mbc,
You may be right but my thoughts were that usually drifting of badly infested bees to other colonies is a very local affair - like within an apiary would be a very high risk, especially a shared one with all types and ability of beekeeper. I have never said oxalic acid treatment should be stopped. So, yes, that would be one reason for oxalic acid treatment in the depths of winter. There may be other valid reasons.
What I am saying is the treatment of thousands upon thousands of hives with a very light varroa loading (as per the DEFRA publications, and often lower), does not warrant the continued 'dose it anyway syndrome' treatments, like we have had in society where doctors prescribed antbiotics for every ailment that came their way. They have learned from that folly (yes, it worked for a while until the cracks in the policy showed through) and are now generally much more thoughtful as to the correct remedy and do not automatically dive for the antibiotics.
All I am saying beekeepers should think before automatically diving for the remedy year after year even if it is not required. There are other facets which may be affected by those, shall we say 'without thought' reactions.
The main reason for my post is that it is about time some beeks woke up to what they may be doing to the honeybee because they do not think about any alternatives but the one that works now (back to antibiotics in the eighties and nineties). Those that actually think about the rammifications of their actions will eventually change, but there will always be those that simply 'look after themselves'. The varroa mite was imported into Britain by a beek. Resistance to fluvalinates was expected but accelerated by beeks. Those were, in my opinion, people who could not care a jot about the species as long as they were doing OK out of it, or were just ignorant of the warnings on the packets. It goes on all over the place, not just beekeeeping. Big business (yes, Bayer included here), politics, international trade and disposal of dangerous toxic chemicals to third world countries are all examples of greed before ethics. British agriculture is another which cannot avoid the problems brought about by monocrops, pesticides, inorganic fertilisers, larger and larger fields, etc etc etc. All short term 'yield increase at any cost' policies.
There are many out there now who have taken up beekeeping for the benefit of the bees, not for the honey production. Good of them, in fact splendid, but they, too, may not yet have had time to think about these treatments they are told they 'must do' as keeping bees from scratch is not the easiest thing in the world, as many now know.
There must be a better solution. Only those that actually think about it will amenable to changing working practices which may be out-dated, less than satisfactory, or downright folly. By that sentence I am meaning there will be those that will not even consider the facts, let alone change their ways and practices.
It is an obvious short-coming of that system (automatic repetitive treatment) IF the bees are slowly responding, and adapting, to the varroa threat. Queen removal and replacement annually does not help that possibility one jot unless the queens used have that trait, which I doubt that many care to investigate; docility and productivity appear to be the main driving forces for queen traits - the former for the new beekeeper (or urban beekeeper) and the latter for some of the former, who don't know any better, but in the majority would be those who wish to maximise their income from honey production, I would think.
I know that beefarmers are under pressure to produce ever more product from never more hives. Diseases are more prevalent with large concentrations of hives (even if further strict hygiene is adhered to). Simples. Factory farming. We have all heard of the factory chickens, I am sure. Probably not the best way forward for the honey bee species.
All I am doing here is bringing this to the attention of all the readers on the forum. If a minority feel the cap fits them, so be it. In this world you have to make changes; for the better would be good.
Regards, RAB
