Are "locally bred" and "locally adapted" not contradictions in terms? Breeding bees is about choosing characteristics for breeder queens that might not otherwise come to the fore. Docility and low swarming for example, both of which would likely not be favoured by natural selection. (I believe Mike's message is more to do with "locally bred").
Therein lies the contradiction in Phil Chandler's project. If we truly want bees that are simply better survivors, shouldn't we just let nature take it's course and see what we end up with? That would be free and more reliable. I'd be interested to know about the need for "expert help that doesn't come cheap".
As an aside, I spent a few hours in the Worcestershire archives 2 years ago, and discovered in the years after WW1 the county was restocked with black bees from Holland. And between the wars there was a renowned breeder of black bees operating in my current territory, and they sound like top notch bees to me, but then so are the Buckfast types I have now.
Probably my paraphrasing of Mike's 2 hour lecture that's at fault ... I took from him that his queens were locally bred by him and had become acclimatised or adapted over a period of time (my words not Mike's) to his rather unique beekeeping environment - so I saw two separate terms, not a contradiction but I can understand why you read it like that.
What PC appears to want to do is reinforce the existing black bee populations commencing where there are already similar populations in place and I can only commend that as one way of going forward.
The other way, as you point out, is obviously the one we have in freely mated queens in most of the UK at present and it clearly produces a wide variety of bee types - even within a single queen .. I still get a small number of stripy yellow bees within my predominantly black ones so evidently one drone who got to one of my queens (who mated freely last season) was not one of local descent - although I fully accept that colour provides little provenance when it comes to the other characteristics.
Buckfast bees were (and still are) bred for a variety of characteristics all of which are very positive attributes within bees for beekeepers and if you were able to guarantee these characteristics being passed on generation after generation then I think most UK beekeepers would happily take Buckies in preference to any other local or foreign bees. But, as I understand it, open mating on 2nd and 3rd generation Buckfasts can lead to less desirable characteristics.
My point was less about the other characteristics and more about suitability for the environment within which they live and perhaps ten years without upsetting the gene pool with imports in a locality could well result in the sort of hybrid/mongrels that I seem to have (fortunately) found that appear well adapted to the Costa del Fareham. The fact that they are easy to handle, great comb builders, prolific breeders, currently disease free and seem to tolerate or cope with a degree of varroa infestation is just icing on the cake. However, if they turned into the bees from hell I would not contemplate allowing a characteristic of this sort to continue ....
From the worrying picture Mike Palmer paints of the state of US Bee stocks and how they got to this state I can see that there are major benefits to be gained over there from adopting a sustainable apiary system on a localised basis... excluding the poorer bee stocks from the gene pool. I don't think we are yet at the stage in the UK where we are likely to suffer the sort of problems they face in the USA but I can see that what Phil Chandler is trying to do is a positive step and not a detrimental one. If anything it is very much akin to what Mike Palmer is doing in his beekeeping ... although I would not wish to put words in his mouth .. these are very much my views.
As for any personal financial consideration resulting ? - I still don't think that PC is motivated by monetary gain - or that he is intending to provide 'expert help' himself. But with about £500 raised so far from his crowd funding I think it's a bit immaterial !
I'm with JBM here, if people have money to 'donate' let's send it to where it will do some good, not some ****holes in oz.
