From MAILER-DAEMON Sun Feb 13 07:12:57 2000 Received: from listserv.albany.edu (listserv.albany.edu [169.226.1.24]) by luna.oit.unc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA08318 for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2000 07:12:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from listserv.albany.edu (listserv.albany.edu [169.226.1.24]) by listserv.albany.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA02313 for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2000 07:12:56 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200002131212.HAA02313@listserv.albany.edu> Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2000 07:12:56 -0500 From: "L-Soft list server at University at Albany (1.8d)" Subject: File: "BEE-L LOG9910E" To: adamf@METALAB.UNC.EDU Content-Length: 14640 Lines: 282 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 21:05:34 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Harry Goudie Subject: Re: AFB, CONTROL W/O ANTI-BIOTICS MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Frankly, I doubt bees that have been starved will ever amount to much, unless > they have a long time until winter and lots of ideal conditions. There is a lot to be said for killing or "Culling" as Dave puts it. However if you only have one or two hives then this is not an option. This method would therefor only be used if you wanted to save the colony for some reason. A couple of thought occur regarding this method. One is that it is possible illegal to use this method in Britain although I think the laws regarding this are a bit outdated as are any other laws regarding bees and beekeeping. The second thought is you would have to think about the source of the disease. I suspect that most of the hives become infected though robbing and after "curing" your colony they may return to the original source and become re-infected. With regard to culling in general I think this must depend on your reason for keeping bees. If you are only interested in profit from your bees then culling is probably your best option. However if you are interested in keeping bees then killing them seems a bit silly. Harry, Scottish Bee Issues:- http://www.luichartwoollens.freeserve.co.uk ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 08:35:06 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Stan Sandler Subject: Re: Canadian Honey Grades Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > If unpasteurized honey is not allowed in Canada Forgive me if my post was misleading. Unpasteurized honey is certainly allowed in Canada and on graded honey. However, at present you cannot label it unpasteurized (or raw, or unheated.....). Here, in specific is the definition of pasteurized used in the Canada Agricultural Products Act that is under review: quote: "pasteurized", in relation to honey, means treated in a registered pasteurizing plant by the controlled application of heat so that the honey is free of viable sugar-tolerant yeasts. end quote Actually, in my opinion there is some merit in this definition, since pasteurization is a process dependent on two variables, both temperature and time, and various combinations can lead to the same result. I have not looked at ALL the bee-l logs related to pasteurization, but it is clear to me that most posters were dealing with pasteurization temperatures necessary to kill bacteria, not yeasts. Most beekeepers honey houses in Canada that are registered and inspected would be registered as producer-grader establishments, and even in the next classification up, packing establishments there is a separate category for pasteurizing plants. I assume that only these registered plants are allowed to label the honey "pasteurized". Canada No. 1 is the grade name of honey that in addition to other requirements (including filtering through at least an 80 mesh screen) "contains not more than 17.8 per cent moisture or, where its container is marked "pasteurized" or "pasteurise" not more than 18.6 per cent moisture;" Similarly with Canada No. 2 the beekeepers honey can be up to 18.6 per cent, and the pasteurized can be up to 20%. I have reviewed some of what is in the bee-l logs, and it seems that there is little agreement on this subject on the list, and so it is not surprising that the politics are complicated and frustrating to the food inspection people. But it seems to me that there should be SOME label that small producers graders have available to put on honey that has been directly packed at not remelted from drums or other containers. If the honey is not heated over 35 C and only strained through a 10 mesh screen (sorry I don't know how that relates to microns, and interestingly enough the regulations are NOT metric in this regard although they are strictly so for container weights) then I think one should be able to say so on the label. Regards, Stan ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 09:27:03 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: William Morong Subject: AFB treatment by "starving" bees not legal here Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Some states permit no treatment of AFB but burning. I have read the Maine statute, which makes it illegal for me to possess any AFB contaminated bees or equipment, as such must be burned and the ashes buried. No compensation is provided. Hive bodies may legally be saved by scorching in the approved manner. Despite this law, AFB is common in here, requiring utmost vigilance about all colonies, domestic or feral, within flying range. Abandoned hives, manmade and natural, are a common and grave source of danger. Here, location and capture wild colonies, while not directly profitable, is wise for the sake of one's own bees. Bill Morong ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 04:29:43 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Allen Dick Subject: Information at Your Fingertips MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I notice that quite a few people don't know how to search the internet and/or our BEE-L archives for keywords. I'll try to give a few quick and easy ideas here. I have noticed that just asking a question on BEE-L or sci.agriculture.beekeeping is a bit of a crapshoot. Whether any good answers come in or not depends a lot on whether the matter has been discussed much in the past. If it has, it seems that the members become increasingly reluctant to answer it again at any length, and often only a few superficial answers are given. Therefore, it pays to check your copy of 'The Hive and the Honey Bee' first, the logs second, then pose a question based on that research to the List if there are some points that are unclear. Such questions generally well received and answered thoughtfully and in depth. Before I get into that, though I want to mention that no one can afford to be on the internet these days without a good virus checker. Some experts recommend having two or more. Viruses are now pretty well ubiquitous. However, I have always found it a nuisance to have to buy and maintain the software; therefore I was delighted to find a good one totally FREE on the web. I've used it for about 4 months now, and find it excellent. New updates are available every week or two (totally free) on the web. The URL is now listed at http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/ Back to searching BEE-L: http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/Bee-l.htm is designed to provide easy access to all the BEE-L info anyone needs, from our guidelines to searches, and even detailed explanations why a post sent to BEE-L might not appear on the list. It is an excellent idea to visit and do a quick search to get some background before posting, in order to frame questions in the best possible manner. Searching is actually easy with a little practice, and the process is always fascinating. Go to http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/Bee-l.htm and select the 'Can I Search the Archives for keywords of Interest?' link. You will then see a page with a form on it. For some this is pretty intimidating at first, but it is actually simple. Merely typing one word into the first pane and then hitting the ' Start the Search' button will get back a lot of material. If the keyword that was typed in was well chosen, then the material will usually be exactly what is needed. However, if a common word is chosen, the responses will be voluminous, and too general or irrelevant. The whole secret to searching is to think of about five words that are likely to be found only in the question you are asking, or --even better -- in the answer. They should be as unique to the topic as you can imagine. Initially, then, do a search by typing several into the first pane, connected by AND, then starting the search. There is no substitute for just taking time and playing with the search, so the best time to do some research is when you have a little time to spare and are not in a rush. The 'Help' function on the search page is very good and is accessed by clicking the word 'Help' near the 'Start the Search' button or the 'Is there Search Help available?' link at http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/Bee-l.htm Let's try an example. Suppose we want to learn about varroa. We go to http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/Bee-l.htm, select the 'Search the Archives' link and type the word 'varroa' (without the quote marks) into the first pane and hit the 'Start the Search' button. Of course we are going to get a lot of results. Too many. 2981, in fact when this was written, and assuming the moderators approve, this very post will make 2982! Okay, unless we are really willing to read all that, we have to get more specific and ask ourselves what *exactly* we want to know about varroa. Maybe we want to know if varroa have legs, so we go back and type 'varroa AND legs'. This time we get any posts with both 'varroa' and 'legs' in them and there are 47 (48 now). Most are not relevant, but a quick scroll down the results page gives us one that mentions carniolan bees chewing legs off varroa, and another mentioning that the bee louse has six legs and varroa have eight. There you go! Now, the question is whether the person posting was knowledgeable or just guessing. A quick search for posts by that author in another pane further down will bring up all the author's articles and then you can decide. Fascinating! And a bit like reading a dictionary. If you are like me, you can't just look up one word and close the book. :) One more tidbit for those who want to search the web quickly and thoroughly, and have read this far: Try http://express.infoseek.com/subdocuments/express_details.html to get a fantastic search addition to your browser. It allows you to use several engines at once, select the best hits, and then and background load all the selected pages into cache for *quick* evaluation. Have fun allen ----- See if your questions have been answered in over a decade of discussions. BEE-L archives & more: http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/Bee-l.htm Search sci.agriculture.beekeeping at http://www.deja.com/ or visit http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee to access both on the same page. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 10:53:13 +1300 Reply-To: nickw@beekeeping.co.nz Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Nick Wallingford Subject: Re: AFB, CONTROL W/O ANTI-BIOTICS In-Reply-To: <199910291116.HAA09105@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT The NZ beekeeping industry-initiated and funded strategy that we hope to lead to the elimination of AFB is extensively documented at: http://www.nba.org.nz/pms In particular, I think BEE-L readers may find the manual written by Cliff Van Eaton and Mark Goodwin to be an excellent resource, even if your own country's laws and approaches are different to ours: http://www.nba.org.nz/pms/manual (\ Nick Wallingford {|||8- nickw@beekeeping.co.nz (/ NZ Beekeeping http://www.beekeeping.co.nz 'Order' files from an autoresponder... NZ Bkpg: Threats from Overseas? Email to: threats@beekeeping.co.nz ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 21:52:01 -0000 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Ivan McGill Subject: formic acid Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Has anyone done any studies or know of why queen failures are so high when formic acid is used? Ivan ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 09:24:33 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: William Morong Subject: Bee fanning aerodynamics? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" This past summer I was watching my bees fanning and got told to move aside. Sitting beside the entrance, which was about two feet from the ground, I sighted along a line almost parallel to the the lower front corner of the lowest hive body which constitutes the upper part of the entry. The bees were fanning as usual, and as usual there was a small "moustache" of bees above the fanners along and above this upper corner. They were chaining themselves together, and the profile of their mass looked suspiciously like one end of a venturi. As the breeze shifted they would reposition themselves. Has anyone else noticed this? Has anyone seen whether there is a matching formation on the inside? Are the "moustache" bees passively aiding the fanners, perhaps reducing turbulence near the corner?