BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Bob & Liz <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 27 Feb 2002 13:41:01 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (23 lines)
Hello Karen and All,


Karen wrote:

Nor, that the mite drop from the Apistan was not enough to control the mite
population   3,800 mites per day, after 42 days, even with decreasing
numbers each days, as the population decreases, should eliminate even a very
large population of mites.

Actually Karen these hives  were so far over threshold most was beyond saving and later died. 

Blane wrote:
The problem is that the mites that were dropped by the apistan were not =
killed.  Also the percent of the total mite population dropped by apistan =
was not high enough to give control of the varroa mites in these hives.

The original post referred to the Coumaphos resistant mites found by Jeff Pettis in bees in Maine and in Florida.

Blane and I heard first hand from Jeff about the above at the ABF convention in Savannah. Blane is correct in his post.   Blane is only saying what Jeff said and all bee inspectors in the room felt was happening. Although not what beekeepers want to hear the truth is Apistan is not giving control behind Coumaphos resistant mites. AT LEAST NOT IN THOSE HIVES.  The above hives had not had Apistan in three years.  
Sincerely,
Bob Harrison

ATOM RSS1 RSS2