Or do we just surrender without a fight?
I came across this quote in an article from the Washington Post on VSH Breeding. The comment is in context a reason to not adopt recent developments to Non Treatment.
"a major queen producer in Orland, Calif. said he spends “in excess of $40,000” a year medicating his queens against gut disease. “I’m not sure it’s necessary,” he said, but he can’t risk selling diseased bees to his customers."
The simple answer I see. Buy a $400 microscope and start looking. You might get a better than "I don't know" reason to treat. Or not. Monitor mites. examine for foul brood.
What is riskier. Monitoring or managing a business on I Dunno guessing? It seems to me it is a matter of taking the easy way out. Just treat em anyway. save all that data collection effort. For 40 grand you could do a whole lot of sampling.
I get the overall impression that many if not most beekeepers are looking for improved results form minimal effort. I admit that may just be me. Do others also get this impression?
Many do not want to think about problems. collect information when they can simply drop in some meds and walk away. if the colony dies it could not have been from the disease they treated for. Of course they will not grab the microscope and confirm that either.
Recently I read a thread on this group about Alcohol tests for Varroa. the entire thread was full of. oh my kill a jar of bees! Nah, that would be cruel. Risk the entire hive. that's a better answer.
Anyway I just wanted to share something I saw and the general impression it had on me.