> Despite what many would like to believe most of the causes for 
> CCD are contained in what has been found so far.

The statement above is mere speculation.  All that can be said for
now is that many mundane things have been >>eliminated<< as possible
causes of CCD.  The symptoms of CCD are very unique.  There are no
known pathogens or other problems that cause the specific symptoms 
being experienced.

> I would have suggested setting up a package of testing equipment. Electron
> microscope etc. so each commercial beekeeper could do his own testing. 

You can't have meant to type >>electron microscope<<!  Those are very
expensive toys, and would provide little, if any advantage to someone
looking at bee disease problems.  Worse yet, they are temperamental
beasties,
where sample prep is more of a black art than a skill that can be taught.

> I would provide the same for every bee club and train at least one member 
> of each club to run the tests. The cost would be small compared to what 
> has been proposed.

I'm not sure how many clubs need their own "lab", given the ease with which
one can utilize existing facilities funded under existing programs, such
as the USDA ARS Beltsville diagnostic service, described here:
http://www.masterbeekeeper.org/B_files/diagnosis.htm

> I would set up training in all states starting with the states hardest 
> hit with CCD. In order to get the $1500-2000 worth of free testing 
> equipment commercial beekeeping operations & clubs would need to send 
> at *least* one person to attend the classes. At the classes all the 
> information about what has been found *so far* on CCD will be shared.

This is a fine idea in general, but I don't see how one can predict that 
a mere $1.5K to $2K worth of lab gear will be of help in looking at a 
problem that still remains undiagnosed despite the efforts of the "best 
and the brightest", using the "latest and greatest" gear.

Yes, such gear would help in diagnosing the more mundane things that
beekeepers
have ignored, such as Nosema, but I have advocated the use of cheap plastic
"child's" microscopes ($20 or so) for diagnosing nosema for years, but this 
advice has, for the most part, fallen upon deaf ears.  I doubt that
providing
free gear is going to suddenly motivate people who were so utterly
disinterested 
when the entry cost was a mere $20.

As far as dissecting microscopes go, they certainly are neat, but aside from
using them to find tracheal mites, what would practical purpose would they
serve in disease/pest diagnosis?  They certainly are not going to show you 
nosema spores.  Anyway, if your queen supplier sells you queens that are 
still susceptible to tracheal mites, find a new queen supplier.  This is the

21st Century, and anyone selling tracheal-mite susceptible stock is either 
lazy or incompetent.

Anyone who attends EAS can attend a full slate of disease and pest seminars,
so the forum for intensive training exists.  We have EAS, WAS, and HAS, and
while the offerings vary from year to year, they at least provide an
existing
mechanism to supply the required training, and tend to draw the experts who
can lead such workshops, have classroom space, and supply low-cost room and
board for attendees.

I really think that before anyone holds their hand out for funding to
"enhance"
our diagnostic abilities, we need to let the diagnostic/research efforts
under 
way produce some results, to give us some hints as to what we need to look
for.
We don't know what tools we need yet, so "tooling up" is premature.

I also have to counsel caution about the utility of expecting beekeepers to 
take on the "lab work" required.  We are, for the most part, a group that 
still has problems with implementing a simple 3-day natural mite drop 
surveillance scheme to track varroa populations over time, so I don't have
much 
hope for seeing a sudden change in motivation and attitude sufficient to
produce 
the sort of consistent and precise work needed to do a full slate of tests
on a 
few dozen samples a month.

Many samples sent to Beltsville are not properly prepared, making
diagnostics
more difficult or impossible.  This is yet another way to define the
abilities
of beekeepers in the area of following instructions and "doing lab work".

******************************************************
* Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at:          *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm  *
******************************************************