a Mr Linder snip...
Supercedure is not as common as some would have you believe.   We see about
5%  and they are usually successful.  If you destroy the supercedure cells
the queen is usually just fine,  they are trying to supersede her due to a
lack of brood pheromones.

They 3rd option of which you speak is costly and difficult,  and was
especially so back when those were written.  You need southern yards, food
for the bees,  and someone to work them as well as transport fees.

Those who do travel south will tell you,  its not as easy and profitatible
as it sounds.  Without the huge fees from almonds it would be even rarer
than it is.

my comments...
of course the larger problems now is no northern beekeeper can wait until the time in the springtime when they can count their winter death losses and then order packages and have any hope to get the package + mated queen in any kind of timely fashion.  quite simply stated with reduced inventory (from which to make packages) and increased demand (largely from the hobby folks) you simply cannot hope to make this older program work.

as to your first comment.... superscedure like most biology is subject to it own variation (mean and standard deviation) so saying it is not common or that some number represents it total impact may not be fully descriptive for any person that understands biology or statistics.  

your explanation of cause is certainly one potential cause (or at least partial cause) but it appears to me that other items will also work into this mix.  at the top of the list I would add weather during the mating period and nutrition from the time the queen cell emerged till several weeks (quite likely more) after the new queen has begun laying.  I do know (based largely on experiments and data that is quite dated) that superscedure rates from some well known beekeeping queen rearers in some periods has been documented as high as 100% < there was a 'blind' Nebraska test back I THINK??? in the 60's where the superscedure rate were recorded for individual queen rears where the rate varied from 0 to 100%.

finally as to cost then and now.... I think your idea of the 3rd option and relative cost then and now is also quite speculative.   MY own long standing HYPOTHESIS > the cost of all of these items would be to some significant degree track along with the price of petro.  Labor cost would of course have to include the importation of this basic input from central america + any living expenses for the season... doing this tough job with domestic labor as far as I can tell by what I see is quite rare.    

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