason
why I don't autumn feed under normal conditions is  quite different; if bees are
so ill-adapted they can't winter on what they  gather for themselves, I don't
want those genetics around. That may well not  apply in regions where bees
are not native, so please don't anyone feel I'm  getting at them.

   << I came into beekeeping just when Tracheal  arrived and saw quite a few
beekeepers drop out of keeping bees. Their  practice was "set and forget"
and tracheal did them in. When Varroa hit, we  lost many more Beekeepers.>>

    Maybe a 'set' practice isn't always a bad thing.  I've been wondering for
a long time why British bees developed resistance to TM  successfully, while
a lot of US bees haven't, and at last I think I've found  something relevant.

    Beowulf Cooper (Honeybees of the British Isles, p.  89) says that while a
'voluntary expert' (unpaid bee inspector) in Lincolnshire,  he found that, in
single (National) broodboxes, the proportion of TM-infested  stocks among
those which died out over the winter was far higher (no  figures given) than in
those which wintered successfully. Colonies with  larger broodboxes, however,
did not show this. It seems that TM-infested  colonies eat more during the
winter, and in the small broodbox, these tended to  starve, thus selecting
against the mite. Please don't anyone think I'm sniping  at them, but is it possible
that big broodboxes and heavy autumn feeding are  enabling susceptible stocks
to survive, when you'd actually be better off  without them or their drones
perpetuating susceptibility?

    Regards,

    Robert Brenchley

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and  other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::