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:
James Fischer <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Tue, 18 Feb 2003 19:50:01 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (55 lines)
Bob said:

> I am still checking but right now Checkmite sold in Kansas is not
> being shipped to Missouri.

Ironic - the agriculture division of Bayer, the "home" of Checkmite, is
headquartered in Kansas City, Missouri.

A number of the Section 18s in the original batch expired on February 1
of the year following the original approval.  Perhaps the MO Section 18
expired on 02/01/03, and no one can ship to MO until they have a
renewal in hand.  The associated EPA "tolerance" for coumaphos (1ppm
in honey) does not expire until 2004.

Peter said:

> The reason given was that you cannot get a section 18 exemption unless
> there are *no other products* that work. People should lobby for
> *registration* for thymol, if they think it works -- not an exemption.

Then I'm missing something here.

As I recall, Section 18s were approved for Checkmite based upon the discovery
of even a single case of Apistan resistance in any one state.

If my memory is correct, it follows that the sole prerequisite for getting a Section 18
for yet another an alternative miticide would be one or more cases of coumaphos
resistance.

Since there have been multiple cases of correlation between coumaphos resistance
and fluvalinate resistance (see the archive, as referenced in the really bulky tag lines
being added to everyone's messages), I'd guess that more than one state has
sufficient grounds to request a Section 18 for "something else" right now.

But even if both my memory and reasoning are correct, would such conditions prompt
a Section 18 request for thymol, or something else?  There must be some sort of
consensus and sanity check built into the process, or different states would request
different products.

But just about anything else would be a good alternative to Coumaphos.

I think that Brushy Mountain describes Checkmite best:

   "Approved for use in a limited number of states, call for info.
    Some states require a pesticide use license in order to purchase this material.
    Numerous environmental hazards, use only as needed."

                jim

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
BEE-L subscribers are reminded to read and follow the
guidelines for posting, which are available online at:
http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

ATOM RSS1 RSS2