> I have to disagree here.  Organisms are only pests when they prove to be
> extremely resilient and resistant to irradication.

We haven't even really tried, and eradication is only an ideal and 
useful here for rhetorical purposes.

Most of us would be delighted to keep the pest under 0.5% without 
putting all sorts of inappropriate things into our hives.  It can be 
done, but first somebody has to think it is a feasible goal and figure 
out how -- and everyone has given up!

We had synthetics that worked really, really well, and were minimally 
harmful compared to current concoctions.  IMO we and our regulators 
screwed that up by releasing and permitting them only one at a time when 
_everyone_ knew that rotation is essential to preventing resistance.

Now we throw in the towel and casually use substances which are more 
damaging and less effective because of our mismanagement of the problem.

We have been through a few synthetics that were magic bullets.  How many 
more are there? Who is looking seriously?

>  There are too many variables to consider to make it an easy fix.

I am amazed at the defeatism I see in beekeepers almost without 
exception.  Some even argue that varroa is a Good Thing (here goes)...

> As a side note, eliminating varroa would certainly make our jobs a lot
> easier, which may actually make it less profitable in the end.

Yeah varroa!  Go Varroa! Thank you varroa!

I am now converted. (and used up my quota of question marks and 
exclamation points!!

             ***********************************************
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