> ...I also don't see the crops of yesteryear.  But just
 > yesterday received photos from a  Midwestern long-term treatment-free
 > beekeeper with supers full of bees and honey stacked to the sky!

We're seeing beekeeping like the old days up here in Alberta with some 
huge crops this and last year year and many beekeepers with so many 
bees, they don't know what to do with them.  All this has been happening 
after years of huge losses and small crops due to excessive splitting 
and mite damage.

This is all thanks to Apivar IMO, and we hope it lasts a little longer.

I know people get tired of hearing me say we need another good synthetic 
that does not harm the bees or leave residues, but the proof is in the 
pudding.

We had easy beekeeping as long as Apistan worked and as long as 
coumaphos worked, now we'll have it as long as amitraz works.

I'm wondering if Apistan might work again soon.

At any rate, after losing bees and wasting time with the Mickey Mouse 
alternate supposedly soft treatments, I say it is time to face facts: 
they are too time consuming and constraining -- and they don't really 
work without hurting the bees.

Until we can keep bees treatment-free with some certainty of freedom 
from sudden depopulations when conditions or locations change, IMO, 
synthetics are the answer.  (Coumaphos was a mistake IMO).

Now, what was the question, again?

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

Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm