> Working out just fine, thanks. I've had bees for about twenty years
> - 4 or 5 hives to put myself in context - and my bees do just fine,
> thanks.
I'm curious. What do you consider to be "just fine"? Can you give us
some metrics on production, losses, etc.?
You do realize that a few isolated hives are much more likely to thrive
than larger yards, and are also a small sample, even over twenty years?
Small samples tend to be very random. Win or lose. One or the other.
Self-reporting also tends to be selective. I find that in myself.
Besides providing justification for people to have a good belly laugh at
my expense, that is one reason I keep an unedited diary.
Having a long-term history of activities and thoughts reveals in
hindsight that often what I thought I was doing and experiencing was not
what I really was actually doing and experiencing.
Am I the only one who kids himself constantly? I maintain a hope that
someday my perceptions and reality will be in sync. That's one reason
that I write.
I am assuming from what you say that you never lost all 4 or 5 hives in
that twenty years, or found the hives to be very sick during that time
-- or has that been discounted in saying, "doing fine"?
> If I had a choice between using the toxic stuff you use in your hives
> ("For god's sake don't breathe the fumes or even TOUCH the stuff") or
> quitting beekeeping, I'd quit beekeeping.
Personally, I said the same when the end of fluvainate's efficacy
was in sight and actually acted on it. I sold off almost all my 3,500
hives of bees. With the remainder, I went treatment free and eventually
lost all the hives.
The decision point to quit commercial beekeeping came soon after a
conversation with Bill Wilson about he prospects for an Apistan
replacement. I recall crossing a street in Saskatoon one February
winter evening with Bill Wilson after a Saskatchewan Beekeepers session
and asking him what we could expect now that the end of Apistan's
usefulness was approaching. He said coumaphos was next up. After
researching coumaphos, I offered my operation for sale. That was not
the only consideration, but I never considered coumaphos to be a
chemical I could accept for use in hives, and I never did use it.
Although I did not like coumaphos and rejected it, I did and do consider
Apistan to be acceptable when used properly and with understanding. I
think the same of Apivar.
Oddly, as it happens, amitraz was one of the first miticides brought to
bear in the US, but was withdrawn due to a stupid legal hassle.
I was able to maintain excellent varroa control over many years using
less than 20% of the Apistan that many were using (and I achieved better
control than most) and never saw any adverse effects.
BTW, I'm open minded on these chemicals and I'd be interested in hearing
arguments against using amitraz.
> Believe me, there are plenty of other beekeepers who feel the same.
I _feel_ the same, and tried going without any treatments with tragic
results --twice! Although I may feel that way, I am not about to
totally quit beekeeping anymore than Bob is.
I have played around with various alternatives and have come to the
conclusion that we really fumbled the ball in North America by not
adopting IPM right off, and not managing the use of fluvalinate and
amitraz better.
I also think, after much deliberation, that we are still stumbling
around and selecting our solutions on the basis of fear, misinformation,
rhetoric, politics, misplaced regulation and just about everything
except logic and science.
***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm
|
