Malcolm T. Sanford
http://apis.shorurl.com
The Florida Cooperative Extension Service employs specialists on the university faculty in specific areas who provide information to 67 county offices. Each county office is in direct contact with the public and disseminates the knowledge it receives in a number of ways, including telephone, print and increasingly, computer technology. The program is “cooperative” because it is financed by three levels of government: national or federal, state and county or local. Originally established in the agriculture arena, the focus of Cooperative Extension has been broadened to also include the urban sector as the general population has moved off the farm and into the cities. The role of the Service is continually being examined <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/apis96/apjun96.htm#1>.
In the early 1980s, the author published A Profitability Model of a Mid-Sized Beekeeping Operation, both as a publication and software package. It was developed using the spreadsheet program Multiplan®, Version 1.0 <http://hammock.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/aa/aa08900.pdf>. This has been reconstituted into another program written in Microsoft Excel® for both Macintosh and Windows called Beekeeping Economics. It is currently being sold by the American Association of Professional Apiculturists <http://ianrwww.unl.edu/ianr/entomol/beekpg/beekpg.htm>.
The author has also produced two videotapes, VT 297, A Glimpse of Florida Beekeeping and VT 249, Varroa Mite Detection, that have been released to the general public. They are currently available on request by sending a blank VHS tape to the author.
The APIS newsletter has undergone a metamorphosis in parallel with the electronic information revolution, evolving from a simple electronic document to a full-blown Internet site <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/papers/emweb.htm>. The newsletter’s distribution is managed by the APIS-L electronic mailing list, using Listserv technology. Anyone, anywhere in the world can receive preliminary issues of the newsletter as they are published, along with response and feedback by the readership of APIS-L. This is the only interactive beekeeping newsletter of its kind in existence at the present time and has over 600 subscribers. . To subscribe see http://apis.shorturl.com
During his faculty development leave in France, the author was able to do several things that would have been impossible without information-age computer technology. He continued to publish his newsletter on a regular basis both in print and electronic versions. He also improved the APIS Web site by marking up back issues in html, the language of the World Wide Web. He also made many electronic contacts to help in his study and regularly sent out reports of his activities to the APIS-L electronic mailing list
ADAPI is a relatively new concept; it has had only one Director since beginning 1986 <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/apis97/apmar97.htm#1>. It’s success, however, has spawned a sister association and there are discussions under way to have a country-wide organization based on the ADAPI model <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/letters/aix7_6.htm>.
The overall philosophy and mission of ADAPI is similar to the Cooperative Extension Service. It attempts to discover new knowledge about beekeeping and disseminate the results. It also helps beekeepers get honey certified and assists them in promoting their products. It is funded by its membership associations, but also has direct governmental subsidy. Unlike Cooperative Extension, ADAPI does not have a strong formal university connection. However, it does work with university students being trained at INRA, L’Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique <http://www.ifas.ufl.edu/`mts/apishtm//letters/aix7_9.htm> and <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/letters/aix7_15.htm>.
The similar interests of both the Cooperative Extension Service and ADAPI fit very well with the author’s faculty development leave proposal. The basis of the study was to look at pollination and beekeeping practices in France and nearby Spain. These areas are presently leaders in greenhouse pollination technology using both Apis and non-Apis bees. The French GRAPPs are also a local implementation of an innovative stable pollination service <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/apis95/apoct95.htm#1> and <http://perso.wanadoo.fr/cl.ivert/grapp.htm>. Another focus of the study was to look at how beekeepers in France and Spain are coping with apicultural problems that also affect United States beekeeping. The most important issue confronting all beekeepers in both areas is controlling the Varroa bee mite. Southern France has become an important region of inquiry as resistance to pesticides by this mite have been reported there.
1. February 7, 1997. Pollination Research Group at INRA (L’Institute National de la Recherche Agronomique), Montfavet, Avignon, France <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/letters/aix2_9.htm>.
2. February 10, 1997. Syndicat des Apiculteurs Professionnels de Provence (SAPP), Départment of Var Les Mayons, France <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/letters/aix2_11.htm>
3. February 28, 1997. Honey Bee Unit of the Centre National d'Etudes Vétérinaires et Alimentaires (CNEVA), Sophia Antipolis, France <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/letters/aix2_28.htm>..
4. March 23, 1997. 31st Congress of FNOSAD (Federation Nationale des Organisations Sanitaires Apicoles Départmentales), La Ciotat, France <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/letters/aix3_23.htm>.
5. April 23, 1997. XVI Feria Apícola (Beekeeping Fair) de Castilla La Mancha, Pastrana, Spain <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/letters/aix4_23.htm>.
6. June 9, 1997. Annual Administrative council meeting of the Assocation pour le Développement de l’Apiculture Provençale (ADAPI), Maison d’Agriculture, Aix-en-Provence, France <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/letters/aix7_6.htm>.
7. July 3, 1997. Visit the INRA (L’Institute National de la Recherce Agronomique) station, Avignon, France <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/letters/aix7_9.htm>.
8. July 15, 1997. Visit the INRA (L’Institute National de la Recherce Agronomique) station, Bures-sur-Yvette, France, just outside Paris <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/letters/aix7_15.htm>.
In addition to the above, the author was able to visit many individual beekeepers and others associated with the activity, not only in southern Provence, but also in the Alps, Southwestern and Northwestern France. Of particular importance was time spent with Giles Ratia, International Apicultural Consultant; Claude Ivert of the GRAPP Mediterranée; Remy Vandame, doctoral student at Université Claude Bernard-Lyon 1, Institut d’Analyse des Systemes Biologiques et Socio-economiques, Lyon France (Presently in Mexico); and Steve Taber retired from the United States Department of Agriculture living in France (now relocated to South Carolina). Bruno Poissionner of Le Bateau Abeille, and Patrick Vienne at Station Apicole Oya, Ile d’Yeu provided insight about unique beekeeping situations in the country. The former manages a riverine apiculture site on a converted canal boat, while the latter breeds pure Caucasian (Georgian) bees in an Atlantic island environment.
The author reported his observations from many of the above contacts to the APIS-L discussion list. Edited versions of these have been published in the May through August 1997 issues of the United States’ beekeeping newspaper, The Speedy Bee.
The concept of a professional beekeeper in France is somewhat different than in the United States. One beekeeper there said that a “professional” category had to be created to distinguish the commercial beekeeper from the many amateurs who have exerted considerable influence, but are professionals in other fields. Professional beekeepers, therefore, have set up their own associations, do their own honey promotions and provide funds for carrying out bee research and disseminating the results.
A three-part report in the French journal Abeilles & Fleurs by Mr. Gilles Ratia, titled: "Regards statistiques et cartographiques sur la France apicole de 1994" (Vol. 444, pp 14-21; Vol. 445, pp. 21-25; Vol. 446, pp. 15-18; Feb. thru Mar., 1996) shows that in 1994 there were 84,480 beekeepers in the country, which consisted of 98 Départments (counties or provinces) with 145,739 apiaries, totaling 1,370,220 hives. The calculated average number of hives in an apiary was nine, and the average beekeeper had 16 hives. Most beekeeping is concentrated in the eastern and southern part of the country <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/apis97/apmar97.htm#2).
Besides number of colonies, other differences can be detected between the average professional or commercial beekeeper in France and the United States. In general, those in France are younger, run a smaller number of colonies and come from a non-beekeeping background. Another difference has to do with governmental help. In France, agriculture continues to be heavily subsidized in many ways <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/letters/aix4_25.htm>. Land is available to agriculturalists on a preferential basis and loans are relatively easily obtained. The family is also supported by governmental assistance based on the number of children. One of the tangible results of this is that most professional beekeepers early on in their career are able to purchase up-to-date equipment. This often places them ahead of similarly experienced United States’ beekeepers.
In the United States, there are few, if any direct agricultural subsidies helping the beekeeper. The apicultural industry has lost many of its programs including pesticide indemnity, governmental honey subsidy and loans in the 1970s and 1980s and they have not been reinstated. Beekeepers must seek loans for honey or equipment on the competitive market place.
· 125,000 beekeepers--located in every state
· 3.03 million colonies--operated by owners of five or more colonies
· Typical commercial operation--1500-2500 colonies
· About 600 beekeepers operate 1,000 or more colonies each; as a group these produce 75% of the U.S. honey crop
· Farm value of honey crop--$US 125 million
· U.S. honey consumption--1.1 pounds
· Employment--2,400 full time and 6,100 part time employees
· Added value (pollination) to 40 U.S. crops--$US 9.7 billion
Sources of Revenue produced by the beekeeping industry that year:
· Honey production--$US 125 million
· Pollination rentals--$US 46 million
· Queens and packages--$US 27 million
· Hive products--$US 5 million
Historically, beekeeping has declined in the United States. In 1947, there were 5.9 million beehives. This number decreased steadily, leveling off at 4.1 million in the 1980s, but falling off again to a present level of 2.9 million. During the same period, the number of beekeepers also declined (see Agricultural Economic Report Number 708, Honey: Background for 1995 Farm Legislation, USDA, April 1995, by Frederic L. Hoff, <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/apis95/apjun95.htm#BA>.
The same emphasis on honey characterization and quality can be found in other European countries. Certificates of origin are highly sought after. One is being considered for French mountain honey. Only one product in Spain has a certificate at the present time, Miel de la Alcarria, produced near Guadalajara. This topic continues to be of great concern for all countries as the European Union becomes a reality <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/apis97/apapr97.htm#2>.
Heated and filtered honey, common in the United States, is rare in Europe; most is sold crystallized in the jar to the consumer. Processing, especially by heat is thought to reduce the final quality by lowering diastase levels and increasing HMF levels.
In the United States, the same honey quality criteria used Europe are absent. Only one honey to the author’s knowledge is certified regularly by origin, tupelo from north Florida. This is based on pollen analysis. In spite of certification, a claim of pure tupleo honey is not allowed on the label. In Florida, no honey can be labelled “monofloral,” but can be called “predominantly” a particular source, provided 51 percent comes from a single floral origin. There is minimal, if any, laboratory certification by either state, federal or private laboratories. So-called “monofloral” honeys, therefore, are not as readily available in the United States as they are in France and elsewhere in Europe.
Most honey in the United States market has been flash heated and filtered to prolong shelf life and reduce crystallization. It often is blended, because a uniform product is preferred in supermarkets, the major outlet for large packers. There is, however, interest by consumers in creamed honey, produced by the Dyce® process. It can be found in major outlets and specialty shops. Many honey consumers, however, believe that a crystallized product is not good quality, in contrast to Europeans who prefer it in that state.
Generally, the one measure of quality that is carefully controlled in the United States is moisture content. Again, this is mainly to prolong shelf life. The levels of diastase and HMF are not regularly measured to the author’s knowledge in the domestic United States market. United States Department of Agriculture honey grades do exist <http://www.ams.usda.gov/standards/exhoney.pdf>. However, products meeting these standards do not appear to carry the same prestige as certified honeys in Europe do.
Differences in determining honey quality between Europe and the United States seem to have little scientific basis. Producer interest mostly drives them and customer expectations are based on tradition. Europeans are the largest world consumers of honey and generally more sophisticated than those in the United States. In addition, quality designators have been inculcated into both beekeeper and consumer for decades, and are also an integral part international export standards. In spite of these efforts, there are exceptions. Honey is labeled and sold without the customary quality controls by many “amateur” beekeepers across Europe.
In the United States, there continu to be flagrant violations of honey quality with addition of substitute sweeteners, especially by addition of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/papers/adulter.htm>. However, the honey consumer in the United States, especially those shopping in boutiques and gourmet shops, is becoming more educated about the possibilities of the product. In the author’s opinion, there exists a lage potential for importing specialty honeys into the country.
Local chambers of agriculture also promote honey through their outlets. Many publish brochures, which promote local products, including honey. Other innovative ideas in honey promotion in France include information kiosks using touch-screen technology and Web sites promoting honey over the Internet.
Honey marketing by commercial or professional beekeepers in the United States is minimal <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/apis97/apaug97.htm#5>. Most large and many part-time beekeepers sell the majority of their product wholesale in fifty-five gallon drums. Packing and promoting is done through the middleman, or packer. Because the producer and packer have different interests, there has historically been conflict between the two. Packers have their own associations, which are distinct from those of producers. There is some overlap with producer-packers belonging to both kinds of groups. In practical terms, however, most of those packing honey move toward that as a full-time activity. Efforts to get United States beekeeper producers to do their own marketing have not been effective. In addition, individual beekeeper marketing of honey-derived value-added products is at a very low level.
Generic honey is promoted in the United States by the National Honey Board. Approved by the industry in the 1980s (over eighty percent of eligible beekeepers voted in favor), any operation producing over 6000 pounds of honey is now assessed one U.S. penny (cent) a pound under the Honey Research, Promotion and Consumer Information Act. This is collected by the first handler, usually a packer, and goes to the Board. The same assessment is also collected on imported honey.
The National Honey Board <http://www.nhb.org> not only promotes honey through newspaper and magazine advertisement, but also produces videos and sponsors research projects concerning honey quality and use <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/threads/nhboard.htm>. Marketing efforts of some brand name honey is assisted by the Board on a limited basis. It also educates beekeepers on how to promote honey and has sponsored several sales and export seminars <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/papers/nhbsem.htm>, as well as participated in large sweetener shows both domestically and abroad.
In accordance with its mandate, the National Honey Board has generated a significant amount of knowledge for honey use in processes that industrialize the sweet. These include meats, breads and pastries, snacks and dairy products. This information is made available through a honey telephone hotline (800/553-7162). Although controversial in some circles, the Honey Board’s programs have been deemed successful by many in the United States and elsewhere <http://www.ifas.ufll.edu/~mts/apishtm/papers/promo.htm>. This concept is now being looked at as a possible model for other countries to implement. In addition, the Board’s role may be somewhat changed in the future as it addresses more directly the needs of its constituency, the beekeepers of the United States <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/papers/nhbsem.htm#9>.
In contrast, honey cooperatives are relatively rare in the United States. Many have been started, but most do not survive. Only one large honey cooperative, Sue Bee® , which markets large quantities of honey to supermarkets has survived over the years <http://www.suebee.com>. This cooperative is run by a cadre of committed professionals. Because it has such a large producer base, it is able to provide something that is important in the United States’ marketplace, an extremely uniform product. This is based on one of the prime honey flows in the midwestern United States, sweet clover. The cooperative also markets a darker honey which again is quite uniform country wide. Canada also supports several cooperatives, including Beemaid <see http://www.beemaid.com/>.
To address commercial pollination problems, French beekeepers in the south have banded together into what are called GRAPPs (Groupement des Apiculteurs Pollinisateurs Professionels). These special pollination groups approach the “stable pollination service,” that S. E. McGregor called for in his landmark book, Insect Pollination of Cultivated Crop Plants (Agriculture Handbook 496, US Agricultural Research Service, 1973). The GRAPP arrangement allows members to set uniform prices and provide pollination guarantees to growers, something impossible for the individual beekeeper <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/apis95/apoct95.htm#T1>.
This new market for pollination has not been overlooked by Apis beekeepers in France and Spain. Several French beekeepers experimented with marketing bumble bees, even becoming quite sophisticated in rearing techniques <http://perso.wanadoo.fr/cl.ivert/elevbour.htm>. In the end, however, these efforts were mostly abandoned. One reason is that other bumble bee competitors appeared on the scene, which lowered prices. Another is that bumble bees and honey bees are quite different species, and trying to do both at the same time is extremely demanding. Beekeepers who were passionately involved with their Apis insects, therefore, have seen no alternative but to abandon the rearing of Bombus. This does not, however, preclude beekeepers from becoming part of what is a potentially new enterprise, the pollination consultant. <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/letters/aix6_7.htm>.
Great Britian, of course, publishes the three primary journals of the International Bee Research Association (IBRA): Apicultural Abstracts, Bee World and Journal of Apicultural Research <http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/ibra/index.html>. A new journal is also available called Bee Biz. It is published in the United Kingdom, and is attempting to ally itself with the EDAPI and other European publishing efforts. The United States, far larger than all of Europe, has only three monthly organs of beekeeping information. Two, American Bee Journal <http://www.dadant.com> and Bee Culture, formerly called Gleanings in Bee Culture <http://www.airoot.com>, have been published since the 1800s. A more recent one, appearing in the early 1970s is The Speedy Bee. These are all published on a monthly basis. These are supplemented by a number of Cooperative Extension newsletters from California, Florida <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/apis.htm>, North Carolina, Georgia and Michigan <http://www.ent.msu.edu/bplus/index.html>. There are also many others published by local, state and national associations.
The United States does play a limited role in publishing the quarterly international journal Apidologie, but there is no comparative effort to the EDAPI enterprise in Europe or OPIDA in France. Again, the role of government subsidy in these activities has generally been stronger in Europe than in the United States.
A related issue concerns membership in the world apicultural organization, Apimondia, which publishes the journal Apiacta. The last Apimondia Congress held in the United States was in 1967 at the University of Maryland. Since then, the country has dropped its membership in that organization. Whether this will change, given that the 1999 Congress will be held in British Columbia, is a matter of conjecture. In spite of their country not being affiliated, however, United States scientists and beekeepers alike have been present and welcome at all recent apimondia congresses.
Several individual French beekeepers not only have electronic mail, but also World Wide Web sites. The Director of APISERVICES, Gilles Ratia, originally a professional beekeeper, has accumulated a huge number of information resources <http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/APISERVICES>, the largest beekeeping Web site in the world in both French and English <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/letters/aix3_31.htm>. The site includes the Apimondia home page, as well as other publications and organizations, including one of Europe’s largest bee supply manufacturer, Ets Thomas Fils.
Apiservices has also developed a computer program called Gestapic, which is used by the French Agriculture Ministry to compile a detailed database using FoxPro® . As a result, France has one of the most sophisticated apicultural data gathering efforts in the world. The results of some of these have been published in Abeilles & Fleurs, one of the country’s several bee publications <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/apis97/apmar97.htm#2).
United States beekeepers have perhaps the largest presence on the Internet. A number of Web sites have been set up by individuals, universities and others. The Web is radically changing information delivery as it becomes more accepted. The beekeeping home page <http://weber.u.washington.edu/~jlks/bee.html>, for example, is maintained by someone who has no formal connection with the beekeeping industry. Preliminary information on disease treatments and other management issues is easily disseminated in this milieu, a concern of scientists and extension workers who see this as potentially causing premature adoption of technologies before they are confirmed by scientific method <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/apis96/apoct96.htm#2>.
There are also other outgrowths of this information technology. Of significance is the Bee-L discussion list, where many topics are debated by some 800 subscribers worldwide. To subscribe, send Digital Dialogue at http://www.beesource.com
OPIDA was begun in the 1960s with significant help from INRA, which originally published Annales de l’Abeille. Its current president, Francoise Jéan, gives credit to early INRA workers, especially Rémy Chauvin, J. Louveau and Christiane Courant who helped him in his quest to develop an instrument which would have credibility with the beekeeping community. He outlines some of the history of INRA in Bulletin Technique Apicole (BTA) Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 56-57, 1996. <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/letters/aix7_15.htm>
The tradition in the United States Department of Agriculture Research Service (USDA ARS) is parallel to that in France. Early workers such as S.E. McGregor also were driven by an applied research approach. This tradition continues today. There are two active bee research bodies in the United States: The U. S. Department of Agriculture Research Service (ARS) and the collective universities. Results of this research is generally published in the scientific literature. Some makes into the beekeeping press, culled by the bee journals and a few state university extension employees, but much of it does not. In an effort to help coordinate some of this activity, the American Association of Professional Apiculturists (AAPA) was formed in the early 1980s <http://ianrwww.unl.edu/entomol/beekpg/aapapubs.htm>. This organization continues to work toward a more cohesive research and information dissemination effort.
United States’ queens imported into southern France have not met with success. One concern is that the bees cannot adjust brood rearing rapidly enough and, therefore, quickly run out of resources. This may be because many bee breeders in the United States are producing what is generally called “Italian stock,” known for keeping a large brood nest. Another complaint is that United States’ queens produce populations more susceptible to American foulbrood (AFB). Some think that routine preventative feeding of Terramycin®, not very common in France, is the cause of this, but there is no concrete proof of this. It is known that United States’ bee colonies undergoing antibiotic preventative treatment often break down with AFB symptoms when medication is halted <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/threads/abf.htm>..
Beekeepers in France are surprised to learn that there are strict importation regulations into the United States mainland, especially now that both African honey bees and Varroa have been introduced. The United States’ importation law was passed in 1922 as a measure to prevent introduction of the tracheal mite (Acarapis woodi). It remains in force today, although there is increasing pressure to make it more relevant to the times. There have also been limited controlled stock importations by the USDA/ARS over the last few years; these will probably be continued. The lack of importation has been of concern; there is fear that the honey bee genetic base is becoming far too narrow <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/apis97/apoct97.htm#4>.
Canada closed its border to bee importation once tracheal, and then Varroa mites were found in the United States. Whether it will be opened in the future is also under serious consideration, given the terms of the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/apis97/apfeb97.htm#2>.
Varroa came to the United States in 1987 <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/threads/varroa.htm>. The first treatments were those developed and still used in Israel based on fluvalinate impregnated wooden strips. Apistan® quickly supplanted this, however. It is the only current legal treatment. Given the experience in France, however, it would seem only a matter of time until resistance is found the United States. Alternative treatments are being experimented with, however, and it is hoped that soon some formulation of formic acid will be available as a possible second control measure in the United States <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/papers/formic.htm>.
France and the United States have been intricately associated throughout history. The Normans provided intrepid explorers to the New World such as La Salle. Religious persecution resulted in a nucleus of population in Louisiana, a territory and later state which only could have become part of the country by purchase from the French Emperor Napoleon. The United States’ Revolution was helped greatly by La Fayette and the favor was returned during both World Wars. From a biological perspective, there are other connections. C.V. Riley, USDA Entomologist, receive a gold medal for helping France overcome a devastating phylloxera infestation of its noble vines. Most of the wines the French take for granted are produced from grapes grafted onto United States’ rootstock. One of southern France’s finest honey plants is Robinia pseudacacia, introduced from North America <http://www.ifas.ufl.edu/~mts//apishtm/apis97/apjun97.htm#4>.
France is now undergoing the transition from use of one chemical material (fluvalinate) to other technologies to control the Varroa mite, the world’s most significant honey bee parasite. What the country learns will be important for U.S. beekeepers, who have yet to see resistance in their bee yards. The French have also pioneered the concept of the stable pollination service in beekeeping, as envisioned by S.E. McGregor. This represents an important step in cooperation by beekeepers to provide professional pollination services to a wider clientele. Finally, as producers in an area of well-educated consumers, French beekeepers have taken the lead in developing innovative honey promotional efforts using a wide range of strategies. This is something United States’ producers would do well to emulate to remain profitable in the new era of “valued added” agricultural products <http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/apis97/apoct97.htm#3>.
Subject: 1st PRIZE Beekeeper Page
From: andy.nachbaur@beenet.com (Andy Nachbaur)
Date: 1997/08/12
Message-Id: <9708122109592408@beenet.com>
Newsgroups: sci.agriculture.beekeeping
Oh my gosh with so many very good Beekeepers sites on the internet how can anyone judge them all and come back with a winner without hurting everyone's feeling. Well I have not judged them as it is really an impossible job, but for content I have a WINNER for you all to check out. If you don't want to read more on why set your browser to:
<http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/letters/aixind.htm>
Surprise, no fancy graphics, but a diary or series of letters from Dr. TOM SANFORD, from the University of Florida, Beekeeping Extension, father of the internet for beekeepers and a teacher, Doctor of Beekeeping Extension via the Internet for sure.
Why you ask do I suggest its worth the time to read these 19 letters, because it’s a fast way, (maybe an hour for a careful reader) to get a look into what others, beekeepers, educators, bee regulators, and bee scientists are doing and thinking TODAY in the Mediterranean region. After a few minutes of reading you will be able to relate to what is or has gone on in the US and how other's are dealing with it. All this is from Dr. Sanford's perspective which I believe to be an open minded one, and slanted maybe toward what Florida's beekeepers or southern states beekeepers could be interested in. Read it because you will find reading them a totally enjoyable experience today that may not repeat itself for many years to come in quality or content, but I believe will be read in the future as classic history for beekeepers interested in beekeepers.
Although most of the author’s time was spent in France, assistance was provided in Spain by Silvia Canas Lora, Editor of Vida Apícola, Jose Sanchez Sanchez, University of Salamanca and Jose Luis Herguedas de Miguel, Director of the Feria Apícola Castilla la Mancha.