Lately, I find disagreement among the BEE-L moderators about what is acceptable on the list.  I often seem to be in the minority and find my posts rejected for directly confronting issues and abusers when other, offensive posts (I know because you tell me) are accepted.

I am now posting here the articles I write to BEE-L which are refused by the moderators, apparently for reasons of pettiness, squeamishness or political correctness.  Feel free to write me.   (So far bouquets predominate by 5:1, but don't let that stop you from patting me on the back).


From:     "Allen Dick" <
To:       <BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM>, <mister-t@CLINIC.NET>
Subject:  RE: TM in crisco
Date:     Mon, 4 Dec 2000 11:05:07 -0700

> Allen Dick wrote:
> > > If there are no right or wrong answers then why bother?...

Actually, I did *not* write that, but I did write this:
> > I think you purposely missed my point...

> ...and now New Zealand has become a Fascist state.

I certainly did not say that, and do not recall anyone else saying that here -- until you did just now.

> What has not been discussed is the mechanism that continues the spread of
> AFB... Every mechanical control is directed toward removing the source,
> which are the contaminated frames, either by burning, scorching and new
> foundation, or other forms of disinfecting...
> Those who use TM and do not remove contaminated frames might be masking the
> problem and, if my guess is correct, could have AFB if the TM treatment is
> ended...

That is a crucial point. The point that follows this, and which the idealists very often -- if not always -- ignore is that in the real world, SO DO THE PEOPLE WHO DON'T USE OTC and who rely on burning.

To be intellectually honest, we have to extend the same assumptions in all cases; we cannot be selective and just apply them to the OTC treated hives while ignoring those which are not treated. After all, they share a common environment, contain wax foundation from a common source. The untreated hives may just happen to not be breaking down right now, but we no more can prove them free of AFB than we can the others.

An absolutely zero infection state cannot be proven. It can only be *assumed*. A non-active state can be observed, but that is *not* the same thing. AFB is everywhere. Even in Oz and NZ. It may not be active, but it is there -- possibly in EVERY hive. After all, if there is one spore, no matter how old and weak, it is there, and the hive has inactive AFB (using the all-or-nothing definition being promulgated by idealists).

The important difference is that the beekeepers who do use OTC routinely and properly are spared the loss of time constantly searching for AFB, the rapid build-up of AFB when contamination comes to the neighbourhood -- plus and the cost of equipment destroyed.

Some beekeepers like working without a net, and they look great -- until someone falls. Personally I like a net, even if it does not seem so heroic. People seek their own level of risk. Personally, I don't like surprises, and I use an IPM approach to AFB, not an all-or-nothing approach. After all, I make my living from this. If an heroic non-OTC-using neighbour gets hit with heavy AFB, I won't worry. It won't make any difference to my operation at all. My background levels of spores may rise a bit and I may get a bigger crop from the robbed honey, but won't be in anguish standing by a fire pit or running to a smarter neighbour to learn belatedly how to get with a prevention programme.

> What have you people been drinking during the time I was away? Fights on
> religion, name calling, wow, just like the good old days before moderation.

Not really. Take another careful read and don't inject your own prejudices into what was said. IMO, we got a bit off topic, and some people managed to do a little proselytizing, but that's about it. It has been all in pretty good humour and somewhat useful. My only concern has been staying on topic and the flooding the list and archives, so I have done what I could to cut it off. As I said in a recent post (which apparently was censored) moderation was not set up to stifle honest debate, but merely to eliminate binaries, viruses, massive off-topic quotes, flames, trolls, grunts and belches, etc..

FWIW, IMO this whole OTC issue is a very obviously religious one, with the idealists against the 'realists', so I think the religion thing was inevitable, and even somewhat useful. (Realising that, I may even go and approve a post or two I had put into the wait-and-see folder).

FWIW, I doubt if this message will be approved, but I thought I'd try one more time. If it does not make it through the political correction filter, and if it does not appear on BEE-L, it can still be read on my favourite haunts these days:

* My diary, where I say what I cannot here without censorship

* on sci.agriculture.beekeeping

allen

Come on Home