Many people on several continents have worked over several decades to
develop formic protocols that work.
NOD's product is just one of many ways to use formic to control varroa and
tracheal mites, and, as such, has limitations in its applicability. The
size of colony, the time of year, the design of the hive (nuc?) and other
factors may preclude use of NOD's product, when, at the same time, use of
pads, applicators, and other approaches might be quite practical. NOD's
product is -- IMO -- an unnecessarily expensive, unwieldy, and inflexible
method of using formic. I know several beekeepers who have used various
incarnations of the NOD product and who are not - AFAIK - planning to use it
again. I realise that we are being presented with a new improved version,
but I would not bet my operation on it, or give up all other formic methods
for it. I am sure the NOD product has its niche, but I would hate to see it
displace or threaten all the other methods, and I am afraid that NOD's
current activities are attracting the attention of regulators in Canada and
the USA to what has been a minimally regulated product.
I have followed the various methods of formic application over the years,
and been aware of this particular method ever since Medhat first developed
it, and, although I have used other formic methods, I have always stayed
away from long-term, single shot applications for reasons of efficacy, brood
suppression, the need for extra equipment, time constraints, and other
factors. I have, however used and followed other formic methods, and I
personally favour both the use of meat pads and Jean-Pierre's method with a
special floor, although I have not personally used the latter. Bill R's
method seems a bit complex for me, and I have never tried it, but I am very
impressed by the vigour with which he has worked to educate beekeepers to
the potential of formic and the availability of various non-proprietary
techniques, and think his method has its place.
I tend to agreed with Bill's assessment of the NOD applications, and share
his apprehension that NOD's activities will affect our use of other, and IMO
better and more flexible, formic applications for mite controls.
I would advise all beekeepers to examine the various methods of formic
application (see
http://www.honeybeeworld.com/formic/default.htm) and to oppose any attempts
to discredit non-proprietary formic use or restrict formic use to one
proprietary method.
Bill writes:
> All of the information on Formic Acid NOD registration and
> the Canadian experience is available at the following links.
> You are welcome to use any part of them in your own
> submission or resolution.
and includes the following links.
Since some of the links broke across lines, I am giving them again, here,
with shorter, unbroken URLs to the same pages.
Formic Acid Registration Response - includes NOD evaluation. LINK:
http://mitegone.com/forms/Formic%20Acid%20Registration%20Response.pdf
Scheduling C94-05 - the most sensible way to regulate acid use
LINK:http://www.pmra-arla.gc.ca/english/pdf/reg/reg_c9405-e.pdf
Supporting emails RE FORMIC ACID USE THREATENED.
LINK http://tinyurl.com/6fvkp
Introduction and Status of Formic Acid in the USA
LINK: http://tinyurl.com/4twgg
NOD Application for 65% Technical Grade in Canada.
LINK: http://tinyurl.com/3mshr
allen
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
|
