# Marin Bee Survey: Hobby keepers - a net population sink



## JWChesnut

Marin County, Ca has a very active bee association with a strong bias towards "treatment free" husbandry. The association is extremely well educated: its monthly meeting in this year has featured lectures by Kefuss, Spivak, Cobey, Berry , Delaney and Seely. In 2013-4, the association supported a local "survivor" nuc endeavor.

Marin Bees have a local survey of bee keeper practices and outcomes. The April 2013 to April 2014 results have just been published. Key findings for me include the statistic that TF methods (the majority of the association) had a 50% mortality rate, and formic treatment experienced a 30% hive mortality. 

I prepared a graphic of colony flows documented by the survey, rectangles are proportional to the colony tally.


Marin has attempted to respond to the shrinkage in hobby hives by promoting splitting management. The survey shows that maintenance of numbers require importation from producers and swarm capture. 

The differential mortality of hives under different management strategy shows a interesting bimodal distribution: the organic acids have mortality <40%, and the TF and "folk" treatments have mortality exceeding 50%.

Raw data for the % survival by tally of hives


One aspect of hobby keepers I am very concerned with is "Churn". This is the constant turnover as new beeks enter the hobby, but quickly wash out. This is time and energy drain for people, like myself, that have been active with bees for many years. I much support a "sustainable" system, that recruits folks and provide them with effective tools, so these people do not lose money and interest in beekeeping due to constant losses.

The age structure of the Marin Beeks show a logarithmic decline in demography. The survey has been repeated for several years, and the the rapid "extinction" of new beeks can be traced in the repeated surveys.


Of note, is the interesting statistic -- first year beeks reported lower mortality than the norm (mortality peaks in year two). This is of course is consistent with the first year halcyon relief from mite pressure in newly established hives.

Mortality is concentrated for the Marin survey in the September to December period. This, of course, it the peak mite pressure period.
 

In summary, I think this survey documents that the social pressure to conform to a "treatment free" ethos results in the tragic loss of bees and unfortunate loss of beekeepers.


----------



## squarepeg

interesting jwc and your points are well taken. what is your take on the high losses among those using treatments? weather? pressure from migratory colonies? extra virulent mites/viruses? you have reported near 100% losses with your treatment free trials. marin sounds like a not so bee friendly place.

did the speakers have any thing of interest to say that you would be willing to share with the forum?


----------



## beemandan

Were there no small cell reporting beekeepers?


----------



## JWChesnut

Square Peg,
I am not a local member of the Marin group. I live 200 miles south. I have attended some of the lectures. Their newsletter has good reporting on the salient points of each:
http://marinbees.org/wp/beek-newsletters-by-year/

Dan, 
"Small Cell" or "Regressed" is not reported.
No foundation was reported used for 392 colonies (or about 50% of the ±800 colonies (existing + added) in the survey.
Loss rate for the "foundationless treatment" was 45.2%

The survey show just how much "mind share" the Foundationless + No Treatment prescription has penetrated the hobby market. Unfortunately, the system as prescribed is a recipe for dead out.


----------



## squarepeg

thanks for the link. not surprising that jennifer berry's admonitions "caused a stir".  

the club looks to be well funded and thus able to bring in those high caliber speakers.

are you experiencing 30% losses in your treated yards jwc?


----------



## JWChesnut

squarepeg said:


> are you experiencing 30% losses in your treated yards jwc?


Heavens, No ! I don't migrate to the Ay-Mends, and I sell off hives young. So I stay ahead of the mortality curve.


----------



## squarepeg

JWChesnut said:


> Heavens, No ! I don't migrate to the Ay-Mends, and I sell off hives young. So I stay ahead of the mortality curve.


understood. 

what kind of success rates are your proteges having?


----------



## shinbone

Fascinating information. Thanks for posting.

I wonder if there is a different dropout _rate_ for TF vs. T beekeepers?

Also, I wonder how many TF beeks would never have taken up the hobby if TF wasn't considered a viable option?


----------



## Michael Palmer

squarepeg said:


> the club looks to be well funded and thus able to bring in those high caliber speakers.


Ha! They told me they get their speakers for free.


----------



## squarepeg

Michael Palmer said:


> Ha! They told me they get their speakers for free.


deep pockets out there michael, hold out for all you can!


----------



## squarepeg

i was surprised to see such high losses among those treating. gotta be more at play than just failing to control varroa out there.


----------



## squarepeg

squarepeg said:


> deep pockets out there michael, hold out for all you can!


(in all honesty i'm just jokin' around and don't have a clue what or if they pay the speakers)


----------



## Kofu

Very nice. You've put your finger on the same issues that I see in the Philadelphia area, same dynamics. But you have data, too. We're not that together, yet. Thanks for taking the lead on this stuff.


----------



## laketrout

Two things that surprised me if I'm reading the graphs right , looks like formic did a better job than oa , could that be because it kills mites under the cappings but does it show how many queens died from formic and the other -- it shows more dead outs in ( Oct. - Dec. ) than ( Jan . - March ) I would have thought the end of the season would claim more hives with stores running out .


----------



## Michael Palmer

squarepeg said:


> i was surprised to see such high losses among those treating. gotta be more at play than just failing to control varroa out there.


Exactly.


----------



## JSL

What are the implications? This trend is evident in the beekeeping clubs around me too. Some view it as a bad thing, some view it as the way it is. I think the churning is common when it is viewed as a hobby rather than a profession. Curiosity is a good thing, but then the realization of how much work and money is involved can be sobering.


----------



## beemandan

squarepeg said:


> i was surprised to see such high losses among those treating. gotta be more at play than just failing to control varroa out there.


Not necessarily. Might be the new beekeepers who treat fail to do so in a timely fashion. It would be interesting to look at losses based on number of years beekeeping. I'm betting the folks with 5+ years, conventional or tf would have much better results than those averages.


----------



## shannonswyatt

JWChesnut said:


> Heavens, No ! I don't migrate to the Ay-Mends, and I sell off hives young. So I stay ahead of the mortality curve.


 Sell them to someone else to let them die! 

I don't think the loss of new beeks has muchto do with the methods of beekeeping. I think people get into because they think it is cool or something and then find out you have to work to keep them going. Sure, if you could be a hands off beek you may not lose as many beeks, but that ship has sailed a long time ago. 

I think that shinbone below has a point about treatments and new beeks as well.


----------



## crofter

squarepeg said:


> i was surprised to see such high losses among those treating. gotta be more at play than just failing to control varroa out there.


Squarepeg I wonder if there would be a big leap between token, perhaps ill timed "treatment", and "effective treatment" with confirmed results! Were you hinting at the difference between treating and controlling?

I think a further breakdown into experience levels of each of the T, TF classifications would be interesting. California would be a totally different ball game than places with 3 month or more brood break. I'll take my 6 month winters!


----------



## squarepeg

dan and crofter, you guys may be on to something there, after all the club is skewed toward those with less experience.

to be honest, i wasn't considering the year round brooding but there ya go. i know that most of california has been experiencing drought conditions for some time now and when i visit family out there the parts that i get to see are pretty developed so i wonder about forage availability. the state is already pretty crowded but then there's the influx of the migratory colonies for almonds ect. so i imagine the competition for resources is pretty fierce.

what do you think michael palmer?


----------



## odfrank

>the influx of the migratory colonies for almonds ect. so i imagine the competition for resources is pretty fierce.

I would think there are almost no commercial almond orchards in Marin County. Most of it is suburban or open space. Mr. Honey-for-all has mentioned some yards in Marin.


----------



## Michael Palmer

How many things can go wrong with a colony of bees that eventually leads to the demise of that colony? Many, right? Make a list and believe that each and every one happens to colonies of bees. Lack of forage would certainly be on that list...but maybe not directly on the list of a new or unobservant beekeeper. Perhaps it would show up as starvation, inability of a colony to build comb or population. 

And here you have an explosion of new beekeepers who aren't properly educated in the ways of honey bees. They don't have a plan for yearly management. They don't really know what's going on within their hives and when the colony perishes that haven't got the knowledge to properly diagnose a dead-out. 

And so..."Two months ago the hive was packed with bees and honey, and yesterday the hive was completely empty. I treated, and they died anyway." 

What our beekeepers need is proper education. Something more than what is being taught in most beginner bee classes. Seems to me that what is being taught, here in the States is pretty shallow. A short course in the spring and the new beekeeper picks up a package of bees...often from the teacher...and then it's have a nice day. And they're all but lost and when something goes wrong, well, they don't catch in time and..."Two months ago....etc"

And who's filling out the surveys?


----------



## johno

Well if you see the media going on about the massive decline in America's honey bee population and that most of these newbeeks are out to save the bees, what else is to be expected. Neonics will probable be blamed anyhow. But you have to admit all these hive failure are good for the package and nuc suppliers.
Johno


----------



## DPBsbees

"What our beekeepers need is proper education. Something more than what is being taught in most beginner bee classes. Seems to me that what is being taught, here in the States is pretty shallow. A short course in the spring and the new beekeeper picks up a package of bees...often from the teacher...and then it's have a nice day. And they're all but lost and when something goes wrong, well, they don't catch in time and..."Two months ago....etc"

What Michael states is of course correct. Our beginning beekeepers class includes membership to our club, the PA State club, and tickets to our annual banquet. This almost always insures that the new beekeepers get continued support by attending the meetings and talking to many beekeepers with much experience. The link is here if you would like to read about it "http://www.montcobeekeepers.org/Documents/2015%20New%20Beekeepers%20Brochure%20Calendar.pdf".


----------



## JWChesnut

The survey has an interesting data table for survival by queen lineage. I hesitated to post it (because the colony count exceeds the other cross tabs by several hundred --indicating data funk).
With that caveat it indicates that "exotic" lineages that have been professionally selected: NWC Carniolan, Russian, and the local breeder's Nucs may have much higher survival than swarm captures (e.g. "local survivors" in the TF vernacular) or run-of-the-mill Italians and their mutts.


Binomial data (Live/Dead) has a confidence interval associated with it of C.I. =± Sqrt( p (1-p)/ n) where p = proportion, and n=sample. For example where n=40 colonies, and p=40%, the CI = ±7.7%. For this reason, close comparisons in small samples should be treated as statistically identical. Where sample size increases to several hundred, power increases. I don't have access to "per respondent" data, or a repeated measure test could be performed, which provides very strong statistical power.

Are NWC and Russians better bees, or do more experienced and committed beeks go to the expense of using those lineages? Would be interesting to delved deeper into the survey to answer that question.

I also neglected to post the i'net source of the data (hosted on the local nuc suppliers website). http://bonniebeecompany.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/2014-Marin-bee-census-results.pdf


----------



## bison

I'm a member of the Marin Beekeeper's Association so can add a bit of color about the club. It's exploded in membership over the last few years - I believe the dues paying membership is about 350 now, no doubt a multiple of what it was when I joined just a few years ago. Certainly a lot of well intended but inexperienced keepers. Dues are a whopping $20 per year, and that allows members to attend the meetings (indeed great speakers, I believe we pay their freight plus some fee) plus borrow club equipment (extractors, etc).  Tom Seeley is speaking in January. 

There is indeed a bias toward TF, though there are many other views and the debate is strong. In recent years there has been a "split squad" that gets splits from TF hives that have survived and sells them to members who pledge to remain TF and will give splits, this in an effort to breed local mite resistant bees. Really good people who are willing to help newbies out, as an example the first 15 minutes of each meeting is a Q&A session where anyone can ask questions and answers come from members. Several members teach various classes thru the year (thanks DP!). 

I have the full data from the survey and can forward to anyone interested - pm me.

Lots of rain falling out here now after way too much dry weather. Certainly proves the saying "when it rains, it pours!"


----------



## squarepeg

many thanks for the insight bison, and really good post mp.



bison said:


> I believe the dues paying membership is about 350 now


from wikipedia: "According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the county has a total area of 828 square miles (2,140 km2), of which 520 square miles (1,300 km2) is land and 308 square miles (800 km2) (37.2%) is water."

that ends up being 1.5 square miles of county per club member.


----------



## DPBsbees

Thanks, Bison. Seems like you have a great club there. I'll PM you for the full data since it seems likes a nice way to be heading..


----------



## franktrujillo

one problem is that most of the packages come from commercial bee keepers. for that reason I suspect that they were in pollination fields before sold which the orchards were sprayed before the removed the bees.so by the time beekeepers get the contaminated bees the build up then die.as I have removed hives that have been sprayed with pesticides they soon die with in 6 to 8 months later they all seems well for awhile during that time next thing you know boom one day there all gone no eggs and some capped larva no bees one time I seen 2 walking around looking lost and wobbling like there drunk.so when going TF it takes 5 years to eliminate the damage done to them thru treatments and feeding my losses the first year my 1 hive died due to wrong breed Italians in my cold climate with the combination to foul brood switched breeds to nwc and carniolan 2 nd year was 87% the third year added Russian x carniolan breed to my apiary winter loss was was 66% the 4th yr. 50% added 1 unknown cut out and unknown swarm 5th year 30% 6th year 27% 7th and 8th year still 27% this is my 9th winter added Russians and added Italians to apiary Italians I'm wintering them over in 3 deeps.one thing I have been doing is I let them swarm not only for the brood break also it allows some swarms I miss to populate the area I live. I also keep the brood box plastic free except the honey suppers.no queen excluders are used no winter wrapping, full sun all year next spring I will take my oldest survivor hives and pull the queens place in nucs and let them swarm to get new young queen as well the hives I pulled them from re queen themselves winter nucs over.


----------



## Ross

Interesting, but doesn't at all match my experience with 15 years of foundationless TF. I average about 10% losses. I wonder if the emphasis on splitting is a factor. Weak hives die more frequently. Might also have something to do with climate and urban environmemt that the bees need more help. Lots of factors that can skew the data.


----------



## shannonswyatt

Am I reading the graph correctly? It looks like if people that don't know what kind of queen they have end up with better results. Maybe someone could use that for there business model. Our queens of unknown origin perform better than all other queens!


----------



## JWChesnut

shannonswyatt said:


> Am I reading the graph correctly? It looks like if people that don't know what kind of queen they have end up with better results. Maybe someone could use that for there business model. Our queens of unknown origin perform better than all other queens!


 NO! survival on a percentage basis for the unknown lineage was worse. There were many more individual hives in this cohort (because on the emphasis on replacement of dead-out by captured swarms). Swarm absorption by new beeks is a common pattern I see. In time, the effort to chase swarms, and their frequently poor performance makes them a liability. As beeks grow in experience the effort put into swarm capture concomitantly decreases. Queen breeders I know bait hives, but kill the swarm queen, and use the now queenless swarm for cell builders.


----------



## squarepeg

jwc, is there any substantial number of your nucs represented in that data? if so, how do the colonies you sell compare to others with regard to survivability?

do you get more complaints from treatment free customers who lose their bees from you compared to those on treatments?

do you include service after the sale with regard to advice on how to manage the bees for beginners?


----------



## JWChesnut

No, this data is Marin County. 
I live in San Luis Obispo County


----------



## squarepeg

i sold a late swarm i caught in july of 2012 to a first time beekeeper. i helped him split it in 2013 and both colonies are still going strong. (he only wanted two)

i didn't sell bees in 2013 but made up a handful of nucs to sell in 2014. 

in 2014 i kept a few of those nucs for myself and built up the rest for splitting. i ended up keeping 8 of those and selling 13 nucs divided between two other first timers.

i lost 2 colonies this summer that failed to get a mated queen after swarming and had to be combined.

i'll teach the 2014 beginners how to split their's next spring and make increase.

we expect to lose one here or there due to queen failure over the winter, but as of now all colonies are going strong and most will make it to swarming strength by april if the have not already been split.

even if left alone to swarm these bees would increase their colony count year by year, and with queen rearing and splitting their numbers increase even more. they are more than surviving.

it doesn't make any sense at all to interfere with that kind of success by doing much of anything that alters the 'ecology' in the hive.

"n. noun

2. The relationship between organisms and their environment"

dictionary.search.yahoo.com

the problems the bees are having in marin county and elsewhere have to do with a lot more than not just managing for varroa mites.


----------



## mtforge

Michael Palmer said:


> And here you have an explosion of new beekeepers who aren't properly educated in the ways of honey bees. They don't have a plan for yearly management. They don't really know what's going on within their hives and when the colony perishes that haven't got the knowledge to properly diagnose a dead-out.
> 
> And so..."Two months ago the hive was packed with bees and honey, and yesterday the hive was completely empty. I treated, and they died anyway."
> 
> What our beekeepers need is proper education. Something more than what is being taught in most beginner bee classes. Seems to me that what is being taught, here in the States is pretty shallow. A short course in the spring and the new beekeeper picks up a package of bees...often from the teacher...and then it's have a nice day. And they're all but lost and when something goes wrong, well, they don't catch in time and..."Two months ago....etc"


You just described me. Following a method that didn't work for me. There is a LOT more that wasn't brought up or I missed in the beginning. But I've joined the state and local group. I'm following beesource, buying books watching videos. I think I'll go a more main stream approach and gain some experience. THEN see if I want to experiment after I can over winter healthy hives.


----------



## squarepeg

mtforge said:


> You just described me. Following a method that didn't work for me. There is a LOT more that wasn't brought up or I missed in the beginning. But I've joined the state and local group. I'm following beesource, buying books watching videos. I think I'll go a more main stream approach and gain some experience. THEN see if I want to experiment after I can over winter healthy hives.


unfortunately it does happen more often than we like.

the most promising path to success at keeping bees off treatments is finding someone in your area already doing it, and getting your bees and training from them. you can expect to experience similar successes if you mirror someone else's genetics and methods.

if no one else is accomplishing this around your location you may have to have to accept the possibility that your specific location may not support a tf approach. this might be due to lack of forage/habitat, lack of feral survivors providing drone genetics, lots of domesticated stock providing drone genetics, too much competition from too many other managed hives nearby, ect.

the big losses reported by the marin county, ca. club are case in point. the tf approach appears to not be working well (and even the treated approach is not doing that great) perhaps due to all of the above and even additional factors not yet considered.


----------



## squarepeg

jmnsho. (just my not so humble opinion, i apologize to the forum if any of that came off as arrogant. it's just how it looks from where i am sitting).


----------



## camero7

> the most promising path to success at keeping bees off treatments is finding someone in your area already doing it, and getting your bees and training from them. you can expect to experience similar successes if you mirror someone else's genetics and methods.


some of the most "successful" TF beeks I know buy lots of packages each spring. Just saying.


----------



## Adrian Quiney WI

The swarm losses/splits are interesting. I have followed Odfranks swarm capture stories for years with interest, and he is honest enough to point out that they have a large die off rate. This data seems to corroborate his experiences.

I agree with Crofter, in one of the earlier posts, the lack of a brood break would seem to be a hindrance for TF beekeepers in CA. I suspect in order that in order to get the maximum benefit from MDA splitter methods a winter brood break is needed. 

I wonder if VSH, and the leg-biter (Purdue?) stock would do any better?


----------



## squarepeg

camero7 said:


> some of the most "successful" TF beeks I know buy lots of packages each spring. Just saying.


it is doubtful that those beeks would be selling nucs to beginners. are you saying no one is able to pull it off up there cam?


----------



## camero7

No, not saying that, but I believe they have pretty serious winter losses. I do know some are overwintering TF hives. I've done it too with my nucs, but had over 50% losses. I have tried several ways to be TF and been unsuccessful - 3 winters of 100% losses, even with VSH queens on the hives. Not discounting beekeeper error but when I got back into beekeeping I drank the cool-aid and tried it. I was singularly unsuccessful. I think some isolated pockets allow some to be TF. I would love to be TF but can't see my way to be. Those heavy winter losses are just too much.


----------



## squarepeg

camero7 said:


> I think some isolated pockets allow some to be TF.


that is the picture that seems to be developing over time. the 'cool-aid' may taste better in some locations and not as good in others.

i really like the way randy oliver approaches the subject in his recent articles:

http://scientificbeekeeping.com/wha...fference-between-domesticated-and-feral-bees/

and,

http://scientificbeekeeping.com/wha...mitotypes-genotypes-and-tradeoffs-in-fitness/


----------



## shinbone

camero7 said:


> some of the most "successful" TF beeks I know buy lots of packages each spring. Just saying.


Which raises an important point in discussing TF beekeeping: _Just what is successful TF beekeeping_?

Until I hit the ground, I could say I "successfully" jumped off the Empire State Building, but what kind of sense does that make?

We've got one non-treater who loses 50% each year, but never treats, so he calls himself a "successful" TF beekeeper.

We've got another non-treater who splits like crazy to maintain his hive numbers, and no one hive lasts more than 3 years, but he calls himself a "successful" TF beekeeper.

There's still another non-treater who has a reasonable over-wintering success rate, but his hives only just make it each year and he can never harvest any hive products, but he calls himself a "successful" TF beekeeper.*

Is a sufficient definition of "successful TF beekeeping" simply only "doesn't treat"? Shouldn't the "successful" and "beekeeping" parts of the term have some meaning too?

How fair is the current crude definition to the newbie who has yet to learn all the nuances of what can be expected from hives in his area? Does such a simplistic definition serve to create unrealistic expectations in newbies who then promptly experience large losses which cause them to think they they are a failure and therefore give up?

Until we get some sensible TF definitions worked out, we can't have meaningful communication. Without meaningful communication, the best we can hope to achieve is a few scattered individuals who are successful TF beekeepers and a whole lot of confusion, which is exactly what we have today.



We should at least draw a distinction between "non-treating beekeepers" and "treatment free beekeepers":

A "non-treating beekeeper" doesn't treat his hives.

A 'treatment free beekeeper" is a non-treater who achieves the same or lower losses for his area as a knowledgeable, experienced local treating beekeeper, and is able to harvest a reasonable amount of hive products compared to the local treating average, and has done so for more than a couple of years.





*these are just hypothetical examples, any potential seeming likeness to an actual forum member(s) is just a coincidence


----------



## JWChesnut

Repeated measures data from the Marin survey over several years shows the treat v. non-treat data is not a fluke, but is statistically valid at the p=< 0.0001 level. n= number of respondents, not colony count (which is not reported for other years).


----------



## squarepeg

excellent post shinbone. the definition of success likely varies wildly from one person to the next. it's complicated because success encompasses the tangible and well as the intangible.

for example the beginner that i helped get started in 2013 only wanted a couple of colonies, mostly for pollinating his gardens, but also to get a little honey for personal use as well as just having something interesting and enjoyable to do.

since the objectives of individual beekeepers ranges over a continuum of possibilities, so would the definitions of success.

i keep bees for enjoyment primarily, but i could accomplish that with just a hive or two and have much less work. i have decided to take my operation to the level of 'semi-serious sideliner', so being profitable is an important objective. being lucky enough to get bees derived from ferals that appear to be demonstrating natural resistance has motivated me to make an effort to propagate them. the decisions i make and the management i effect is the result of balancing these considerations.

for context here is how my 2014 season played out.

came out of winter with 15 colonies
dedicated 8 to honey production and 7 to splits for nuc sales
sold 13 nucs.
harvested a little over 400 lbs of honey.
ended up with 18 colonies going into winter.
took in right at $4000 for the year.
no treatments, no feeding.
successful? i'm satisfied and that's all that really matters.

the poor honey harvest was about half of last year's due to a shortened spring and a dry fall, plus several of my production hives swarmed and didn't provide much harvest. i got right about 150 lbs from my best hive, 120 from the next best one, and zero to 60 lbs from the rest.

my best guess is that there is not a substantial trade off of productivity for survivor traits with these bees. i'm still learning, and experimenting, and only time will tell. my approach for 2015 is to have all colonies by used for production _and_ nucs. i would like to average one nuc and three supers harvest from each hive. i think this is very doable if the weather cooperates. the potential is roughly $700 per hive and i am set up with equipment for up to 20 hives.


----------



## squarepeg

jwc, another way of looking at the data is that most of the bees the tf group lost would have been lost anyway even if they had treated.


----------



## beemandan

squarepeg said:


> jwc, another way of looking at the data is that most of the bees the tf group lost would have been lost anyway even if they had treated.


Again....considering the possibility that these are predominantly inexperienced beekeepers using ineffective timing or applications. I'd be sick if I lost thirty percent.


----------



## squarepeg

beemandan said:


> Again....considering the possibility that these are predominantly inexperienced beekeepers using ineffective timing or applications. I'd be sick if I lost thirty percent.


exactly dan. any conclusions derived from the results are subject to interpretation. in the op jwc seems to be claiming the results make his point that tf is a bunch of hooey.

what is clear is that there is much more to it than that.


----------



## shinbone

squarepeg said:


> exactly dan. any conclusions derived from the results are subject to interpretation. in the op jwc seems to be claiming the results make his point that tf is a bunch of hooey. what is clear is that there is much more to it than that.


Developing a standard definition of "treatment free beekeeper" would eliminate the "subject to interpretation" problem.


----------



## squarepeg

shinbone said:


> Developing a standard definition of "treatment free beekeeper" would eliminate the "subject to interpretation" problem.


that too.


----------



## JWChesnut

SquarePeg's comment on the Alabama "No Comb Law" ((different thread, source http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...owns-to-ban-pollinators&p=1194811#post1194811 )) may be crucial to the observation that Alabama appears to have a viable "no treatment" possibility.

A "No Comb Law" that effectively minimizes migratory use results in a local population that is un-adulterated. This permits natural selection to work strongly, and the "survivor" concept may actually be reflected in the genotype.

How common are "No Comb Laws". Do other states have this restriction in place and enforced ?


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

Maybe out of topic but I put these two questions :
- what is the average production per hive/year in the US?
- 30 % of lost hives per year in the US is the correct average?


----------



## bison

A note about the demographics of the Marin Beekeepers Association - of the roughly 350 members, I don't think that there are more than a dozen or so (at most) that have a material economic motivation to keep bees. The vast majority are backyard beekeepers with a few hives, even those with more (I have about a dozen) are in it for fun and some honey for friends and/or to sell in small quantities to pay for their hobby. I don't know for sure, but doubt that more than a handful have over 20 hives and would be surprised if anyone has more than 100. One very active member runs a small business with her husband http://bonniebeecompany.com/wp/about - Bonnie is responsible for starting the survey and it's linked in the "About" tab on her web site.

I suspect that the demographic of the MBC may be be materially different than other groups (after all, just about everything in Marin is different!). I think it's fair to say that in general we're in beekeeping for fun rather than profit, and are generally both idealistic and naive (certainly the latter given the relatively brief tenure in beekeeping of most members.


----------



## shannonswyatt

Bison, isn't that the case with most bee clubs? (few members materially motivated to keep bees) The folks in the club that make money from bees are there either for the social aspect or to sell stuff to other beeks. They get less from the club in the way of information than the beginners.


----------



## HarryVanderpool

shannonswyatt said:


> I don't think the loss of new beeks has muchto do with the methods of beekeeping. I think people get into because they think it is cool or something and then find out you have to work to keep them going. .


Shannon hit the nail right on the head.
One graph that is the most important is glaringly missing:
100% of the folks that go to bee school are people!
100% of people have lives, problems and issues that require attention in the course of their daily life.

We have been running a very successful bee school here in Salem, OR since 1967.
If everyone that left our school and started a hive attended our meetings we would have many thousands in attendance each month.
But no.
Our attendance is usually 40 - 80.

We need another graph:
"Why did you think you wanted to become a beekeeper?"
The graph would clearly show a majority of irrational reasons.

Add to that, the current irrational beekeeping practices that are currently the fad.
We are going to see an increase of new beekeepers falling out of the practice.


----------



## odfrank

Comments from a Marin neighbor:

I have kept bees one hour's drive from Marin county for 45 years. I have 25 years pre-mite experience, 20 years post mite experience, and eight years post (CCD, whatever that is/was) experience. Pre-mite losses were less than ten percent. I remember early on, once being shocked to find two winter dead in an apiary of 25. The mites came about 1994 and we would find dead hives when we went to harvest in fall, with the whole crop on but void of bees. I used Apistan a few years but it became ineffective. I tried Checkmite but it got bad publicity for being too comb contaminating, and also became ineffective. Both these treatments became only as effective as treatment free. I went completely treatment free for many years, the losses were moderate until 2006 when they rose to about 80%. The last few years I have tried MAQS, 22% loss from application. Wintergreen pads once, 100% success, but the same apiaries had good success untreated the previous year. This year I used one application of Hopguard II smuggled in from Texas on my main yard that has always suffered large losses, no data yet, one loss so far. Several strong hives at this site were left untreated because they had piles of wets occupying them, they are thriving as are the treated colonies. I have used small cell for ten years with no loss prevention evident.

Beekeeping is local, and as a reader of BeeSource for many years I have always felt that my losses here have been greater than what I read from across the country. As has been mentioned, we have no brood break here in suburban areas. Probably some of rural Marin County does have a winter brood break. Forage and climate can vary here in the Bay Area by a few miles. In suburban areas we have a problem with winter honey clogging of brood chambers. You can move two miles out of suburbia and be in a zone that requires winter stores be left on the hives. I have been able to keep my hive count up by overwintering nucs made in summer and fall and saturation bait hive trapping using combs from my dead hives. A large early swarm here can produce two mediums of crop, an over wintered nuc starts to build up after New Years and becomes a production hive by March. 
I have had some luck with using swarm cells from survivor hives, but not on all attempts. I have had no luck with California commercial bees, they have been dismal. I had great production success this season with B Weaver queens used on divides 7/6/13, but have lost about half over the summer and fall. 

Lets go easy on the Marin beekeepers, it's been a tough game here for a long time. I already in 2008 made these videos of massive overnight die offs of my hives. There are some nasty viruses along with the mites lurking about our neighborhoods. The graphs show that even treatment beekeepers need to replace 30% losses. When treatments cause 22%, losses they minimize their usefulness. I continue to have wonderfully healthy untreated hives standing next to those dropping dead. We can't expect hobbiests to have the time and need for multiple OA treatments a year. And does that make for 100% survival rate? Many people spend hundreds of dollars a year on annual flowers and vegetable without a second thought that they will die in winter. I tell beginners that their bees will not be like a cat or dog that lives for 20 years. One beginner named his package hives after his grand daughters. They were both gone that winter. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49G00nN6wSg&list=UUdeOrgFk3sLorf8olIvQeog

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6ax1EU_gOM&index=24&list=UUdeOrgFk3sLorf8olIvQeog


----------



## squarepeg

good post ollie. thanks for the synopsis and the insight into the difficulties faced by beekeepers out there.

jwc, i am cautiously optimistic that the conditions here may indeed be favorable for selection to play out and think i may be observing it in my apiary.


----------



## JWChesnut

No brood break indeed. The bees were working the Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) like mad *today*. Deafening buzz over the oak. Live Oak covers thousands of square miles in the coast range. Just spent an unproductive hour attempting to obtain an amino acid profile of Coast Live Oak pollen from a published source. Our spring is rolling.


----------



## DPBsbees

JWChesnut said:


> No brood break indeed. The bees were working the Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) like mad *today*. Deafening buzz over the oak. Live Oak covers thousands of square miles in the coast range. Just spent an unproductive hour attempting to obtain a amino acid profile of Coast Live Oak pollen from a published source. Our spring is rolling.


That's so cool, JW. It's not even winter here yet. I can't wait. Dan


----------



## kilocharlie

Ross - You only match those in the Marin data group with 15 years experience TF using the same breed of bees and who raise the same bloodline(s), except that you're in Texas, they are in Kaliphornya. Maybe there's a difference?

Some TF beeks also tell me they DO NOT FEED bees eek, and I wonder if they have higher or lower survival rates...also against those who feed cane sugar + Mega-Bee or Ultra-Bee vs. beet sugar vs. HFCS?

I would have to enlist as at least 2 people - half Treatment-Free but artificially fed, half IPM managed, with multiple bloodlines, 6 years experience but with close mentors of 41 years, 32 years, 30 years, 18 years, and 12 years, plus 2 local clubs, and a great uncle who did it for a long time. Not your average newbie (wearing out my second bee jacket), but not a seasoned veteran. I'd skew the curve for the inexperienced guys.

JWC - I really appreciate the post. Good to see what an active club can do. I just met the first commercial beek to come to our local club, now in it's 3rd year. San Diego also has a great club. Your conclusions aren't too far off the data.  Thank you.

Bison - Thank you for chiming in. I'll PM you for the rest of the data. Great post!

Shinbone - maybe we need to say Tbeek7/25 for a 7-year Treatment beekeeper with 25 hives, or IPMbeek10/450 for an IPM 10-year beekeeper with 450 hives, or TF beek1/2 for a Treatment-Free beekeeper with a year under his belt and 2 hives? Or perhaps (average # of hives) x years? Variable definitions of imprecise words like "beekeeper" is like trying to hit a good knuckleball.


----------



## shinbone

kilocharlie said:


> Shinbone - maybe we need to say Tbeek7/25 for a 7-year Treatment beekeeper with 25 hives, or IPMbeek10/450 for an IPM 10-year beekeeper with 450 hives, or TF beek1/2 for a Treatment-Free beekeeper with a year under his belt and 2 hives? Or perhaps (average # of hives) x years? Variable definitions of imprecise words like "beekeeper" is like trying to hit a good knuckleball.


Good point about just how to define "Treatment Free Beekeeper" ("TFB")? It won't work if it is too complicated. And, we can't expect mathematical precision in a word.

Maybe draw the line between "non-treater" and "Treatment Free Beekeeper" (TFB) as someone who has at least one hive survive 4 or more years with no treatments and usually harvests something (honey, wax, splits, queens, etc.) from that hive.

The beekeeping community openly acknowledging a difference between "non-treater" and TFB would save a lot of anguish for the starry-eyed newbies who want to be a TFB from day one. It being known there is a difference between non-treater and TFB, newbies choosing to attempt to go down the TFB path would at least be able to identify an appropriate TFB mentor, and, further, be aware of the high potential for failure. In other words, knowing what questions to ask is the first step in solving a problem. That would be a huge step forward, and would substantially reduce the new-beekeeper attrition rate.

I should add that "non-treater" shouldn't be a pejorative term, because a non-treater could be someone who is well on their way to being a TFB, but they just need another few seasons before it is demonstrably clear their treatment-free methods do indeed work and they are in fact a treatment free beekeeper.

I suspect that distinguishing between non-treater and TFB will be met with resistance because of those who are emotionally invested in their self-image as a TFB, but who are, in reality, simply non-treaters.





.


----------



## odfrank

I was a "successful" non-treater and treatment free beekeeper for about ten years between bouts of treatments. My production did not suffer, in fact it increased. But would anyone call me a success? Half of my hives died next to the half that lived, and I spent a huge amount of time making increase. 

I think the only definition of a "successful" treatment free beekeeper is one whose loss rate returns to that of the pre-mite era. I remember that as well below 10%. Do we have that data?


----------



## Nabber86

HarryVanderpool said:


> Add to that, the current irrational beekeeping practices that are currently the fad.
> We are going to see an increase of new beekeepers falling out of the practice.


The Fad Factor has a lot to do with. Not just TF, but hobby beekeeping in general. 

I don't have graphs to back it up, but in my opinion, most TF beekeepers = somebody who buys one or two hives, gets on the internet and talks a lot about it, is successful for a couple years, colonies die, and the beekeeping hobby ends. I am not saying that TF cannot be done with a lot of work and a lot of hive to work with, but a newby with a couple of hives spells disaster. I was treatment free myself for exactly 2 years, with a single hive. I just about gave up, but decided to keep pushing on.


----------



## shinbone

odfrank said:


> I think the only definition of a "successful" treatment free beekeeper is one whose loss rate returns to that of the pre-mite era. I remember that as well below 10%. Do we have that data?


That is a pretty high bar. I think only a small number of beekeepers would qualify.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

Eduardo Gomes said:


> Maybe out of topic but I put these two questions :
> - what is the average production per hive/year in the US?
> - 30 % of lost hives per year in the US is the correct average?


I found the answers to my two questions here:
http://www.honey.com/newsroom/press-kits/honey-industry-facts
http://beeinformed.org/2014/05/colony-loss-2013-2014/


----------



## shinbone

A graph of over-winter colony loss by year as reported by the Bee Informed Survey. It also includes what most beekeepers find to be an acceptable loss rate. Maybe this could form the foundation for a definition of "successful treatment free beekeeper," in that a TFB must usually at least be at the national average loss rate, plus typically harvest a hive product. Perhaps using the local region loss rate would be a better measure, if such data was available.


Figure 1: Summary of the total overwinter colony loss (October 1 – April 1) of managed honey bee colonies in the US across the 8 annual national surveys (red bars). The acceptable range (blue bars) is the average percentage of acceptable loss declared by the survey participants in each of the 8 years of the survey.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

Thanks shinbone for posting the chart (I still do not know to do it) . 
I agree that can be a base, but in my opinion to evaluate the success of all beekeepers (not only those who practice a TF) , and only with respect to this: lost colonies. Just my opinion.


----------



## odfrank

I noticed they only included winter losses in the graph. I ran out of bottled honey in July and was "lucky" enough to fine four dead colonies with about 100 pound crop getting robbed long before I was ready to harvest. These middle/end of the summer losses harken back to the first few years the mites arrived....dead colonies at the end of summer with the crop still on. Too bad the graph does not cover annual losses.


----------



## shinbone

odfrank said:


> I noticed they only included winter losses in the graph. . . . . Too bad the graph does not cover annual losses.


Such information may be available in the Survey. I didn't spend much time digging.

But the point is; maybe a comparison to some sort of average national loss rate could form the basis of a definition of a TFB?


----------



## shannonswyatt

odfrank said:


> I think the only definition of a "successful" treatment free beekeeper is one whose loss rate returns to that of the pre-mite era. I remember that as well below 10%. Do we have that data?


Wouldn't success be someone that doesn't treat and they have a similar loss rate to those that do treat in their area over time? That and having hives for long enough to have meaningful data. I would think five years minimum.

But just keeping the bees alive may not be the only marker of success. If you keep them alive, but you get no crop (crop could be honey, wax, more hives, etc) then you are only treading water.


----------



## odfrank

shinbone said:


> But the point is; maybe a comparison to some sort of average national loss rate could form the basis of a definition of a TFB?


Sure, if TF beekeeping can equal treatment beekeeping in losses ratios, they have achieved the best we can expect at this time. My goal of pre-mite loss levels is a pipe dream at this point until the miracle cure comes along. And I don't think we have seen that from either crowd.


----------



## shinbone

shannonswyatt said:


> Wouldn't success be someone that doesn't treat and they have a similar loss rate to those that do treat in their area over time? That and having hives for long enough to have meaningful data. I would think five years minimum.
> 
> But just keeping the bees alive may not be the only marker of success. If you keep them alive, but you get no crop (crop could be honey, wax, more hives, etc) then you are only treading water.


Sounds reasonable, and I agree with the last statement 100%. I think the last point is (intentionally or unintentionally) overlooked by many non-treaters, making them just masquerading as TFBs, as previously pointed out by a few posters.


----------



## squarepeg

michael palmer's sound advice to incorporate making increase (i.e. overwintering nucs) as a way to make up for winter losses applies to all beekeepers on or off treatments. 

i found it to be an enjoyable and rewarding adjunct to the endeavor.

my 21% loss last winter was easily overcome by an 89% gain over the season. most of those ended up as surplus and sold. 

the idea is to identify say your 20% least productive or otherwise undesirable colonies and split them up into nucs receiving queens made from your best colonies (while keeping those strong colonies dedicated to honey production).

this approach makes losses in the +/- 30% range pretty much a non-issue. the husbandry involved takes the beekeeper to the next level, and the effort should over time result in improved stock.

i assume that this is what a lot of experienced beekeepers are doing and why the 'acceptable' losses declared in the survey are so high.


----------



## shinbone

squarepeg said:


> the idea is to identify say your 20% least productive or otherwise undesirable colonies and split them up into nucs receiving queens made from your best colonies (while keeping those strong colonies dedicated to honey production.


What time of the year are these splits made, say, relative to swarm season or the honey harves?


----------



## squarepeg

it was spread out a bit for me this year shinbone from a couple of weeks after drones appeared (which came late this year because of weather) up until about the first week in june.

there are likely many individual variations on michael's theme.

my first splits are taken after drones start flying and involve taking out the queen and a few frames of bees from my best colonies. the strong donor colonies are allowed to requeen themselves. the cut down splits are used to replace my winter losses and to graft from.

then if i have colonies that swarmed too much and/or didn't make much honey last season i'll bust them up into mating nucs with two or three frames of bees and give them grafts.

so some of this is started just before swarm season but it continues through and possibly past it as well.


----------



## squarepeg

jwc, nice photo!

will this be their first brood cycle?


----------



## shinbone

Thanks for the info! I am hoping to raise queens for the first time this coming year. What you describe sounds like it would be perfect for me.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

odfrank said:


> I noticed they only included winter losses in the graph. […]Too bad the graph does not cover annual losses.


"
Preliminary results for the 2013/14 survey indicate that 20.0% of all colonies managed between April 1 2013 and Oct 1 2013 died. Responding beekeepers who managed bees over the entire April 2013 – April 2014 survey period reported losing 34.2% of the 670,568 colonies managed over this period.  The annual loss differs from the sum of summer and winter losses reported above because the respondent pool differed as only respondents who reported for both the summer and winter period are included in the annual loss rate calculation.

The 2012/13 survey expanded beyond only winter mortality estimates to improve our understanding of colony losses by also reporting on summer and annual colony mortality rates. Results from the 2012/13 survey indicated that that summer colony losses (between April 1 2012 and Oct 1 2012) were 25.3%. Loss estimate for the 12-month period (between April 1, 2012 and March 30, 2013) was 45.2%." in http://beeinformed.org/2014/05/colony-loss-2013-2014/


----------



## squarepeg

shinbone said:


> Thanks for the info! I am hoping to raise queens for the first time this coming year. What you describe sounds like it would be perfect for me.


you'll have fun shinbone. a donor colony making it's own queen is checked a month after splitting for eggs. nucs receiving ripe queen cells are checked three weeks after the cell is placed. be prepared to requeen or combine the few that are unsuccessful at getting a mated queen.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

shannonswyatt said:


> But just keeping the bees alive may not be the only marker of success. If you keep them alive, but you get no crop (crop could be honey, wax, more hives, etc) then you are only treading water.


I agree completely. A criterion for those engaged in the production of honey may be the average honey production of their country. If I have 100 hives in October 2014 and in June 2015 has 100 hives because again put back the lost hives , I will be a successful beekeeper ? Not necessarily . If the production of my hives is too low and produces for example on average per hive 50% or less of the national production I 'm not thinking I'm a successful beekeeper.


----------



## Acebird

Michael Palmer said:


> A short course in the spring and the new beekeeper picks up a package of bees...often from the teacher...and then it's have a nice day. And they're all but lost and when something goes wrong, well, they don't catch in time and..."Two months ago....etc"


This makes me smile. At our December club meeting the beginner course was discussed. It is now a one day all day course were as before it was several days over a couple of months. It is very hard to say whether this change is good or bad. When it is over several days people tend to miss some days.


----------



## johno

Our club in the Northern Neck of VA has a beginners course every year some get bees some do not but generally the new members do not do well, I think the reason is that beekeeping is being proselytized and that people are really not that interested are being dragged into a hobby that requires a fair amount of attention. I personally feel that the beekeepers needed are people that go to great length to get involved. The other thing that bothers is the math involved in loss calculation , lost 4 out of 40 over winter so a 10% loss but have 49 going into winter this year and also sent off 40 nucs and gave away 2 hives now what were my losses. I know of some members who lost 100% of their hives so this skews the picture some what, the 100% could be 1,2 or 3 hives.
Johno


----------



## HarryVanderpool

I remember the day well when I received my acceptance letter for college. What a happy day!

Maybe that is the way we should go; have them fill out a lengthy bee school application with a 500 word essay question at the end: "Why I think I would like to become a beekeeper."
If their essay comes back with the terms, "I don't" or "I won't" more than twice they will get back the, "Thank you for your interest in our school......." letter.


----------



## Nabber86

squarepeg said:


> michael palmer's sound advice to incorporate making increase (i.e. overwintering nucs) as a way to make up for winter losses applies to all beekeepers on or off treatments.
> 
> i found it to be an enjoyable and rewarding adjunct to the endeavor.
> 
> my 21% loss last winter was easily overcome by an 89% gain over the season. most of those ended up as surplus and sold.


Amen to that. Treatment free or not, splits, nucs, and swarm catching are the top three ways to keep your colony numbers up. It is really hard for hobby beeks because they think 1 or 2 hives will do just fine (myself included). Buying nucs or packages year after year is not the way to go about it.


----------



## Honey-4-All

As previously mentioned and noted by ODFRANK we have yards in Marin. I would rate it by far as one of the worst counties in Northern California with "adequate" natural food to maintain healthy honeybees. This is and has been especially true during the drought the past few years. With the reported losses, when one takes into consideration the drought and the TF hippy laced mentality of many beeks therewithin, I am not the least bit surprised with the numbers. The only reason to keep bees there is that all those folks who like to cross the bridge to their million dollar jobs in the city happen also have the means to fork out the "big" bucks for "local" honey. See: http://www.marshallshoney.com/p-167-allergy-relief-honey-package-marin-county.aspx


----------



## squarepeg

squarepeg said:


> marin sounds like a not so bee friendly place.





Honey-4-All said:


> As previously mentioned and noted by ODFRANK we have yards in Marin. I would rate it by far as one of the worst counties in Northern California with "adequate" natural food to maintain healthy honeybees. This is and has been especially true during the drought the past few years.


makes sense, thanks.


----------



## David LaFerney

High numbers of people dropping out of hobby beekeeping after only a year or two shouldn't be surprising. I bet plenty of us have an embarrasingly long list of abandoned (expensive) hobbies in our past. I know I do. 

To some degree I enjoyed all of them - one thing that is different is that beekeeping produces income, and thus somewhat more buy in from my wife. Previous hobbies were pretty much money pits.

If beekeeping is a money pit you aren't doing it right.


----------



## Nabber86

David LaFerney said:


> I bet plenty of us have an embarrassingly long list of abandoned (expensive) hobbies in our past. I know I do.
> 
> If beekeeping is a money pit you aren't doing it right.


I abandoned my saltwater reef aquarium a few years ago; talk about a money pit. 

My definition of a successful hobby beekeeper is to keep 4 to 6 hives and eventually recoup some of my expenses. At least with bees there is a possibility of that. 1 or 2 hives and treatment free is an impossibility for just about anyone.


----------



## AstroBee

JWChesnut said:


> The bees were working the Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia)


Cool tree. Almost looks like a type of holly tree with acorns.


----------



## David LaFerney

Nabber86 said:


> My definition of a successful hobby beekeeper is to keep 4 to 6 hives and eventually recoup some of my expenses. At least with bees there is a possibility of that. 1 or 2 hives and treatment free is an impossibility for just about anyone.


I have a friend who usually sells $2000.00 worth of honey (more or less of course) from 6-8 backyard hives. Been doing it for many years. So it is certainly doable. 

Imho more emphasis should be put on this aspect of the hobby - AND, full disclosure up front about the investments that are required to accomplish that.

I have another friend who has been TF with 4-5 hives for about 5 years. She lives in the sticks, lets them swarm, makes a bit of honey and pollinates her garden - and she seems happy with that. But yeah, 1-2 tf hives seems like the hard way to me.


----------



## odfrank

The native flora in the Bay Area does not suitably support bees for production purposes. They are covered with oak trees and grasslands. In the right areas groves of Eucalyptus globulus will aid the bees. The suburban areas are often a honey flood zone, irrigated and full of a thousand different types of bee favorable shrubs and trees.


----------



## AstroBee

squarepeg said:


> my first splits are taken after drones start flying and involve taking out the queen and a few frames of bees from my best colonies.


Sorry, a bit off topic, but do the original colonies still make a good crop using this technique? I'll do cut-down splits, but not that early. Just doing the math, 12 days to a new virgin, 7-10 days till eggs, plus 21 days to newly emerged workers seems like a long time at the peak of brood rearing. I guess it all depends on how strong the parent colony was prior to the split. Or perhaps you have other objectives in mind for the split?


----------



## JWChesnut

AstroBee said:


> do the original colonies still make a good crop using this technique? I'll do cut-down splits, but not that early. Just doing the math, 12 days to a new virgin, 7-10 days till eggs, plus 21 days to newly emerged workers seems like a long time at the peak of brood rearing.


This is germane to Coastal Calif hobby beekeeping. The main honeyflow is Eucalyptus (January to May). Cut-down splits work to short-cut swarming, especially useful in suburban beekeeping where uncontrolled swarming leads to neighbor conflicts. 

However, a late April split might not even hatch a queen before the honey flow stops cold. The loss rate in Marin may reflect their adoption of methods (summer "walkaway splits") that work just fine in Nebraska, but are entirely inappropriate for Mediterranean Dry Summers. Once every couple of years, the coast gets a honey flow off summer-flowering Toyon, Coffeeberry, and Ceanothus. Those exceptional years "the Nebraska model" might work, or in urban contexts with landscaping. Nucs and Packages produced for the rest of the country and coming online in April are equally poorly timed for the soon-fading California coastal bloom.

As Honey-4-all implies, the inner coast range with pastures of Star Thistle and Vinegar weed, and irrigated agriculture, has better forage in normal years than the coast with its unbroken canopy of Live Oak.


----------



## squarepeg

AstroBee said:


> Sorry, a bit off topic, but do the original colonies still make a good crop using this technique? I'll do cut-down splits, but not that early. Just doing the math, 12 days to a new virgin, 7-10 days till eggs, plus 21 days to newly emerged workers seems like a long time at the peak of brood rearing. I guess it all depends on how strong the parent colony was prior to the split. Or perhaps you have other objectives in mind for the split?


the parent colonies have been making 2 - 3 supers of harvestable honey after splitting if given drawn supers to fill. (there was less harvest this year compared to the previous ones due to whacky weather). when made early even the three frame queenright splits will sometimes build up enough to yield a little harvest, especially when they are given drawn comb from the winter dead outs. i've been amazed at how productive some of the colonies have been.

the objectives so far have been to maintain colony count and generate surplus colonies while propagating from the best performers (and most long-lived colonies), as well as getting a respectable honey crop. (getting grafts is much easier for me when the breeder queens are in nucs or singles).

i do wait until the colonies have built up nice and strong and i leave lots of brood of all ages behind. this has happened as soon as late march and as late as early may depending on the spring weather. drones are already flying by the time of splitting and we are typically on the verge of swarm season.

so far my best attempts at checker boarding (even with walt's help) have only held my swarming down to about 50%, and the swarmed hives produce very little if any honey. the split hives make more than a swarmed hive, but not as much as one that was prevented from swarming. i am considering conceding the swarm by doing cut down splits on all of my hives next spring. if it works out i hope to average a new nuc plus 100 lbs. harvest per hive. that way all hives are productive and i think my average income per hive will better.

as part of this new approach, i'm considering equalizing populations through the spring build up by donated frames of capped brood with adhering nurse bees from the biggest colonies to the smallest ones.


----------



## bison

odfrank said:


> The native flora in the Bay Area does not suitably support bees for production purposes. They are covered with oak trees and grasslands. In the right areas groves of Eucalyptus globulus will aid the bees. The suburban areas are often a honey flood zone, irrigated and full of a thousand different types of bee favorable shrubs and trees.


Marin has a multitude of microclimates, from wet and foggy along the SF bay, to urban irrigated gardens, to dry rural grasslands in the west. I've had honeys from hives no more than 5 miles or so away from each other that are dramatically different, with a dark molasses-like honey from rural areas with lots of native buckwheat and light sweet honey from residential neighborhoods. Eucalyptus is important in some areas - at our last meeting a keeper mentioned that he's already adding honey supers as his hives have been bringing in so much Euc nectar already. 

Not only is the climate diverse, but so is the legal environment for keeping bees. In some towns it's largely unregulated, in others next door it requires expensive permits and neighbor consent (which of course are strictly adhered to...). The MBC has been very active in liberalizing local laws, with a big win earlier this year in convincing San Rafael to deregulate beekeeping (partly thanks to 50 or so members showing up at the city council meeting... and one member on the council!).


----------



## Oldtimer

squarepeg said:


> for context here is how my 2014 season played out.
> 
> came out of winter with 15 colonies
> dedicated 8 to honey production and 7 to splits for nuc sales
> sold 13 nucs.
> harvested a little over 400 lbs of honey.
> ended up with 18 colonies going into winter.
> took in right at $4000 for the year.
> no treatments, no feeding.
> successful? i'm satisfied and that's all that really matters.
> 
> the poor honey harvest was about half of last year's due to a shortened spring and a dry fall, plus several of my production hives swarmed and didn't provide much harvest. i got right about 150 lbs from my best hive, 120 from the next best one, and zero to 60 lbs from the rest.


Got a few thoughts on that. The method is well thought out and also turned a profit that I suspect may be better than average for many. 
Something to consider though is the weak point was that some of the production hives swarmed and had production affected. Also the hives dedicated to splitting made roughly 2 saleable splits each but no honey harvest. Here's how I handle this problem. All hives are to make both splits and honey. If the 15 hives had each had one earlyish nuc taken, swarming would have been reduced but the hives could all be treated as honey production hives. Later, after the new queens were mated and laying, any hives that still looked like they may swarm could have packages shaken but all brood left. The packages are added to the splits to give the new queen the ability to lay a greater area & get those splits fired up. In addition there are 15 hives going into honey production cos they were only split lightly enough to stop swarming.

That's kind of based on what I do but may be totally inappropriate in your area I don't know, but it's a thought. Thing is, in one way all my management is based around swarm control. That's because any hive that swarms out on me is an expense of hundreds of dollars lost income that season to me. So all hives are harvested for bees in spring and hit pretty hard if need be. But last season I lost almost zero swarms, instead all those bees were in my boxes, and turning a buck for me.


----------



## squarepeg

many thanks oldtimer! all points very well taken and i appreciate you taking the time.

your approach is similar to where i think i am heading with what i want to try next year. 

my goal is to average 6 - 7 hundred dollars income per hive with 20 hives. that's averaging one nuc and two and a half supers of honey sold per hive. if our weather is more or less typical i think it's doable, especially since i now have almost enough drawn super comb.

that may be a lofty goal but hey, if you don't aim high you will always hit low.


----------



## sterling

Oldtimer. How early is earlyish compared to the "normal swarm season" and do you move the queen with the nuc or leave her in the big hive? Am I correct in assuming you let one or the other make a queen. Please explain split lightly.


----------



## johno

Hi Oldtimer, I basically used your system of swarm control last season, unfortunately left too many queen cells in the hives so ended up with many virgin queen swarms. Virgin queen swarms were easy to catch and hive and so I ended up with more nucs than I bargained for, some of the hives swarmed more than once with emerging virgins. So although I moved 40 nucs honey production was not good some 6oolbs plus from 20 hives. So will try again next season to remove the queen and a nuc and give or leave just one queen cell on half my hives and try out one of the short versions of the Demaree system and try to see if I can get a better honey harvest
Johno


----------



## sterling

johno said:


> Hi Oldtimer, I basically used your system of swarm control last season, unfortunately left too many queen cells in the hives so ended up with many virgin queen swarms. Virgin queen swarms were easy to catch and hive and so I ended up with more nucs than I bargained for, some of the hives swarmed more than once with emerging virgins. So although I moved 40 nucs honey production was not good some 6oolbs plus from 20 hives. So will try again next season to remove the queen and a nuc and give or leave just one queen cell on half my hives and try out one of the short versions of the Demaree system and try to see if I can get a better honey harvest
> Johno


I am under the impression that Oldtimer makes his splits before the bees start swarm cells. Hope he will explain.


----------



## Oldtimer

Yes the first splits are made before swarming time. 



sterling said:


> Oldtimer. How early is earlyish compared to the "normal swarm season" and do you move the queen with the nuc or leave her in the big hive? Am I correct in assuming you let one or the other make a queen. Please explain split lightly.


The queens are left in the hives, production is important and those hives have to pump! The nucs are given queen cells I have raised separately which speeds things up a lot in terms of getting a laying queen into that nuc. I do not wait till the hives are making swarm cells this would be very high risk for me, plus I like to get the first splits kicked off before that time anyway.

Johno, sounds like in the end you did OK! For me, it's not economic to go swarm chasing so things are more controlled. I'm lucky in my area there is a series of flows for a long time over summer which makes it possible to continue taking nucs and packages off the hives right through the season. But a lot of people don't have this luxury so if people are in an area with a short sharp flow, taking just enough, whatever that is, to stop swarming, is the most advantageous way to go. Something not usually considered by hobbyists is taking packages. But if a person can get geared up for that it can do surprisingly little damage to the hive if all brood is left they quickly bounce back, and the packages themselves are real handy for boosting those splits into saleable condition. Taking packages kicks swarming in the guts. More so than taking nucs. I can shake out a hive with swarm cells, I don't even bother to kill the cells, the bees do it themselves once they realise swarming is not now possible cos 80% of the bees are gone. I do this once weather is warm enough that those few bees left can just keep that brood alive till hatching.

However I know this is way off topic but just responding to the posts.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

In this respect I agree with the Oldtimer and the squarepeg focusing management around the swarming.
My preventing swarming (2 a 3 weeks before swarming timings) into account along with the ages of queens. Then I'm making some adjustments according to what each hive will telling me week after week. The reproductive swarming in my area goes from the end of March to mid-May.
1 ) To queens with more than 1.5 to 2 years of age: a walk away split;
2 ) To queens with about 1 years: checkerboarding and short version of Demaree;
3 ) To queens under 1 years: checkerboarding.

With these measures I can multiply my colonies by a factor of 1,8 to 2.
Moreover approximately 80 % of the colonies give me my one to two crops. I do transhumances/migratory about 40 % of my colonies of small distance and altitude.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

Oldtimer said:


> Something not usually considered by hobbyists is taking packages. But if a person can get geared up for that it can do surprisingly little damage to the hive if all brood is left they quickly bounce back, and the packages themselves are real handy for boosting those splits into saleable condition. Taking packages kicks swarming in the guts.


Excellent. I had never thought about this option.


----------



## Oldtimer

BTW Squarepeg good luck with the plan, if you can get everything exactly right you may be able to pull it off!

For me though usually not everything goes exactly right . But as you say, have a plan and aim high!


----------



## squarepeg

thanks again ot. we'll keep ya posted!


----------



## sterling

Thanks Oldtimer for your reply. Good stuff.


----------



## AstroBee

Oldtimer said:


> Yes the first splits are made before swarming time.
> 
> The queens are left in the hives, production is important and those hives have to pump!


Excellent advice OT. I really don't like to pull queens during build-up as it can really impact yields. Even a cut-down performed just prior to the peak flow may have a negative impact. I know its supposed to be a net plus, but I'm not sure how often you really see increased yields.


----------



## Oldtimer

Thanks AstroBee I always value your opinion.

Got to let this thread get back on topic, but first just for anyone thinking of making packages it's easier than you may think. Just find the queen, put her aside, and start shaking. Or put an excluder plus a box of 6 frames on top, smoke the bees up & shake. A very strong 2 brood box hive can make 1 1/2 4lb packages and if weather is OK still have enough bees to get the brood hatched and hive back to good shape in a few weeks.

Below is a pic of my shaker sitting on a package, it's made of tin but a quick cheap one could be made from ply or probably even cardboard.


----------



## sqkcrk

laketrout said:


> Two things that surprised me if I'm reading the graphs right , looks like formic did a better job than oa , could that be because it kills mites under the cappings but does it show how many queens died from formic and the other -- it shows more dead outs in ( Oct. - Dec. ) than ( Jan . - March ) I would have thought the end of the season would claim more hives with stores running out .


It could have something to do with when applications were made and the beekeepers themselves.


----------



## squarepeg

AstroBee said:


> Even a cut-down performed just prior to the peak flow may have a negative impact. I know its supposed to be a net plus, but I'm not sure how often you really see increased yields.


agreed. i've yet to see increased yields but i'm not doing the cut down exactly as presribed whereby all of the open brood is removed. i've felt that leaving only capped brood would leave them queenless and broodless for too long and invite the workers to start laying. plus i was concerned that the single deep brood box would get honey bound.

astro, what is your main swarm prevention method?


----------



## David LaFerney

Oldtimer said:


> put an excluder plus a box of 6 frames on top, smoke the bees up & shake.


Just a bit more detail please! Brood frames? Vented cover? How much smoke? Smoke alone or smoke + bee repellant?

I'm picturing this as a possible fall back position for when cells get built despite other actions.

I've come to see swarms as at least $100 worth of bees + $100 worth of honey lost. A weakened hive that doesn't swarm makes far more money than any hive that does. Better to sell the bees than to send them to the trees!


----------



## Oldtimer

That was the method we used in fall after honey harvest, the now 2 deep hives would be boiling with bees. It was to make packages to send overseas, our fall being Northen Hemisphere spring. We would walk around the yard and take all the lids off the hives & put an excluder on top followed by a box with 6 evenly spaced empty combs, most likely white but could be anything. The lid or at least mat (not vented although not sure that matters) would go on top of this box. Then we'd walk around with a smoker & a rubber hammer & give each hive a good smoking through the entrance plus a drumming on the side of the box with the hammer. We would then walk around the yard & do them all again, each hive would get done 3 or 4 times. The top boxes, now full of bees, would then get shaken. The reason for only 6 evenly spaced combs was to give the bees room to cluster between combs. The shaker we used for that was wider then the one pictured, it held a whole box.

However this method did leave quite a lot of bees in the hive, for swarm control it may not be adequate, more may need to be taken. What I do now, if I'm shaking bees and find a hive preparing to swarm and boiling with bees, long as the weather is warm I'll find the queen and shake all the combs in the hive. All that's left to re stock the hive is the queen which gets put back with whatever bees are on the comb she's on, and the bees that escape during shaking plus returning foragers. This leaves barely enough bees to keep the brood warm and they shelve any plans to swarm plus destroy any cells. Judgement has to be used, if there's obviously not going to be enough bees left to do that I'll leave a few frames not shaken. Although I'm slamming that hive, it's still a hive that I want to produce and be harvested for more bees later plus make some honey, so it's important to leave the hive in a state that no brood will be lost and it can bounce back to strong again quickly.

The caveat with all this is the hives must be healthy and close to zero mites. If there is a mite load or any other problem then the bees just will not have the resilience to rebuild. The morale of the hives need to be high so that taking bees like this just stimulate them to work harder, my income is primarily from bee sales so I'm working it in such a way to produce maximum bees during a season rather than a one off hit. The hives must not go below that critical mass that allows maximum production from a 2 deep brood nest. Although if they are planning to swarm, it is more economic to hit them hard, than have them swarm.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

Oldtimer said:


> What I do now, if I'm shaking bees and find a hive preparing to swarm and boiling with bees, long as the weather is warm I'll find the queen and shake all the combs in the hive


Very good stuff!
Oldtimer in addition to the queen swarming cells, which are other previous signs that you have in mind to make the prognosis that the hive is preparing to swarm?


----------



## Oldtimer

Queen cells is the main one but also the behaviour of the bees, ie (not always) but sometimes they can just stop work plus be extremely docile. Again not always, but sometimes the brood pattern can go patchy and the empty cells full of nectar among the brood, as the queen slows laying so she can lose weight to be able to fly.

Also here is a link to a video of some guys taking packages by the exact same way I do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYJoXmX1bI4


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

Oldtimer said:


> Also here is a link to a video of some guys taking packages by the exact same way I do.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYJoXmX1bI4


Very standardized work. Oldtimer I have a pick-up for my beekeeping work. If I want to transport the bees packages without queen from an apiary to the other in a 30 minutes to 45 min. trip can I do it without problems on days with temperatures of 80F in boxes dedicated like the ones in the video?


----------



## Oldtimer

Yes but there has to be a gap between each package for ventilation, as long as your vehicle is moving they are OK. But if you are not moving they cannot be left in the sun very long they get too hot they will die. Also in the bee yard as you make them they have to be put in the shade. If there is nothing else, under the truck is OK plus ensure gap between them. In those temperatures they can die very quick so you need no sun, good ventilation, and not many bees on the outside of the package.

If you are going to add the bees to other nucs or hives to boost them, here is what I found works best. The bees should not be added to a different hive the same day they are shaken because they see the other queen as different and may kill her. The packages should be sprinkled with sugar water at the end of the day it puts them in a better mood. Next day, they should be taken to the hives they will be added to, and sprinkled with water to stop too much flying, and added to the hives. If weather is cold, warm water should be used.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

Oldtimer said:


> If you are going to add the bees to other nucs or hives to boost them, here is what I found works best. The bees should not be added to a different hive the same day they are shaken because they see the other queen as different and may kill her. The packages should be sprinkled with sugar water at the end of the day it puts them in a better mood. Next day, they should be taken to the hives they will be added to, and sprinkled with water to stop too much flying, and added to the hives. If weather is cold, warm water should be used.


Yes it is my plan. 
In some apiaries I finish the harvest when other apiaries are starting the crop. I am thinking to use this technique to strengthen the hives in latter apiaries with harvesting bees of the first apiaries.

I usually use a few drops of essential oils of eucalyptus or lavender to harmonize scent. If I add a few drops of these oils in water and spray the bees on the hive and the bees in the package I think that will get to avoid the kill of the queen and the fight between bees. Bearing in mind that I only do the next day as you advised.


----------



## Oldtimer

A while back I sold a bunch of queens to a bee club. Soon got feedback that several of the queens had not been accepted by the bees, they were killed.

I spoke with the people who had lost queens. Turns out they had all sprayed their hive with lavender, because that's what someone at the club had recommended. Out of the people who had not sprayed their hives with lavender, there were no losses.

Because I'm a nice guy I gave everyone who had lost the queen a free replacement, the condition being they did not spray the hive with lavender. There was 100% success.

Lavender is used as an insect repellent. I don't see how anything good can be accomplished by using it in a beehive.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

I believe that I am not correctly translate the name of the plant. The scientific name is _Lavandula stoechas_ and is one of the major nectar plants of Portugal. The essential oil of this plant never seemed to have negative effects on the times I used. But I will do just as you explained, using only water. :thumbsup:

Oldtimer you can see here the plant: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavandula_stoechas
"L. stoechas luisieri, which has petals much less interconnected. It is found mainly in Portugal and adjacent regions of Spain."


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

I did some research and you are correct. The essential oils of Lavandula stoechas are used as insect repellent. I am very surprised! Of the time I used to join weak hives (never used with the introduction of queens) ever I realized negative effects.
I'll stop using it. Thank you Oldtimer.


----------



## AstroBee

squarepeg said:


> astro, what is your main swarm prevention method?


Kind of two distinct threads going on here... Sorry JWC

My swarm control consists several distinct actions depending upon population relative to the point in the season. 

1. Throttling back populations by removing 1 or 2 frames of brood and bees. These are used to help make up mating nucs. This is done as early as weather permits.
2. Cut-down splits at the start of the peak flow. Timing is critical - too soon and you lose production, too late and you may lose your bees. 
3. super early and make sure they always have overhead space. Bottom supering can be helpful, but more work.
4. provide an upper entrance.
5. Cull colonies that so excess signs of swarming. I have two colonies from last year that are on the "naughty list" and will be requeened in the spring with more swarm resistant stock.
6. During inspection, observe the broodnest to insure things look good, i.e., no backfilling, good brood patterns, and if the opportunity presents peek at the queen. Big monster queens are not going anywhere soon. Thin runny queens get my attention in swarm season. 
7. make lots of queens from your most swarm resistant colonies.


----------



## squarepeg

perfect. many thanks astrobee. (also sorry for straying off topic jwc)


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

also sorry for straying off topic jwc x 2


----------



## winevines

johno said:


> Our club in the Northern Neck of VA has a beginners course every year some get bees some do not but generally the new members do not do well, I think the reason is that beekeeping is being proselytized and that people are really not that interested are being dragged into a hobby that requires a fair amount of attention. I personally feel that the beekeepers needed are people that go to great length to get involved.


IF true, that in my opinion is a terrible approach. People should not be dragged in- but they do show up interested in droves. We are part of the Northern Virginia Teaching Consortium. Our short course is 7 weeks minimum. Our club tries very hard to lay out the cost and time involved before just signing up students. At least we try- it does not always work out. Also we have not ordered packages as a club for many years. Last year, no packages ordered for students either. Just nucs produced from our members. Build it and they will come.


----------



## winevines

Back to the folks in Marin- I have followed their data for a few years. One thing they have done really successfully if you can look at the data over time is dramatically increase the number of colonies started from nucs and splits vs. packages- and many of those are indeed the newcomers. Of course, all that has been said on this forum is true about new beeks... we were all there once, and I continue to be humbled daily.

I think most clubs must have a philosophy, stated or not, that influences the membership. Some voices are louder than others. I like to think our own club is open to all ideas, but we too have our own philosophy and we are overt with it. We are very focused on promoting a Sustainable Apiary model as outlined by MP. I find the few citizen science data collection and analysis efforts like Marin, BANV, PWRBA, and Overland Apiaries helpful as they all demonstrate better survival of colonies started with nucs vs. packages and some even show an even better survival when local queens are used. I used to be less opinionated about the treatment free approach, but now we have some data on that too- 30% loss seems to be the average or maybe the minimum for that approach. Some feel that is also the "national" average too, so what- they are comfortable with it. Fair enough (except for that drift factor of remaining bees from the dead outs!). Marin's data clearly shows TF have higher losses than that. BIG KUDOS to them for actually sharing their data. So many proponents of TF never do- some of us are still waiting to hear real numbers or even estimated numbers.


----------



## Michael Palmer

winevines said:


> BIG KUDOS to them for actually sharing their data. So many proponents of TF never do- some of us are still waiting to hear real numbers or even estimated numbers.


Yes, I agree. Some of us are.


----------



## Oldtimer

Agree with that. A good portion of the people that influenced me to go TF are gone now. There was a lot of talk at the time about their "success" but once they had big losses they just quietly disappeared without much of a mention.


----------



## johno

Winevines, I think there seem to be too many new beekeepers who are influenced by the media hype of the dying honeybees and are out to save the honeybees and really do not save anything, I maintain better to be like the old days, if you are interested in bees look for a beekeeper and go and help him and learn while you are doing the field work, when the beekeeper thinks you know enough he will most probably give you your beginnings of a hive. So the practical work comes first. JMHO.
Johno


----------



## Acebird

Oldtimer said:


> There was a lot of talk at the time about their "success" but once they had big losses they just quietly disappeared without much of a mention.


You are absolutely certain that they don't have bees today? Most people will shy away from "I told you so" brow beating that unfortunately is common on public forums. That does not mean that they gave up the ship. You will come across very few Acebird's in your life so don't expect me to quietly disappear.


----------



## Oldtimer

No not absolutely certain Ace. Some of them may still have bees, or maybe even started treating. I think it's more a problem with the net. Once people take a position and write something, it's set in stone for all to see, for eternity. Once these one and two year beeks write a whole lot of stuff, particularly if they have been vociferous and argumentative, and later realise they had it wrong or their method does not work as stated, publicly changing position is too unpalatable for them so they just disappear.

It's why Facebook is losing popularity. Too many people spilled all their beans when they were young and stupid, and now wish that could be left in the past.


----------



## shinbone

"_You are absolutely certain that they don't have bees today?_"

Of course Oldtimer is not "absolutely certain." He never said he was. What a straw man argument. No one can be absolutely certain about what happened to all the people who loudly proclaimed the gospel of Treatment Free (or any other style of beekeeping) and then suddenly disappeared from Beesource. The obvious explanation, though, is that it wasn't as easy as such newbies fervently and vocally wished, their TF apiaries imploded, and they just quit when they realized how hard keeping bees actually is and/or how much it would cost to rebuild. No one is going to quit beekeeping and then come back on Beesource to effectively announce they were a failure.

Too bad we don't have a way to survey how many people have quit keeping bees, and whether they were T or TF beekeepers.

"_You will come across very few Acebird's in your life so don't expect me to quietly disappear._" So, are you saying that your TF beekeeping efforts have been a failure?


----------



## shannonswyatt

I think people start hobbies and stop hobbies for all sorts of different reasons. Not sure that you can directly relate this to treatment versus treatment free. A friend from our club said that he may get out of it, and he has been keeping bees for a long time and was commercial with over 1000 hives for a while when he was a younger man. 

The zeal of a convert tends to be high.


----------



## Lauri

I've learned a lot from Beesource, including this:










:digging:


----------



## Acebird

shinbone said:


> " No one is going to quit beekeeping and then come back on Beesource to effectively announce they were a failure.


No person that I know that accomplished something hasn't had failures. People who don't do anything don't have failures. I think you are mistaken if you think the majority of people who leave beesource are failures.


----------



## shinbone

"_No person that I know that accomplished something hasn't had failures._" I agree, but not relevant to Oldtimer's point.

"_People who don't do anything don't have failures._" I agree, with this, too, but, again, not relevant.

"_I think you are mistaken if you think the majority of people who leave beesource are failures._" I never said this, and I don't think this way, and, again, not relevant.

The point is, newbies who say how easily achievable TF beekeeping is, and that they are gonna do it from day one, and that all the naysayers are just sycophants for Monsanto, and then have their apiary implode due to mites, don't come back to Beesource to confess their vaunted TF method(s) failed.


----------



## FollowtheHoney

shinbone said:


> "
> 
> The point is, newbies who say how easily achievable TF beekeeping is, and that they are gonna do it from day one, and that all the naysayers are just sycophants for Monsanto, and then have their apiary implode due to mites, don't come back to Beesource to confess their vaunted TF method(s) failed.


Who are all these newbies promoting TF? Clearly, MB is not a newbie. I know there are other TF beekeepers out there, but it seems to me they are pretty reserved, and not because of universal failure. I am very new and unsure where I will land on the TF debate, but I have never felt pushed towards TF here, just the opposite.


----------



## shinbone

"_Who are all these newbies promoting TF?_"

Exactly the point. What happens to them? Where do they all go? If TF is so effective and simple, why don't the TF numbers continue to grow and grow so that there are lots of them?


----------



## Oldtimer

It was more so a few years ago FollowtheHoney, believe it or not things are a bit quieter around here now.

Some of those heads are older and wiser now and some have even realised the need and crossed to the dark side.

Back then there was pretty head on confrontation complete with name calling etc, even claims of ignorance, immorality, etc. There's still tension but there is actually a better understanding of the positions of others now, in my opinion. I believe the online treatment free community, has in the main, accepted that for some beekeepers going treatment free is not going to work, and that has improved relations from the time when it was said everybody should just stop treating, and the ones who don't are ignorant and ruin it for the rest.

Those kind of things are still said of course but a good portion of treatment free beeks understand that for say, commercial migratory beekeeping, the extra stresses such as hundreds of hives all loaded on a truck for several days with huge exchange of bees between hives going on, and other things, mean those bees will not make it without good mite management. Or even stationary small scale beeks hives in certain locations will not survive mites untreated purely because of the location and what else is around.


----------



## Acebird

shinbone said:


> newbies who say how easily achievable TF beekeeping is,


I have been pretty regular on BS for the last three years and I am having a hard time recollecting newbies who want to do TF from day one say it is easily achievable if what you really mean is long term sustainable. Achievable couldn't be easier. Buy bees throw them in a box and walk away. Sustainable takes more effort and I think most newbies know this if not initially then soon after otherwise they wouldn't be here in the first place.
Have you ever been in any other hobby? There are always newbies coming and going usually because of cost.


----------



## FollowtheHoney

Thanks, OT, I have seen some pretty unfriendly past threads. I try to avoid them as I think we are all much more than what is seen in our posts.


----------



## Oldtimer

Absolutely. I would love to meet a lot of Beesource guys, whichever side of the fence they are on I am sure we would enjoy talking bees or working bees together, if we actually met.

Because I'm on Beesource the odd beekeeper has contacted me when visiting my country and even come out and help me working the bees, most of these beekeepers are treatment free but working bees with me we get on fine there is too much in common, they love working some good productive hives, treating is barely discussed.


----------



## FollowtheHoney

Agreed Ace, that is what I see.


----------



## shinbone

"_I have been pretty regular on BS for the last three years and I am having a hard time recollecting newbies who want to do TF from day one say it is easily achievable if what you really mean is long term sustainable._"

That is a critical caveat. There is a big difference between simply not treating versus not treating while still having healthy hives long term. Many TF beekeepers never acknowledge or get past this point.

In the thread linked below, the OP asks for people who have been TF for 5 or more years to post. As of my post here, that "5-year TF" thread has been up for about 6 weeks and a total of 14 people posted they had been TF for 5 or more years. That is a tiny tiny fraction of the number of beekeepers on Beesource, and, I bet, a small fraction of Beesource members who consider themselves treatment free beekeepers. Accordingly, it seems to me that there are very few people who are sustainable TF beekeepers (if you could even call "5 years" sustainable). Surely, there were more than 14 people who started out as TF beekeepers in the last 5 to 10 years. Where'd they go? I contend things didn't work out and most quietly (and unfortunately for the beekeeping community) moved on to other projects. 

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?305116-TF-For-5-Seasons-of-More-Please-Stand-Up

Further, this relates to the point I was hoping to make in Post #44 of this thread - that is, we should distinguish between "TF beekeeping" and "successful TF beekeeping." I used the terms "non-treating beekeepers" to describe beekeepers who didn't treat and "treatment free beekeepers" to describe beekeepers who didn't treat and who had long term, healthy, productive hives. 

Perhaps better terminology would be "treatment free" and "_sustainable_ treatment free," as alluded to in a previous posts. "S_ustainable_" doesn't exactly capture the "healthy" and "productive" parts of "successful," but it is a good step in the right direction and is easy for a newbie to immediately grasp.

JMHO



.


----------



## AstroBee

FollowtheHoney said:


> I know there are other TF beekeepers out there, but it seems to me they are pretty reserved...



I think OT provided a very nice summary in post 139. My experience, and I've been here a while reading posts nearly daily, is that the TF forum has been anything but "pretty reserved". My observations suggest that it has been one of the most contentious in the history of beesource. I have posted there in the past, but its usually for a very brief exchange. However, to the credit of the moderators and participants, the TF discussions lately seem much more civil and productive. I hope that trend continues.


----------



## TalonRedding

Lauri said:


> I've learned a lot from Beesource, including this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :digging:


I think........wait a second, never mind.:doh:


----------



## sterling

TalonRedding said:


> I think........wait a second, never mind.:doh:


That's the answer to shinbone's post 144. Thanks Lauri. I have observed if ones says to much about some things around here one gets beat up pretty good.:lookout:


----------



## shinbone

Ah, yes, I forgot about the Secret Society of Sustainable Treatment Free Beekeepers (SSSTFB), where the first rule of membership is to never tell anyone your a member.


----------



## clyderoad

maybe it's me but when I had 3 years experience keeping bees I still had more questions than answers.
at around 10 years experience keeping bees I began to have more answers for what was being thrown my way when working my bees and fewer questions. 
I still have questions and learn more every bee season, both on my own and through others.

So for me, someone with 3-4 years experience keeping bees is still a newbee with a steep learning curve still ahead of them and success remains questionable.


----------



## shinbone

Clyderoad - My thoughts, too.


----------



## Michael Bush

If you are looking for successful TF beekeepers many of them have left and gone to Dee's yahoo list. Also a lot have learned it's not worth arguing with people who deny you can do what you are doing. i.e. they have learned to keep their mouth shut. There are many of them on other forums as well where they are less harassed. I think people are either being disingenuous or they are simply not paying attention to what is happening around them when they pretend that people who are treating are not losing just as many hives and quitting at just as high a rate as any other beekeepers. I really would love it if we would all realize keeping bees simply is not as easy as it once was. Treating does not make that go away.


----------



## shinbone

"_I think people are either being disingenuous or they are simply not paying attention to what is happening around them when they pretend that people who are treating are not losing just as many hives and quitting at just as high a rate as any other beekeepers._"

The data from Marin County in the original post shows that T beekeepers lose fewer hives than TF beekeepers in that area. BUT, that is just one locale, and, I agree, both groups lose a lot of hives, IMHO.

Regardless, my question is: what is the defining difference between successful TF beekeeping and an unsuccessful TF beekeeping? This question is getting off topic, so I will start a new post.




.


----------



## Oldtimer

Acebird said:


> I am having a hard time recollecting newbies who want to do TF from day one say it is easily achievable if what you really mean is long term sustainable.





Acebird said:


> Achievable couldn't be easier. Buy bees throw them in a box and walk away. Sustainable takes more effort and I think most newbies know this if not initially then soon after otherwise they wouldn't be here in the first place.


Ace you have answered your own question.

If you are saying most newbies do not post till they "know this" well that has not always been the case.

But as others have pointed out, this last page or so has been away from the main topic of the thread.


----------



## Acebird

Michael Bush said:


> I think people are either being disingenuous or they are simply not paying attention to what is happening around them when they pretend that people who are treating are not losing just as many hives and quitting at just as high a rate as any other beekeepers. I really would love it if we would all realize keeping bees simply is not as easy as it once was. Treating does not make that go away.


I was going to mention this on page 5 but I am older and wiser now. I figured sooner or later someone who know his s### (Barry this is code for stuf) would set the forum straight.



> But as others have pointed out, this last page or so has been away from the main topic of the thread.


The main topic of this thread is of no scientific relevance but does have very nice graphs coming to a very wrong conclusion.


----------



## JWChesnut

JWChesnut said:


> Repeated measures data from the Marin survey over several years shows the treat v. non-treat data is not a fluke, but is statistically valid at the p=< 0.0001 level. n= number of respondents, not colony count (which is not reported for other years).


The MB quotes claims ""I think people are either being disingenuous or they are simply not paying attention to what is happening around them when *they pretend that people who are treating are not losing just as many hives* and quitting at just as high a rate as any other beekeepers.""

This breezy, evidence-free claim is not supported by the Marin data-set. Marin is a TF friendly venue, and its data clearly shows a substantial, consistent TF mortality cost. 

I have no idea why MB would insist on making evidence-free assertions, but his claim doesn't hold up.


----------



## crofter

"" The MB quotes claims ""I think people are either being disingenuous or they are simply not paying attention to what is happening around them when they pretend that people who are treating are not losing just as many hives and quitting at just as high a rate as any other beekeepers.""


This breezy, evidence-free claim is not supported by the Marin data-set. Marin is a TF friendly venue, and its data clearly shows a substantial, consistent TF mortality cost.

I have no idea why MB would insist on making evidence-free assertions, but his claim doesn't hold up". 


I think that that kind of blind denial calls question to the idea rather than giving it support. Eventually some kind of concensus will come about but it is amazing how long it can take.


----------



## squarepeg

i'm beginning to think that some of you guys just enjoy all the blathering.

it should bother us that a respondent who loses their single hive for a 100% loss is weighted exactly the same as a respondent with 50 hives who loses 10 for a 20% loss. the bar for these two would be set at 60% loss, even though only 21.5% of the colonies were actually lost.

the marin data-set is tellling us that everyone's bees out there have a tough row to hoe. i'm sure you see that too jwc, and i am surprised at the assertions you are making with these data to support them.

you don't have to concede the merits of a treatment free approach to concede that treatment free bees in marin county are at a competitive disadvantage.


----------



## JWChesnut

Squarepeg, the Marin data is reported in aggregate (i.e. 207 of 414 colonies under trial died in the TF superclass). If I had access to the per respondent data, I would analyze it using per beekeeper methods. I did calculate a mean hive per respondent number in each of the classes. The average apiary is surprising large --

The beek tally show just how pervasive the "TF" mindshare is. Rather than a persecuted minority, Beeks in that class outnumber all other classes combinded.

Mean Apiary size per treatment
Formic -- 12 -- n=20
Oxalic -- 23.3 -- n=8
Apiguard -- 7.0 -- n=5
Thymol -- 18.5 -- n=2

Powdered Sug -- 6. -- n= 2
None -- 5.6 -- n=74
Essential Oil -- 22.2 -- n=5
Peppermint -- 21.3 -- n=4
grease patty -- 9.8 -- n=4


----------



## squarepeg

understood jwc. (i misinterpreted 'n = number of respondents', my apologies to you and to the forum)

looks like the formic group has the largest mean apiary size while the no treatment group has the smallest mean apiary size. if this difference is associated with years of experience that my be a factor as was suggested by others in earlier posts. i assume this is the reason that the bee informed survey is working to incorporate the consideration of 'hive-years' into its analyses.

my point has been that what is happening in the marin microcosm of the beekeeping universe should be understood within the context of its location. (all beekeeping is local) using their data to make generalizations or infer conclusions regarding outcomes elsewhere and by others is problematic for this reason.


----------



## beemandan

Michael Bush said:


> many of them have left and gone to Dee's yahoo list.


God help 'em.


----------



## David LaFerney

Michael Bush said:


> If you are looking for successful TF beekeepers many of them have left and gone to Dee's yahoo list. Also a lot have learned it's not worth arguing


Seriously, those people should be encouraged to pop in and testify - not argue, not proselytize - just something like "My name is Joe, and I'm a beekeeper. It has been 9 years since I treated. I make honey and Nucs in Defeated TN." 

Enough of that and the preponderance of evidence might soften some unbelieving hearts - a bunch of vocal 1st and 2nd years never will.


----------



## shannonswyatt

David LaFerney said:


> Enough of that and the preponderance of evidence might soften some unbelieving hearts - a bunch of vocal 1st and 2nd years never will.


I doubt it would make a difference. This is almost a religious thing at this point.


----------



## beemandan

shannonswyatt said:


> This is almost a religious thing at this point.


Which side are you referring to?


----------



## shannonswyatt

I would say both at this point!


----------



## odfrank

Beekeeping and religion opinion differences are similar....there is just less killing each other in beekeeping.


----------



## David LaFerney

shannonswyatt said:


> I doubt it would make a difference. This is almost a religious thing at this point.


I suspect both sides consider their position to be evidence rather than faith based - where one falls out depends on the evidence they have seen (Or not yet seen) and how it is interpreted. Both sides believe they know the truth... yeah, it's kind of religiony.

At least no one has been burned at the stake over it.


----------



## shannonswyatt

Yes, but there are flame wars!


----------



## laketrout

Anyone care to speculate why formic is showing the best treatment especially over oa .


----------



## Oldtimer

Both positions are evidence based. Michael Bush for example has not treated for years and still has bees alive. Therefore to him, his belief he does not have to treat is evidence based.
Somebody else sees their bees succumb to mites, unless they treat. Therefore to him his belief he has to treat is evidence based.

The reason there can be argument between the 2 sides is assumption. If the 2 sides fail to consider the others circumstances such as location, bee breed, are they migratory, their goals (commercial level profit or don't care about profit) etc etc. People fail to consider these things and just assume the others circumstances are the same. Therefore they think the other side is either ignorant, or lying.

When I first came to Beesource I was infected by this also. Where I am, you treat for mites, or you lose the hive, it's that simple. I just assumed it was the same everywhere. When I read people claiming to be treatment free, I found it hard to believe, which was reinforced by most of them that I initially read, being nubees, top bar keepers and that kind of thing, I just assumed they had not been around enough.

But the evidence is there, you have people like Bush or Lusby who are treatment free. Lusby, I'm sure it's her bees and environment, and I base that on the lack of success in being able to successfully transfer what she is doing to a commercial beekeeper somewhere else.

However I believe there is less rancour between the 2 sides now, as a better understanding of each others positions and the reasons for them is growing.


----------



## DPBsbees

laketrout said:


> Anyone care to speculate why formic is showing the best treatment especially over oa .


Possibly, because MAQS can be used with supers still on allowing people to get an earlier jump on mites. I use both MAQS and OAV.


----------



## laketrout

I've seen some big claims its safe to treat with oa with supers on also but maybe its not done as much .


----------



## shannonswyatt

laketrout said:


> Anyone care to speculate why formic is showing the best treatment especially over oa .


Could it be that the study is nothing close to being scientific?


----------



## crofter

laketrout said:


> Anyone care to speculate why formic is showing the best treatment especially over oa .


My speculation is that its success has to do with it being at least somewhat effective on mites under cappings. Since CA. is likely to have brood at all times it does not lend itself as well to treatments that are more effective at zero or low brood times.


----------



## JWChesnut

laketrout said:


> Anyone care to speculate why formic is showing the best treatment especially over oa .


Within the standard error for a Yes/No question and the small sample size, the two results (Formic vs. OA) are statistically identical.


----------



## JRG13

I agree with crofter, I thought Formic was somewhat effective at penetrating capped brood.


----------



## Acebird

shannonswyatt said:


> Could it be that the study is nothing close to being scientific?


Nah the graphs are very professional. Nice power point presentation.


----------



## sqkcrk

laketrout said:


> Anyone care to speculate why formic is showing the best treatment especially over oa .


Maybe more people used it? Maybe sampling was not done in a consistent and verafiable manner? This was a survey, not a scientific study.


----------



## shinbone

I always thought it was well understood that formic acid was more effective against mites because it can penetrate through cappings into the cell (as mentioned by Crofter), where oxalic acid can't. The drawback of FA is that it can be hard on queens, where OA treatments have pretty much no negative affects on adult bees


----------



## Acebird

Many of the chemicals that have been banned still do not affect adults because adults are not developing. However they do affect developing and unborn offspring. In many cases it takes thirty years to find or in most cases to prove the damage done.
The idea of throwing chemicals in the hive and having no negative effects is really burying your head in the sand. The drones have sperm, the queen has eggs, together they develop offspring in a very delicate way. The effects you might not see for 20-30 years.


----------



## sqkcrk

shinbone said:


> I always thought it was well understood that formic acid was more effective against mites because it can penetrate through cappings into the cell (as mentioned by Crofter), where oxalic acid can't. The drawback of FA is that it can be hard on queens, where OA treatments have pretty much no negative affects on adult bees


Pretty much.


----------



## Michael Palmer

David LaFerney said:


> "My name is Joe, and I'm a beekeeper. It has been 9 years since I treated. I make honey and Nucs in Defeated TN."


....."And I had X% of my bees survive the winter and I made X pounds of honey per colony"


----------



## shinbone

Michael Palmer said:


> ....."And I had X% of my bees survive the winter and I made X pounds of honey per colony"


That would be wonderful, but the chances are slim.


----------



## TalonRedding

David LaFerney said:


> Seriously, those people should be encouraged to pop in and testify - not argue, not proselytize - just something like "My name is Joe, and I'm a beekeeper. It has been 9 years since I treated. I make honey and Nucs in Defeated TN."
> 
> Enough of that and the preponderance of evidence might soften some unbelieving hearts - a bunch of vocal 1st and 2nd years never will.


Agreed.
Lol....I know you were using it as an example, but I can tell you that there is no one in Defeated, TN who is treatment free....that is literally right over the hill from me. However, in Difficult, TN, which is right up the road from Defeated..... how poetic.


----------



## David LaFerney

Those are some great place names.


----------



## xphoney

Michael Palmer said:


> ....."And I had X% of my bees survive the winter and I made X pounds of honey per colony"


A quick search shows that they do that and then are promptly driven off this site. I associate with a number of them elsewhere. Its too bad the Dogma of "You have to treat" (and feed) is so entrenched here.

Encouraging people to try different things and report here is something we would all benefit from. If more people behaved we would all be better informed.


----------



## TalonRedding

David LaFerney said:


> Those are some great place names.


Lol...that's why I live in Pleasant Shade. I don't like defeat and I don't like difficulty. 
Historical fact though: both locations were named for when John Peyton and his party were being fought by Indians in the early 1800's. By the name of the locations, the outcome is obvious. 
Anyways, enough of me high jacking this thread.


----------



## David LaFerney

Talon - you should go to wikipedia and add that etymology - at least the article for defeated has no explanation of the name.


----------



## shinbone

xphoney said:


> A quick search shows that they do that and then are promptly driven off this site. I associate with a number of them elsewhere.


What!? Really? I would love to see for myself. How did you do the search? How many examples did you find?


----------



## TalonRedding

David LaFerney said:


> Talon - you should go to wikipedia and add that etymology - at least the article for defeated has no explanation of the name.


Done!


----------



## beemandan

shinbone said:


> What!? Really?


How can you question the opinion of someone who has a Nov 2014 join date?


----------



## winevines

Oldtimer said:


> Both positions are evidence based. Michael Bush for example has not treated for years and still has bees alive. Therefore to him, his belief he does not have to treat is evidence based.


Really? That is a very weak definition of evidence based. There is quite a school of thought in the research community on what the terms means- but even if you want to ignore the scientific and research definitions, saying "I still have a few bees" seems like a pretty weak argument for evidence when you have no idea what they started with.
I find the more honest answers are those who tell the whole story


----------



## deknow

how about someone compile for us a list of beekeepers using treatments that have provided such information in good years and bad. Mike Palmer and HHH come to mind, and I doubt there are more than 3 or 4 others.

Mike is not only a top beekeeper, but by his own claims, is in a near ideal place to produce honey. HHH is not overwintering bees. If these are the benchmarks, why are only treatment free beekeepers obligated to talk about how they compare?

Can anyone show me documentation of other beekeepers (preferably those asking for information here in this thread) who have reported everything (and I would add how much fed and what they treated with) online for us all to analyze over a 5 year period? Even the most trusted and honest beekeeper is unlikely to reveal that the sustainable apiary relies on illegal "tactik"s in writing on a public forum.

I'm anything but secretive...but no matter how much I share, I get personally accused of being so...of taking down content that was never taken down...of never talking about losses or packages.

If you want an environment where people will share openly, it is hard to create it by demanding that others be open.


----------



## Honey-4-All

beemandan said:


> How can you question the opinion of someone who has a Nov 2014 join date?


A million battle hardened soldiers who have been to the front line many a time claim you need to be armed if you want to win the battle and come back alive. The new PFC shows up with all balls and not a shred of brains and is determined to prove the old dudes have it all wrong. When the two gents with the folded flag show up on the front door step of big balls mom what are they gonna say? Sound familiar? Bee Forewarned!!!!!!


----------



## David LaFerney

TalonRedding said:


> Done!


:thumbsup:


----------



## JWChesnut

xphoney said:


> Encouraging people to try different things and report here is something we would all benefit from.


I couldn't agree more, which is why I have run a controlled (but unsuccessful) TF apiary paired with a (successful) IPM apiary since 2002.

Elsewhere, xphony wrote on Thanksgiving, 2014 : " I will have my first hives in Cross Plains Wisconsin in the spring."

Ahh, yes, the brash confidence of youth.


----------



## shinbone

"_how about someone compile for us a list of beekeepers using treatments that have provided such information in good years and bad. _"

Here's data for 2013/14, for both T and TF beekeepers:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1F23GgvXCztEct2ToBeUxBCzV7x-sLLvw7JWgyvLjNDs/edit#gid=0

Last Winter was my second Winter and I lost 25% of my hives. I had treated with OAV in the Fall, consisting of 2 doses 1 week apart, at which point I ran out of time to do the third treatment. This season, I harvested about 10 lbs of honey per hive (yearly Colorado state average is 50 lb). Yes, I had a bad year. My results were similar to others in my area. 

This year I went into Winter with 12 hives. I did one treatment of Apiguard in September, and one treatment of OAV in late November (1 dose when broodless). Neither treatment produced a large mite fall on the sticky board. In the Fall all the hives were light on food, and I fed like crazy towards the end of Fall. Still, I had to MountainCamp 3 of my hives, because the hive scale showed them to be quite light.

I would point out, though, that the T beeks aren't making claims of surprising success and then failing to substantiate those claims followed by disappearing altogether. Additionally, few are interested in the details of how the T beeks achieve the _expected_.






.


----------



## winevines

deknow said:


> If you want an environment where people will share openly, it is hard to create it by demanding that others be open.


Deknow... I wonder why? The last time I shared data on this site you attacked me and the studies of another so viciously, people I did not even know reached out to me expressing concern! 
It seems to me that many times in early Spring on these forums there are generally reports of losses that include numbers. Maybe not comprehensive with treatment and food status, and over a period of years, but an attempt to share. 

If you have shared numbers of your successes and losses which I don't recall ever seeing (or from MB) perhaps you could share them now.


----------



## deknow

JWChesnut said:


> In summary, I think this survey documents that the social pressure to conform to a "treatment free" ethos results in the tragic loss of bees and unfortunate loss of beekeepers.


You certainly like to give the impression that you are speaking from the 'scientific' standpoint...and you certainly are smart enough to know what that means.
I don't think there is any data you present that shows:
1. That 'social pressure' has anything to do with the desire of any of these TF beekeepers to be TF. I know that when I was turned off by what I was being told in beeschool about treatments that it had nothing to do with 'social pressure'....I didn't know anyone that was treatment free...i had no contact or knowledge of any society of treatment free beekeepers.
2. That the loss of bees to a backyard beekeeper is "tragic"...or that it is only the gap between loss of treated bees and the loss of untreated bees is 'tragic'....that 40% loss isn't tragic and 50% is.
3. That the loss of bees due to being treatment free leads to an unfortunate loss of beekeepers...you show no data that correlates loss of beekeepers to TF specific bee losses....and you imply that beekeepers that leave the hobby after treating and losing bees is somehow less unfortunate than those that do so when not treating.

You are capable of much better than this...I'm not sure why you insist on being so disingenuous and pretending that it is backed up by pretty graphs.


----------



## winevines

deknow said:


> You certainly like to give the impression that you are speaking from the 'scientific' standpoint...and you certainly are smart enough to know what that means.
> I don't think there is any data you present that shows:
> 1. That 'social pressure' has anything to do with the desire of any of these TF beekeepers to be TF. I know that when I was turned off by what I was being told in beeschool about treatments that it had nothing to do with 'social pressure'....I didn't know anyone that was treatment free...i had no contact or knowledge of any society of treatment free beekeepers.


From what he presented here on BeeSource you are correct. But he also talked about the association and seems to knows them, as do I to some minor degree. If you were on their list serv, and saw some of the conversations I think his statement are a pretty fair assessments of the general persuasion of many of the beeks, or at least the ones expressing their views most actively.


----------



## HarryVanderpool

We have a well known gentleman in Oregon that travels around talking about TF beekeeping.
He starts his talk right off the bat with, "Now I want you to know; I lose 55% of my hives every year".
I can actually stand to listen to him due to his honesty.

As for the rest that, "Never lose a single hive".
I don't believe them.

I've been around bees way too long to fall for that.


----------



## deknow

winevines said:


> Deknow... I wonder why? The last time I shared data on this site you attacked me and the studies of another so viciously, people I did not even know reached out to me expressing concern!


Viciously? Really?

I thought (and still think) that several (if not most/all) of the SARE bee studies I have seen were either useless or were too costly for the outcome. This isn't unusual for government sponsored work. I'm sorry if you took this personally..but it is difficult to accept public money and publish work and not be willing to defend it against criticism. My objection to your work (in my recollection) was what it cost to provide a few people with nucs. ...and also I seem to recall that it began with you reacting negatively to a caption on a photo that was praising Mike Palmer and/or Kirk Webster for the innovation and willingness to share that they do without a grant.

I'd welcome quotes (not too far out of context) that you think were vicious if you would like to back up your accusations. My recollection is that you deleted your part of the conversation...which makes it difficult to evaluate, but I'm willing to stand by what I said.

I'm also curious as to what "concern" others were expressing. Were they afraid you might have hurt feelings? That you were being threatened? I'm not trying to be condescending...but you've made some claims that make me out to be some kind of monster....it would be nice to have specifics and quotes....I can't even imagine what I might have said to you that anyone would describe as 'vicious'.



> It seems to me that many times in early Spring on these forums there are generally reports of losses that include numbers. Maybe not comprehensive with treatment and food status, and over a period of years, but an attempt to share.
> 
> If you have shared numbers of your successes and losses which I don't recall ever seeing (or from MB) perhaps you could share them now.


...so we are playing "you show me yours....i'm not going to show you mine"? TF beekeepers are required to post their data and everyone else only has to do so when they have good year?
Do you understand my point? Do you see the irony?


----------



## deknow

Harry,
I heard the president of EAS one year give a presentation and claim to never lose a hive....he also recommended raising queens via walk away splits. When someone asked when they should check the cells, his said about 2 weeks after making the split (!!!!).

This was someone who EAS elected to be president.



HarryVanderpool said:


> We have a well known gentleman in Oregon that travels around talking about TF beekeeping.
> He starts his talk right off the bat with, "Now I want you to know; I lose 55% of my hives every year".
> I can actually stand to listen to him due to his honesty.
> 
> As for the rest that, "Never lose a single hive".
> I don't believe them.
> 
> I've been around bees way too long to fall for that.


----------



## deknow

winevines said:


> From what he presented here on BeeSource you are correct. But he also talked about the association and seems to knows them, as do I to some minor degree. If you were on their list serv, and saw some of the conversations I think his statement are a pretty fair assessments of the general persuasion of many of the beeks, or at least the ones expressing their views most actively.


The problem is that JW has shown himself several times in my recollection to mislead on purpose....which is why if he made his claims based upon knowing the association it wouldn't have any real credibility.

Instead he posted a bunch of pretty graphs, and made his claims based upon the data he presented. The fact that he is knowledgable enough to know the difference and understand (without my help) why the data he presents doesn't say what he claims it says is really the point. This was not a mistake or an oversight...this was a deliberate attempt to mislead.


----------



## deknow

I believe that this is the thread that Karla is referring to.
I don't see anything that could be considered 'vicious' on my part.
I'm not sure why you felt so attacked, but I certainly maintain my right to critique publicly funded work.

Anyone (or any bee club) that wants to promote nucs is free to do so. No one is paying what the governement paid for those 24 nucs ($10k). I'm not sure why you keep bringing this up Karla...my position hasn't changed, the facts haven't changed, and the archive hasn't changed (except for your decision to delete your posts).

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?232687-Vermont-Photos

$10k is a lot of money in a beekeeping operation. It can do so much more than provide 24 nucs.



winevines said:


> Really? That is a very weak definition of evidence based. There is quite a school of thought in the research community on what the terms means- but even if you want to ignore the scientific and research definitions, saying "I still have a few bees" seems like a pretty weak argument for evidence when you have no idea what they started with.
> I find the more honest answers are those who tell the whole story


----------



## Oldtimer

deknow said:


> why are only treatment free beekeepers obligated to talk about how they compare?


I think any beekeeper making claims may be asked to verify, I myself have been asked to "give the numbers" on several occasions.

However I would agree there is often requests for TF beekeepers to give actual, real figures. There is a reason though, which is because the TF movement in general, is quite missionary oriented, constantly trying to recruit others to their cause, by means fair, but sometimes foul.
When claims are made such as "my bees just won't die", etc. suspicions are naturally aroused.

False claims are made, such as the often repeated claim that beekeepers who treat lose just as many bees as beekeepers who don't treat. Certainly misleading, at best. In the face of such dishonesty it should be no surprise that requests are made to verify. It does not go unnoticed that such requests for the most part are ignored.


----------



## deknow

I don't think I've misrepresented anything. 

I don't think I've been misleading.

I don't think I'm responsible for what other people say or do.

I wonder who is responsible for all the irresponsible things that beekeepers using treatments do and say.


----------



## Oldtimer

Please have another look at my post and note my use of the words "the TF movement in general". Deknow the post was not all about you, please don't take it as a personal thing about you it was not.

You posed a question, I answered it. Perhaps the answer was not to your liking, but it was honest.


----------



## deknow

I'll speak for myself only here.

My point was largely that people (some posting here in this thread) are always acting as if TF beekeepers are withholding data. In many cases, those demanding numbers don't offer their own numbers. Without something reasonable to compare such data with, it is meaningless...or worse, it is used to mischaractarize things.

JW's original post in this thread is an excelent example. A club collected a lot of data (and I assume they generated the graphs and such) and made it available. JW posted it here and concluded with:


> In summary, I think this survey documents that the social pressure to conform to a "treatment free" ethos results in the tragic loss of bees and unfortunate loss of beekeepers.


...when "this survey" documents no such thing. That is not someone in the beekeeping community learning from and helping other beekeepers understand something...it is pure misrepresentation of what the data in the survey can offer. It isn't my fault that he does this, and I won't apologize for calling him on it...it is plain irresponsible and dishonest. ...and I'm supposed to think that giving him any data will achieve anything but me having to explain why I'm being misrepresented? No thank you.

We recently lost our beloved state apiarist, Al Carl, to cancer. In at least 2 of the 3 previous years, he reported 70-90% overwintered losses in the state (I don't know what or if there was an official report, but this was reported at state bee meetings and in personal one on one communication with Al).

We are not in California, and treatment free is not even talked about in the largest bee school in the state, and is certainly not the norm by any measure...these losses are due to a combination of lots of things....development, pesticides, exotic plant eradication, busy people who don't have time to tend bees, etc...but not because everyone here is treatment free and their bees are dying.

But back to my point...it is absurd that those asking for such numbers are not offering their own (generally), and it's absurd that there is not a realization that if there is a group of beekeepers (who largely treat) and they have a good year, they are likely to post their happy results.

If that is compared to those not using treatments...whether they have a good year or a bad year, how do you think the results will skew?

deknow


----------



## Oldtimer

deknow said:


> My point was largely that people (some posting here in this thread) are always acting as if TF beekeepers are withholding data.


An interesting statement. Would have to be a perception, or an assumption, though.



deknow said:


> It isn't my fault that he does this,


Again, nobody said anything is your fault. It's not all about you.




deknow said:


> I won't apologize for calling him on it.


Nobody asked you to apologise. Got to wonder though. It's OK for you to call people on things, but it's not OK for other people to call people on things?


----------



## camero7

> We recently lost our beloved state apiarist, Al Carl, to cancer. In at least 2 of the 3 previous years, he reported 70-90% overwintered losses in the state (I don't know what or if there was an official report, but this was reported at state bee meetings and in personal one on one communication with Al).


I heard the same info from Al. Last winter I lost over 50% of my hives [I've posted this before]. Year before last I sold over 250 nucs. I advised those that bought them to treat. Some did, some didn't for whatever reasons. Feedback - which is about 5 - 10% of sales indicated that those that treated had somewhat better success. I also sold about 50 overwintered treatment free nucs [I lost about 1/2 of my treatment free nucs that winter and about 20% of my treated nucs] All my buyers were treatment free. Most of those hives were successful and many are still alive. So I do know that some beekeepers are successfully keeping bees without treatments.


----------



## deknow

Cam, did you sell the overwintered TF nucs for the same price as the other nucs?


----------



## camero7

No, I charged $40 more for them than the nucs that came from FL. Could have sold a hundred more if i had them.


----------



## shinbone

"_So I do know that some beekeepers are successfully keeping bees without treatments._"

What does this mean? How long have those particular hives lasted? Do they produce a honey crop and how does it compare to the local average?

http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...-TF-beekeeping-and-unsuccessful-TF-beekeeping




.


----------



## Michael Palmer

deknow said:


> how about someone compile for us a list of beekeepers using treatments that have provided such information in good years and bad. Mike Palmer and HHH come to mind, and I doubt there are more than 3 or 4 others.
> 
> Mike is not only a top beekeeper, but by his own claims, is in a near ideal place to produce honey. HHH is not overwintering bees. If these are the benchmarks, why are only treatment free beekeepers obligated to talk about how they compare?
> 
> Can anyone show me documentation of other beekeepers (preferably those asking for information here in this thread) who have reported everything (and I would add how much fed and what they treated with) online for us all to analyze over a 5 year period? Even the most trusted and honest beekeeper is unlikely to reveal that the sustainable apiary relies on illegal "tactik"s in writing on a public forum.
> 
> I'm anything but secretive...but no matter how much I share, I get personally accused of being so...of taking down content that was never taken down...of never talking about losses or packages.
> 
> If you want an environment where people will share openly, it is hard to create it by demanding that others be open.


Okay Dean. You use my name, here, in your book and other places, so I have to reply. Since I'm one who has asked for numbers I have to reply. 

Yes, I treat for varroa. I've never claimed anything else. I use amitraz. I've never claimed anything else. Yes, I use the product Taktic which is against the law. I've never hidden what I do. Whatever. I feed sugar if the bees require feeding. I've never said anything else. I post my winter losses openly and I post my production when asked. I think my success speaks for itself. I think my stock speaks for itself. I think my management speaks for itself. 

I'm only asking for TF beekeepers on this site, who are the foundation of the TF beekeeping community to do the same. Saying you are a TF beekeeper and "My bees live through the winter" doesn't really mean much to me. I mean...I know when you went into winter with 30 colonies and had 3 alive in the spring. While you can claim that you have "Survivor Bees", I don't see 10% survival as any degree of success. I know you can't produce the honey you sell and buy from Webster and Lusby. I used to buy honey and I understand when your customers order more than you can supply, but...I did make many big crops of 100 + pounds averages. Do you?

And you're railed at me about feeding sugar to my bees. Something about selecting for bees that must be fed sugar. Well, wasn't it a couple springs ago when you needed to buy packages to re-stock your dead hives? And, you had to hold them until the weather improved for installation...and how did this bees survive in their packages without sugar syrup. 

Dean, I don't want to get in a fight with you. If you call me out I'm going to respond. I asked a fair question from beekeepers who espouse the TF agenda. Saying your TF bees are alive in the spring, when you have lost 90% or your colonies, can certainly be considered secretive...whether intentional or not. Saying your TF bees make honey can certainly be considered secretive if they produce only a small fraction of the state average. 

Again, I don't want a fight from you or anyone else. I have no agenda here and I don't care what you or anyone else thinks of my beekeeping management practices. I only asked you all to be open, give the forum the numbers, and let members decide for themselves. I don't guess anything will be posted any time soon. 

And I'll say this once, so there's no misunderstanding and you can't claim I'm being secretive about anything...as you claimed in a PM.
650 Amitraz treated colonies. 450 treated nucleus colonies, 250 untreated mating nuclei, 25 tons honey, 4000 12 oz cuts comb honey, 1600 6 oz cuts comb honey, 160 nucleus colonies sold, 150 nucleus colonies used, 1200 queens produced. 

And y'all??


----------



## xphoney

shinbone said:


> What!? Really? I would love to see for myself. How did you do the search? How many examples did you find?


Quick example, Tim Ives. A man with a wonderful, but recycled approach to beekeeping. He was ruthlessly maligned on this site and when he finally joined to defend his approach to beekeeping even a mod was attacking him. And yes, in anger he swore and was banned.


----------



## xphoney

beemandan said:


> How can you question the opinion of someone who has a Nov 2014 join date?


Your making my point. Does a CEO only become knowledgable the day he takes office? How about a president, or doctor? 

Where do I claim I have any bee knowledge at all. Why do you think I am here?

What does a join date tell you? I have a good idea what your comment tells me about your character though.


----------



## Oldtimer

xphoney said:


> Quick example, Tim Ives. A man with a wonderful, but recycled approach to beekeeping. He was ruthlessly maligned on this site and when he finally joined to defend his approach to beekeeping even a mod was attacking him. And yes, in anger he swore and was banned.


If that's your best and only example it's not a good one.

The guy you mention has also been banned from other sites, including Solomon Parkers treatment free site. Don't think it was his treatment free practises that got him kicked off that one.


----------



## Oldtimer

xphoney said:


> Your making my point. Does a CEO only become knowledgable the day he takes office? How about a president, or doctor?


And you are (unwittingly) reinforcing the beliefs of those you are attacking. One of the reasons for some of the sentiment in this thread, is people who don't even have bees yet lecturing others on where they are wrong. Some of those people have indeed been run off the site.

However I hope that does not happen to you Xphoney, I believe you are acting out of conviction of what you think is right. But it does help to actually have bees before expecting to be taken seriously.


----------



## xphoney

JWChesnut said:


> I couldn't agree more, which is why I have run a controlled (but unsuccessful) TF apiary paired with a (successful) IPM apiary since 2002.
> 
> Elsewhere, xphony wrote on Thanksgiving, 2014 : " I will have my first hives in Cross Plains Wisconsin in the spring."
> 
> Ahh, yes, the brash confidence of youth.


Careful with your assumptions. This "youth" has a long grey beard and 4 decades of agriculture experience.

Confidence.... Yup. I don't like to fail and when I do it's just part of the learning curve.

Me and my two youthful business partners will get our bees in April and use good ideas that we gather from many places, put our own twist on it, and see what comes of it. Can you guess which opened minded ideas we will try first?


----------



## Oldtimer

My guess about what open minded idea you will try first would be that you will close your mind to the possibility mites could harm your bees?

Been around a while, seen this whole thing before....


----------



## xphoney

Oldtimer said:


> And you are (unwittingly) reinforcing the beliefs of those you are attacking. One of the reasons for some of the sentiment in this thread, is people who don't even have bees yet lecturing others on where they are wrong. Some of those people have indeed been run off the site.
> 
> However I hope that does not happen to you Xphoney, I believe you are acting out of conviction of what you think is right. But it does help to actually have bees before expecting to be taken seriously.


So I need to own bees to know when people are rude? Interesting..... (Having fun with you)

I am here to learn, and many here have taught me things. Some have taught me little. 

My point in this with Mike Palmer is that you can find examples of TF having success and giving their numbers, but most choose to stay out of the shark pit. And Mike, thank you for teaching me so much, I have nothing but praise for your operation.


----------



## JWChesnut

One can be young and inexperienced at any chronological age. As MB said much earlier in this thread: keeping bees is hard these days. To which I will add: don't make it harder on yourself by buying into miracle cures, holy relics and crystal energies.


----------



## JRG13

xphoney, keep us updated on how you do, whatever route you take. Jump into chat in the evenings if you're so inclined.


----------



## squarepeg

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1829785,-89.4293824,102149m/data=!3m1!1e3


----------



## shinbone

xphoney said:


> This "youth" has a long grey beard and 4 decades of agriculture experience.


I wish you luck. Hopefully the old expression "Pride goeth before a fall" won't apply to you cause you already got the "pride" nailed.

You should learn the story of "Acebird" on this forum. You will understand all the skepticism if you do.

BTW, the agriculture experience you mention, what was the field? Was it chemical free agriculture? Dairy? Row Crops? Orchards?


----------



## xphoney

Oldtimer said:


> My guess about what open minded idea you will try first would be that you will close your mind to the possibility mites could harm your bees?
> 
> Been around a while, seen this whole thing before....


More assumptions..... 

Yup "The Destructor" will kill lots of our bees, but fewer than old age and cold. Let's hope I manage to find a balance between them. If I learn anything do you want me to share it or keep it to myself.


----------



## Oldtimer

xphoney said:


> Confidence.... Yup. I don't like to fail and when I do it's just part of the learning curve.


Confidence is a fine thing. But, if you fail will you learn.

So many people who go into beekeeping with preconceived ideas about mites and non treatment, fail to learn when they fail. Cos their preconceived ideas are set in stone.

They come here later and say something like, my bees are all dead, Why? I know it wasn't mites cos I'm treatment free so didn't have to monitor, and I didn't see any.


----------



## squarepeg

oops. clicked send too fast. wanted to say that to the west of town looks like nice bee 'pasture', otherwise looks pretty bleak with not many trees and mostly agriculture.


----------



## Oldtimer

xphoney said:


> More assumptions.....


Was my assumption correct? You know it was, and after all you asked the question, I merely offered my guess at the answer.

Like I said, been around a while, seen this whole thing before....


----------



## xphoney

shinbone said:


> BTW, the agriculture experience you mention, what was the field? Was it chemical free agriculture?


Mostly cows, of the Holstein kind, (Wisconsin ya know), plus fruit and just about any cash crop that would grow here.

I never participated in chemical free farming and very few have. But if I can accomplish the same thing with fewer or no chemicals (non natural) I may try it. Maybe I fail, maybe not.


----------



## Oldtimer

xphoney said:


> But if I can accomplish the same thing with fewer or no chemicals (non natural) I may try it.


Well that statement you will find nearly all in agreement with.

Xphoney I think you have been drawn into this argument perhaps unwisely, there is much more to learn about bees than whether or not you treat them. Hope you can participate in discussing other aspects of beekeeping. Realise that despite 40 years of farming, right now you are a beekeeping virgin, if that. All the best.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

xphoney said:


> Quick example, Tim Ives. A man with a wonderful, but recycled approach to beekeeping. He was ruthlessly maligned on this site and when he finally joined to defend his approach to beekeeping even a mod was attacking him. And yes, in anger he swore and was banned.


I see no evidence that _Tim Ives_ was banned from Beesource. You can see from his profile, here, that his account status is not "banned". And, you can also see his most recent posts to Beesource were in October 2014, and there was not even 'controversy' in those threads. Those October posts were months after the heated threads that Tim earlier posted in.

According to this post  by Solomon Parker to Beesource, it was Solomon's Treatment Free Facebook group that Tim Ives was banned from (for offensive language).



Just trying to keep the record straight.


----------



## xphoney

Oldtimer said:


> Was my assumption correct? You know it was, and after all you asked the question, I merely offered my guess at the answer.
> .


No, it wasn't. But that's ok. I don't hold it against you. 

Yes, mites will weaken lots of my bees and the virus's vectored on them will kill many. I am not certain what our solution will be. (Again why I sought out those driven away.... to learn) But believe me the first winter with minus 40 will kill everything in the hive if I treat or not.


----------



## sqkcrk

xphoney said:


> Careful with your assumptions. This "youth" has a long grey beard and 4 decades of agriculture experience.
> 
> Can you guess which opened minded ideas we will try first?


You'd never know by by our Profile.

Sam Comfort's?


----------



## sqkcrk

Oldtimer said:


> Been around a while, seen this whole thing before....


Thus your moniker?


----------



## sqkcrk

xphoney said:


> More assumptions.....
> 
> Yup "The Destructor" will kill lots of our bees, but fewer than old age and cold. Let's hope I manage to find a balance between them. If I learn anything do you want me to share it or keep it to myself.


Cold doesn't kill bees. First lesson.


----------



## BeeCurious

xphoney said:


> But believe me the first winter with minus 40 will kill everything in the hive if I treat or not.


When was the last time that you experienced a period of -40° F cold?


----------



## odfrank

Xphoney's home town did have a record low of -34 in 1994.

Do temperatures of -40 kill bees?


----------



## sqkcrk

I thought it was settled already that cold does not kill bees. Did I miss the memo?


----------



## odfrank

sqkcrk said:


> I thought it was settled already that cold does not kill bees. Did I miss the memo?


Mark...Californian here....we have not gotten below 20 degrees since 1932. What temperature will kill a healthy hibernating hive?


----------



## xphoney

sqkcrk said:


> Cold doesn't kill bees. First lesson.


How do you explain a cluster that can't break and starves inches from honey? Sustained cold with tropical insects can kill, or am I wrong? My yard is windy and had 7 foot frost last year.

Wind I can deal with but in doing so I risk ventilation issues and thus drips. That's the trade off where I live.


----------



## xphoney

BeeCurious said:


> When was the last time that you experienced a period of -40° F cold?


1/2 mile from my house at the intersection of airport road and enchanted valley hit minus 40 twice last winter.

My house. Never colder than minus 38 f since I moved in in 2000.

Where I grew up in central WI ( near mods John and Sheri) at least a dozen times in the 80's. I think it was the January of 91 the high never got above zero. I also don't think I took my long johns off for two months......

I currently live in the driftless area of Wisconsin. What this means is cold air settles in the valleys and does not move until the wind blows it out. Unfortunately those valleys have great resources for bee.


----------



## xphoney

odfrank said:


> Xphoney's home town did have a record low of -34 in 1994.
> 
> Do temperatures of -40 kill bees?


My current hometown is Cross Plains WI. Our official weather station is behind my house on Glacier Creek Middleschool and is 20 feet above the ground about 5 feet above a dark green roof. The school won't let me put bees on their roof.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

The USDA has done studies with "refrigerated" hives over an extended period. I have linked this study in an earlier thread, but here it is again:
http://naldc.nal.usda.gov/download/CAT72345678/PDF

The section that discusses hives in the 'freezer' starts on page 22. I suggest reading that section for yourself, but _my _summary is that even though they held hives continuously at -40 F for a month, the bees were still alive, although _nosema _was noticeably present.

I'd say that is not the "cold" killing the bees, but certainly extreme cold can weaken a hive and contribute to other health issues cropping up.


----------



## sqkcrk

odfrank said:


> Mark...Californian here....we have not gotten below 20 degrees since 1932. What temperature will kill a healthy hibernating hive?


Centigrade or Kelvin? Pretty darn cold.


----------



## shinbone

xphoney - Just curious - how many hives do you plan to get? What strains? Where will you source them? Nucs, packages, both? What will be your hive set-ups? Where will you keep them?


----------



## sqkcrk

xphoney said:


> How do you explain a cluster that can't break and starves inches from honey?


That is classic starvation. A cluster shouldn't have to break to get to food. The cluster slowly moves upwards to where the honey is. A colony properly prepared for Winter has stores where it needs it.

This is not the Forum for teaching the novice how to keep bees, is it? Just asking. Not being hostile now.


----------



## sqkcrk

xphoney said:


> 1/2 mile from my house at the intersection of airport road and enchanted valley hit minus 40 twice last winter.
> 
> My house. Never colder than minus 38 f since I moved in in 2000.
> 
> Where I grew up in central WI ( near mods John and Sheri) at least a dozen times in the 80's. I think it was the January of 91 the high never got above zero. I also don't think I took my long johns off for two months......
> 
> I currently live in the driftless area of Wisconsin. What this means is cold air settles in the valleys and does not move until the wind blows it out. Unfortunately those valleys have great resources for bee.


Basic beginner beekeeping is choosing the proper location. Where best to locate one's apiary(ies).


----------



## Michael Palmer

xphoney said:


> How do you explain a cluster that can't break and starves inches from honey?


A colony that lost enough of its bees from varroa/nosema so the cluster isn't large enough to be in contact with its honey reserve.


----------



## Michael Palmer

Michael Palmer said:


> And y'all??


No?


----------



## jim lyon

My experience when I used to winter in such temps in Minnesota is that a well prepared, strong, healthy hive can survive a few weeks of -30 to -40 lows pretty well. It's the extended winter and the lack of favorable early spring conditions that take the biggest toll.


----------



## beemandan

Michael Palmer said:


> A colony that lost enough of its bees from varroa/nosema so the cluster isn't large enough to be in contact with its honey reserve.


Not just a small cluster but a small cluster of sickly bees.
The symptoms aren't overtly related to mites. One of the reasons, in my opinion, that there is such a denial of varroa's impact. Folks see a small cluster and quickly blame that. They don't consider the reasons why that cluster is so small. And the fact that the bees are weak....how do we 'see' that? And then someone pipes up and says 'if there aren't thousands of dead mites on the bottom board, it must've been something else'. And I'd pull my hair out if I had any left.....so I go outside and scream instead.


----------



## Acebird

sqkcrk said:


> This is not the Forum for teaching the novice how to keep bees, is it? Just asking.


Are you serious? I certainly can't agree with that statement.


----------



## beemandan

Michael Palmer said:


> And y'all??


It sure got quiet........


----------



## FollowtheHoney

This is not the Forum for teaching the novice how to keep bees said:


> I guess I am pretty naive. I thought people did come here to learn how to keep bees, regardless of their experience.


----------



## squarepeg

Michael Palmer said:


> And y'all??





Michael Palmer said:


> No?





beemandan said:


> It sure got quiet........





squarepeg said:


> for context here is how my 2014 season played out.


i shared mine back in post #46. actually when i did my books i took in closer to $4500, and all i bought this year was a new ultrabreeze suit.


----------



## Acebird

shinbone said:


> You should learn the story of "Acebird" on this forum.


I hope he does learn from my mistakes. When well intention experienced beekeepers on this forum give you advice they are looking though your eyes so their advice can steer you wrong. It is something I won't forget. I will continue to be treatment free because that is what I want. No one here knows xphoney well enough to know what he wants in the long run. In time we may find out what that is. Treatment free is not for a commercial beekeeper because they are competing with other commercial beekeepers and it puts them at a disadvantage. They equate everything to work and it would be much more work for a commercial operation to be sustainable. Treatment free is better suited for the hobbyist where you can take two avenues. The no work avenue that I have chosen and the increased work that many others have chosen. 
Xphoney, welcome to the forum. There is much to learn even from those that give you a hard time.


----------



## jim lyon

beemandan said:


> It sure got quiet........


I've always been pretty open about our migratory South Dakota to Texas to California operation. Losses haven't been much of an issue since Check-Mite failed us many years ago. It fundamentally changed my thinking and my treatment strategies. Never gone the tactic route, I prefer the brood break associated with annual requeening with queen cells together with timely treatments of OA, Hopguard or thymol. I have experimented with Apivar and the results have been impressive but I would prefer to use it as a miticide of last resort. A typical year will see summer queen failures of between 10 and 15% and winter losses of another 5 to 10%. We don't see a very wide year to year variation from these numbers. I consider every hive we have as a production hive and figure our per colony averages as total honey production divided by queen right hives at the beginning of the honeyflow. Our averages almost always exceed reported statewide averages for both South Dakota and Nebraska which is just 10 miles from our honey house.


----------



## cg3

FollowtheHoney said:


> I guess I am pretty naive. I thought people did come here to learn how to keep bees, regardless of their experience.


You might try the Beekeeping 101 forum.


----------



## xphoney

Rader Sidetrack said:


> The USDA has done studies with "refrigerated" hives over an extended period. I have linked this study in an earlier thread, but here it is again:
> http://naldc.nal.usda.gov/download/CAT72345678/PDF
> 
> The section that discusses hives in the 'freezer' starts on page 22. I suggest reading that section for yourself, but _my _summary is that even though they held hives continuously at -40 F for a month, the bees were still alive, although _nosema _was noticeably present.
> 
> I'd say that is not the "cold" killing the bees, but certainly extreme cold can weaken a hive and contribute to other health issues cropping up.


It's a good study to show what it's purpose was, cluster size and temps in certain conditions. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. 

My concern is it would seem they controlled humidity via a heated air exchange and prevented other air circulation from the cabinet. I get the impression they wanted to prove that the heat of the colony does not cause air circulation and they did seem to prove that. My understanding is this still leaves us with the balancing act of how sealed up a hive should be to balance drafts with moisture.

If I read it correctly the experiments were all terminated when the hives were too weakened to continue. The parallels with varroa are ironic. Varroa does kill but causes other thing to kill better. Cold does kill but causes other things to kill better (like moisture and nosema)

Conclusions 7 and 18 seem to imply to me that insulation can help. Is that the way it reads to you?


----------



## FollowtheHoney

cg3 said:


> You might try the Beekeeping 101 forum.


OK the forum not BS.


----------



## beemandan

squarepeg said:


> i shared mine back in post #46. actually when i did my books i took in closer to $4500, and all i bought this year was a new ultrabreeze suit.


The 'it sure got quiet' was directed at deknow. He was in a bit of a snit about folks sharing their results, prodded Michael Palmer into detailing his and then he disappeared after being challenged. Almost certainly he will reply eventually, saying something to the effect that he has already bared his soul in past posts. For which most will recognize as bull....er....malarkey.


----------



## squarepeg

i've decided to grade my yearly success based on the number of hive i come out of winter with. for 2014 that number was 15 after losing 4. so i averaged $300 income per hive. (no treatments, no feeding)

that was lower than it could have been due to a shortened spring flow and a dry conditions during fall, plus i'm still a novice and made a few mistakes.

with lessons learned and with decent weather in 2015, my goal is to double the income per hive to about $600. i'll start a thread next month and chronicle the year for better or for worse.


----------



## squarepeg

understood dan. what do you think a reasonable 'per hive' income average is?


----------



## beemandan

squarepeg said:


> i'll start a thread next month and chronicle the year for better or for worse.


You're a good man sp.


----------



## jim lyon

Acebird said:


> Xphoney, welcome to the forum. There is much to learn even from those that give you a hard time.


Yes, welcome. I would suggest you drop any preconceived ideas of what your experiences will be on here. You will encounter a broad mix of beekeeping expertise and yes, you may be challenged if it's perceived that an opinion isn't fact based. There is, however, a really deep body of knowledge available to those who wish to learn. As in any printed forum, you are what you post, it's the only way you can be judged. Courtesy begats courtesy and hostility begats hostility. No one gets " run off of here" because of their beliefs. In short it's not what you say but how you say it.


----------



## sqkcrk

Acebird said:


> Are you serious? I certainly can't agree with that statement.


Alright, maybe I should have written "Thread" instead of "Forum"?


----------



## sqkcrk

FollowtheHoney said:


> I guess I am pretty naive. I thought people did come here to learn how to keep bees, regardless of their experience.


What I meant was this particular Thread is not where individual questions on how to do something should be discussed. If he really wants to know how to do something basic he should start a Thread or read a book or two. But asking why or how in a Thread such as this that's Off Topic, isn't it?


----------



## winevines

deknow said:


> Viciously? Really?
> I thought (and still think) that several (if not most/all) of the SARE bee studies I have seen were either useless or were too costly for the outcome. This isn't unusual for government sponsored work. I'm sorry if you took this personally..but it is difficult to accept public money and publish work and not be willing to defend it against criticism. My objection to your work (in my recollection) was what it cost to provide a few people with nucs. ...
> I'd welcome quotes (not too far out of context) that you think were vicious if you would like to back up your accusations. My recollection is that you deleted your part of the conversation...which makes it difficult to evaluate, but I'm willing to stand by what I said.
> 
> I'm also curious as to what "concern" others were expressing. Were they afraid you might have hurt feelings? That you were being threatened? I'm not trying to be condescending...but you've made some claims that make me out to be some kind of monster....it would be nice to have specifics and quotes....I can't even imagine what I might have said to you that anyone would describe as 'vicious'.
> 
> ...so we are playing "you show me yours....i'm not going to show you mine"? TF beekeepers are required to post their data and everyone else only has to do so when they have good year?
> Do you understand my point? Do you see the irony?


You are entitled to your points of view. Did you know some of Spivak's work early on was SARE funded? 
As for the project I ran and the others similar to it- it was a little more than a "few" beekeepers who were reached and we did a whole lot more than give out a few nucs. We have and continue to reach hundreds of people and made major positive shifts in beekeeping in this region towards a more sustainable approach. The ripples keep growing even all these years later from that one project including something at the National Academy of Sciences this year. I can guess at your response- that you don't need tax money to do that. Maybe not, but I am of the opinion that the SARE funding was a golden ray of light in terms of the positive effects on our region. 

I see no point in analyzing who said what-Tone and emotion are very subjectively interpreted and experienced. What I recall is that a few people were very kind and took the time to privately reach out to me. Their unsolicited responses and concern for me came from something- likely what they read and how they experienced and interpreted it all. 

Regarding sharing data - every year I see many sharing their losses and their successes- in good years and in bad so I am not really following your point on this.


----------



## sqkcrk

Acebird said:


> I hope he does learn from my mistakes. When well intention experienced beekeepers on this forum give you advice they are looking though your eyes so their advice can steer you wrong. It is something I won't forget. I will continue to be treatment free because that is what I want. No one here knows xphoney well enough to know what he wants in the long run. In time we may find out what that is. Treatment free is not for a commercial beekeeper because they are competing with other commercial beekeepers and it puts them at a disadvantage. They equate everything to work and it would be much more work for a commercial operation to be sustainable. Treatment free is better suited for the hobbyist where you can take two avenues. The no work avenue that I have chosen and the increased work that many others have chosen.
> Xphoney, welcome to the forum. There is much to learn even from those that give you a hard time.


T.I. might disagree with you.


----------



## cg3

sqkcrk said:


> T.I. might disagree with you.


I suspect that's true about anybody and any subject.


----------



## sqkcrk

xphoney, which kills cows more often during the Winter, an open barn or a tightly closed barn? Which one is warmer? Since I have been told I am wrong about what we should be talking about in this Thread.


----------



## sqkcrk

cg3 said:


> I suspect that's true about anybody and any subject.


Now Charlie. 

I'm going south next week. Come on over and give me a hand why don't you? You and Herb.


----------



## squarepeg

many thanks dan.


----------



## cg3

sqkcrk said:


> Now Charlie.
> 
> I'm going south next week. Come on over and give me a hand why don't you? You and Herb.


This is probably not the Thread for that, either. Might work, I'll get in touch.


----------



## winevines

Michael Palmer said:


> 250 untreated mating nuclei,


Never noticed this detail before. Why? Because they have a constant brood break in the queen rearing process?


----------



## beemandan

squarepeg said:


> what do you think a reasonable 'per hive' income average is?


I wouldn't dare guess. Way too many variables. Selling nucs? Raising queens? Retail or wholesale honey? Or some combination? It was a good honey season. I averaged 80lbs/hive (60lbs is about the long term average). I sold more nucs than I had planned .....which will brings me at a year over year reduction in total production hives (I didn't have enough 'left overs' to replace my prior year's losses). My year over year losses were right at 15%. I culled nearly 10% already this year in August and September. I expect (hope) my overwintering losses to be negligible. I have a couple of hives that I'm pretty sure are queenless...but if their populations are still good in March, I will give them queens. If not, they will get shaken out and go into my loss tally. Everyone else looks good but I will have to start feeding a few soon...or those losses will climb.
$600/hive profit? Let's see. 150 hives x $600/ = $90,000. Not happenin' here. Not even close. For what it's worth, my mite treatment costs run less than $4/hive.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

xphoney said:


> It's a good study to show what it's purpose was, cluster size and temps in certain conditions. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
> 
> ... ... ...
> Conclusions 7 and 18 seem to imply to me that insulation can help. Is that the way it reads to you?
> 
> http://naldc.nal.usda.gov/download/CAT72345678/PDF


Yes, #7 and #18 do imply that. Also, I think #7 is important ...


> (7) A colony protected by insulation will have a less compact cluster that will fluctuate more in size with temperature change than a cluster in an unprotected colony.


That says to me that an insulated colony will have an easier time moving to new stores. Finally, see #20 ....


> (20) Under normal winter conditions either insulated or noninsulated colonies should survive at Madison, Wis.


Given your location, I suggest looking for posts by Roland on how he winters hives. I think _Crazy Roland_ is not as _crazy _as he claims.


----------



## squarepeg

understood dan. the $600 figure is based on averaging 2.5 supers of honey harvested and 1 nuc sale per hive. that may be wishful thinking, but it's the goal i am working toward.

where are you getting queens so early in the season?


----------



## Michael Palmer

winevines said:


> Never noticed this detail before. Why? Because they have a constant brood break in the queen rearing process?


Don't want to contaminate my mating nuc combs. I lost 99% of them a few years ago, but usually they winter well.


----------



## winevines

Michael Palmer said:


> And y'all??


Sure you won't reconsider that invitation to Georgia now you love that expression so ?

Since 2006- I have had from 2-50 colonies. Over 30 the fast 4 years with half double story nucs. 50 currently give or take a few. Treated with apiguard mostly, but tried the new legal amitraz product this year, and have used formic (both MAQS and home made flash treatment) and oxalic (in winter) , even tried hopguard. Survival consistently 90% or higher except the one year I did not treat nucs. I don't have exact data from that year but estimate I lost at least 40% of those nucs that year. Honey I am still trying to track consistently so don't have good averages per colony over time. We did great in 2014 though! 2 medium box average per colony (not bad for this area). The past 2 or 3 years I have sold at least twice the number of nucs as I had coming out of winter and by Fall I seem to still end up with more colonies than I had coming out of winter each year. Increasingly colonies are headed by my own or my local friend's locally raised queens- I don't have my data fully organized, but estimate more than 85% if I include bee made queens in that. No packages since 2009 or 2010.


----------



## xphoney

Acebird said:


> No one here knows xphoney well enough to know what he wants in the long run. In time we may find out what that is.


This may not be the place for this but apparently I don't care. 

XPHoney is being created as a homeschool project. I have special needs kids that need to learn at a different pace and level. My kids are running out of things to learn in a traditional sense so we are creating a small business from a new hobby/interest in order to take learning to the next level. Honey bees will also fit in nicely with our yard sized mini orchard.

For us the marketing aspect is of the upmost importance since selling bulk honey is not in our marketing plan and we plan to sell "premium honey". We live in probably the most liberal and intense organic food market outside of Berkely. Thus the interest in researching treatment free and determining if it feasible. With Mike Palmers sustainable apiary concept, 30% losses is very doable when you can sell the honey for 10 to 15 a pound. But to beat the current going rate of 10 (Madison rate) you have to brand and have a "gimmick".

The marketing aspect for us is also important since my 13 year old is working on her programming degree and this will give her a real world example for her course work. Ie. programming our website, online sales, hive app tool for hive maintanence, etc.

We Intend to explore all aspects of the beekeeping business including pollination services, selling queens, honey etc.

While profit is not our main goal, learning is, we are capitalists and will try to run the business in a profitable way.

Our main liabilities is startup regulations in the village. We are restricted in where we can keep our hives and to a total of 5 cubic feet per hive- including supers. Thus cold and wind are important. Once we have initial hives in place expansion into farming areas is the only way we can keep the business afloat. We have virtually unlimited space for us in Central Wisconsin and our agriculture connections in Dane county will help a lot.

It is noteworthy to mention that as part of our project we are building our own equipment, including frames, and we discovered that bee space is different for small vs large cell. The bees probably won't care much but for optimal cluster health we had to router down our frames.

Andrew


----------



## xphoney

sqkcrk said:


> xphoney, which kills cows more often during the Winter, an open barn or a tightly closed barn? Which one is warmer? Since I have been told I am wrong about what we should be talking about in this Thread.


LOL. Drafts. Our barn is sealed and vented to the outside with fan set at 45. Ie. when the cows heat the space above 45 heat is vented out. 

Cows are different than bees since they massively heat the space around them and dump more humidity than you can imagine..... 

Calves on the other hand will die if kept in a barn. (Of scours). Calves and heifers need to be in cold housing for the winter that is well ventilated. This is due to the lessened ability to be a furnace.


----------



## squarepeg

andrew, that 'riverway' area looks really good. i think it would have good floral diversity with various plants unique to the river valley and also at the edges of those wooded areas, not to mention the benefit of the trees themselves. picking the brains of roland and other experienced beeks in your area was a great suggestion. good luck with your project!


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

xphoney said:


> Cows are different than bees since they massively heat the space around them and dump more humidity than you can imagine.....


You may be surprised to find that Beesource member _Ian _winters bees indoors, and ... _they heat the space around them and dump more humidity than you can imagine_..... 

A thread by _Ian _touching on that:
http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?304985-Moving-them-in


Ian's farm _also _in the cattle business ...


----------



## sqkcrk

squarepeg said:


> where are you getting queens so early in the season?


CA and HI.


----------



## sqkcrk

xphoney said:


> LOL. Drafts. Our barn is sealed and vented to the outside with fan set at 45. Ie. when the cows heat the space above 45 heat is vented out.
> 
> Cows are different than bees since they massively heat the space around them and dump more humidity than you can imagine.....
> 
> Calves on the other hand will die if kept in a barn. (Of scours). Calves and heifers need to be in cold housing for the winter that is well ventilated. This is due to the lessened ability to be a furnace.


There are more similarities between the housing of cows and bees than you might think. Trapped moisture kills bees and cows more than cold does. That was why I asked. That was where I was leading you to. There is much to learn before making statements about things you have not experienced or learned yet. But it seems as though you have the capacity and the willingness to do so, so welcome to beekeeping. May you enjoy the journey.


----------



## beemandan

squarepeg said:


> where are you getting queens so early in the season?


I get my early season queens from Florida.


----------



## Acebird

xphoney said:


> Thus the interest in researching treatment free and determining if it feasible.





> While profit is not our main goal, learning is, we are capitalists and will try to run the business in a profitable way.


This sounds great. I would not want to see children handling chemicals. Running a profitable business with unrelated children can pose a problem. Trucking hives around with children might be even more of a problem. Children around equipment, you must be careful. They will learn plenty though.


----------



## Michael Bush

>To which I will add: don't make it harder on yourself by buying into miracle cures, holy relics and crystal energies.

Insulting... again. How rational is it to compare letting the bees build their own comb and not poisoning the hive and disrupting the ecology of the hive to "miracle cures, holy relics and crystal energies?" You actually think these are the same in any way? Allowing a natural system to work is a long ways from "holy relics".

>Do temperatures of -40 kill bees?

In my experience as you go up from a couple of weeks of -10 F to a couple of weeks of -20 and then a couple of weeks of -30 and a couple of weeks of -40 your loses go up a lot. At a couple of weeks of -10 I could lose as little as 10% and as much as 20%. At a couple of weeks of -20 that could go up to 30% to 40%. At a couple of weeks of -30 that climbs to 50% to 60%. At a couple of weeks of -40 it climbs to 60% to 80%. There are a few other factors (such as a failed fall flow or how long between cleansing flights or if it's too warm and the bees are flying a lot and too active with nothing to forage) but brutal cold is the single most defining factor to winter survival here. Some will survive -40 F every night for two weeks but many will not. I have never seen -40 F here in Eastern Nebraska, but have seen it in Western Nebraska and in Laramie, WY.

I have traveled and spoken at 65 bee conferences since June 2012 (that comes to over two a month average, and a lot before that back to 2004 or so...) I meet successful treatment free beekeepers all over the country and often have discussions until late into the night on the topic. Most of them have been keeping bees with no treatments for at least the last decade. In New Mexico when I mentioned that the group seemed very positive in their attitude toward treatment free beekeeping I was told, with some surprise at the question, that "no one in the club treats..." I have run into many clubs that have split off (which I hate to see) and formed their own "treatment free" clubs because of the relentless animosity of those who keep saying it's impossible to do what they are doing. Just as a lot of people don't get into these discussions in order to avoid that same relentless animosity.


----------



## shinbone

I am taking a guess, and I am just a rookie so I don't know anything, but I would say any animosity that may exist between some T and some TF beekeepers is because the T beekeepers are skeptical of the success of the TF beekeepers. The suspicion is that a person buys some bees, doesn't treat them, the hives die two years later and the person calls themselves a TF beekeeper. The T beekeeper just doesn't buy that as successful TF beekeeping. But then the T beekeeper is criticized if he starts to ask for details to learn what the self-proclaimed TF beekeeper is actually doing and succeeding at, which then confirms in the T beekeeper's mind that the TF beekeeper didn't really succeed at anything except to let some hives die, and the skepticism grows.

The TF beekeepers then get mad because they sense the disbelief and don't appreciate having their veracity questioned.

At least, that is what appears to happen from my perspective.





.


----------



## Oldtimer

xphoney said:


> We are restricted in where we can keep our hives and to a total of 5 cubic feet per hive- including supers.


5 cubic feet is very limiting, and will make it virtually impossible to run a hive properly, or profitably.

My advice would be see if you can get that rule changed, or have the hives where that restriction does not apply.


----------



## jim lyon

Oldtimer said:


> 5 cubic feet is very limiting, and will make it virtually impossible to run a hive properly, or profitably.
> 
> My advice would be see if you can get that rule changed, or have the hives where that restriction does not apply.


I missed that. It's difficult to understand the logic of such a rule. Given the fact that a 10 frame double deep is about 3.5 cu. ft. It looks like you would only be allowed to put on one medium. Then they run out of room begin to backfill......and probably swarm. Wonder how thats going to go over with the neighbors.


----------



## sqkcrk

xphoney said:


> Our main liabilities is startup regulations in the village. We are restricted in where we can keep our hives and to a total of 5 cubic feet per hive- including supers.
> 
> Andrew


Are you sure? Who makes up regulations like that?


----------



## shannonswyatt

Michael Palmer said:


> Don't want to contaminate my mating nuc combs. I lost 99% of them a few years ago, but usually they winter well.


Michael, are you saying you lost 99% when you treated? Or were you not treating at the time but you lost basically the whole lot, but since they were not treated the comb is not contaminated? (sorry for my confusion)


----------



## odfrank

sqkcrk said:


> Are you sure? Who makes up regulations like that?


Only Idiot bureaucrats could make a law like that....sounds unlikely to me also. I think Xphoney misinterpreted something. Please send us a copy of this regulation.


----------



## Michael Palmer

I don't treat my mating nucs. Usually no problem. That summer we had a drought. So dry the ground cracked. No flow. Very little brood raised late summer after mating was finished. What varroa there were overwhelmed the little colonies and almost none made the winter. I re-stocked them the following spring by inserting mating nuc combs in my standard over-wintered nucs and harvesting brood and bees when I had queen cells were ready. Not the disaster it sounds like, just more work.


----------



## Michael Palmer

squarepeg said:


> where are you getting queens so early in the season?


From over-wintered nucleus colonies of course.


----------



## Duncan151

Michael Palmer said:


> From over-wintered nucleus colonies of course.


Hmmmm, Where have I heard that before! Those were some great videos Mike!


----------



## odfrank

sqkcrk said:


> Are you sure? Who makes up regulations like that?


Unbelievable but true...here are the regulations from his home town. Cross Plains WI. And you people call us San Franciscans a bunch of wackos. 

(a)
Purpose.
The Vil
lage Board finds that honeybee pollination is important to 
wildlife that depend on honeybees for a food source and as pollinators of the 
plants they consume. Further, honeybee hives support a healthy urban food supply. 
Therefore, notwithstanding any other 
provision of this Code, honeybees may be 
kept on any lot, regardless of zoning, subject to the limitations set forth in 
paragraph (b) below.
(b) 
Limitations. 
(1)
No bees, other than honeybees, may be kept or maintained within the 
Village limits.
(2)
No 
honeybee hive shall exceed five (5) cubic feet in volume.
(3)
No more than six (6) honeybee hives may be kept on any single lot.
(4)
No honeybee hive shall be located closer than ten (10) feet from any 
property line.
(5)
No honeybee hive shall be located 
less than twenty five feet from a 
principal building on an abutting lot, and all hives shall be kept in the rear 
yard of a lot.
(6)
An ever present supply of water shall be provided for all honeybee hives.
(7)
A flyway barrier, at least six (6) feet in hei
ght, shall shield any part of a 
property line of a lot in different ownership that is within twenty
-
five (25) 
feet of a honeybee hive. The flyway barrier must effectively direct bees to 
fly up and over the barrier when flying in the direction of the barrie
r. The 
flyway barrier shall consist of a wall, fence, dense vegetation or 
combination thereof, and it shall be positioned to transect both legs of a 
triangle extending from an apex at the hive to each end point of the part of 
the property line to be shiel
ded. The barrier shall further comply with any 
applicable fence regulations contained within this Code of Ordinances.
(8)
If honeybees are to be kept on a lot, by a person other than the lot owner, 
the lot owner must give consent in writing to the keeping
of honeybees on 
the lot as part of the application set forth in (c) below


----------



## squarepeg

Michael Palmer said:


> From over-wintered nucleus colonies of course.


but of course michael! (slaps head)


----------



## sqkcrk

odfrank said:


> I think Xphoney misinterpreted something.


Wouldn't be the first time.


----------



## sqkcrk

squarepeg said:


> but of course michael! (slaps head)


FL beekeepers are making splits with California and Hawaiian queens right now. Not from over Wintered queens.


----------



## squarepeg

understood mark. i'm guessing the ones dan is talking about are raised a little later in the season. headin' south soon?


----------



## sqkcrk

Have to ask Dan, but there's no reason he couldn't be getting queens from HI.

Next week.


----------



## beemandan

I can get well mated queens from Florida by mid March. That is as soon as I am able to dependably make splits. I don't have any real need for queens today. I probably have a couple of queenless hives now but it just wouldn't make much sense, to me, to order for them alone.


----------



## sqkcrk

:thumbsup:


----------



## shannonswyatt

odfrank said:


> Unbelievable but true...here are the regulations from his home town. Cross Plains WI. And you people call us San Franciscans a bunch of wackos.
> 
> (a)
> Purpose.
> The Vil
> lage Board finds that honeybee pollination is important to
> wildlife that depend on honeybees for a food source and as pollinators of the
> plants they consume. Further, honeybee hives support a healthy urban food supply.
> Therefore, notwithstanding any other
> provision of this Code, honeybees may be
> kept on any lot, regardless of zoning, subject to the limitations set forth in
> paragraph (b) below.
> (b)
> Limitations.
> (1)
> No bees, other than honeybees, may be kept or maintained within the
> Village limits.
> (2)
> No
> honeybee hive shall exceed five (5) cubic feet in volume.
> (3)
> No more than six (6) honeybee hives may be kept on any single lot.
> (4)
> No honeybee hive shall be located closer than ten (10) feet from any
> property line.
> (5)
> No honeybee hive shall be located
> less than twenty five feet from a
> principal building on an abutting lot, and all hives shall be kept in the rear
> yard of a lot.
> (6)
> An ever present supply of water shall be provided for all honeybee hives.
> (7)
> A flyway barrier, at least six (6) feet in hei
> ght, shall shield any part of a
> property line of a lot in different ownership that is within twenty
> -
> five (25)
> feet of a honeybee hive. The flyway barrier must effectively direct bees to
> fly up and over the barrier when flying in the direction of the barrie
> r. The
> flyway barrier shall consist of a wall, fence, dense vegetation or
> combination thereof, and it shall be positioned to transect both legs of a
> triangle extending from an apex at the hive to each end point of the part of
> the property line to be shiel
> ded. The barrier shall further comply with any
> applicable fence regulations contained within this Code of Ordinances.
> (8)
> If honeybees are to be kept on a lot, by a person other than the lot owner,
> the lot owner must give consent in writing to the keeping
> of honeybees on
> the lot as part of the application set forth in (c) below



Some of the rules are similar to where I live. The part that is weird is the 5 cubic feet. My guess is that comes out to 2 deeps and 2 mediums or something close. Too lazy to do the math. They probably asked a bee keeper what a reasonable size hive was and they took the dimensions. They would loose their mind on a top bar hive I guess. 

I don't think these are unreasonable for a town since most people probably have no more property than a 1/4 acre in town. It would be better if it were something like no more than x number of hives per x square feet of property in case someone had a large lot of land.

Boy this is really getting off topic.


----------



## xphoney

sqkcrk said:


> Wouldn't be the first time.


Careful, someone might take that personally.


----------



## xphoney

odfrank said:


> Unbelievable but true...here are the regulations from his home town. Cross Plains WI. And you people call us San Franciscans a bunch of wackos.
> 
> (a)
> Purpose.
> The Vil
> lage Board finds that honeybee pollination is important to
> wildlife that depend on honeybees for a food source and as pollinators of the
> plants they consume. Further, honeybee hives support a healthy urban food supply.
> Therefore, notwithstanding any other
> provision of this Code, honeybees may be
> kept on any lot, regardless of zoning, subject to the limitations set forth in
> paragraph (b) below.
> (b)
> Limitations.
> (1)
> No bees, other than honeybees, may be kept or maintained within the
> Village limits.
> (2)
> No
> honeybee hive shall exceed five (5) cubic feet in volume.
> (3)
> No more than six (6) honeybee hives may be kept on any single lot.


Here is that back story so everyone can understand. In most places in Wisconsin keeping bees is illegal by ordinance. (We are talking URBAN areas) The City of Madison is a very organic/local food area. A movement started that allows people to keep bees and chickens in the city limits. The City of Middleton followed suit and after a few year of debate so did the village of Cross Plains. However, people are scared to death of bees so they put in the restrictions. 

I am the first legally licensed beekeeper in Cross Plains so it is important that I follow the rules in order to help the movement along. Rule change is not possible until I establish the good will of those who are scared.

Loophole: I live a few hundred feet from the edge of the village and the TOWN of Cross Plains has no such rules. So within eyesite of my house I have no restrictions. However, every site around me so far has issues like cold settling in or wind. 

Its important for the movement that we play within the rules and develop these close to village site so others can do the same..... and then compete with us.


----------



## Honey-4-All

"I am the first legally licensed beekeeper in Cross Plains"

Seriously... One needs to be licensed to keep bees?

Does one need a garden licence to raise other forms of your own food also?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

See Section 21.15(c)(1)


> Any person who keeps honeybee hives in the Village shall obtain an annual license prior to January 1 of each year or within 30 days of first acquiring the honeybee hives.
> 
> http://www.cross-plains.wi.us/verti...0175}/uploads/Chapter_21_-_Animal_Control.pdf


And if you don't pay the _annual _license fee on time, the penalty is an additional $5 _per day_. 




... _sp_, we have a special smiley very appropriate for post #301 ... :doh:


----------



## squarepeg

Rader Sidetrack said:


> ... _sp_, we have a special smiley very appropriate for post #301 ... :doh:


yeah that's the one. for some reason it's not on my palette. :scratch:


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Its available by clicking the "More" button to bring up additional smileys. But _all _smileys are instantly available by just typing their 'code'. The code for :doh: is 
;doh; 
Use the colon character : in place of the semicolon ; in my example to actually display the smiley,

You can find the 'code' for each smiley by doing a mouse 'rollover'.


----------



## squarepeg

not on the 'more' palette either rader, but thanks for the tips. i guess i'll have to be careful not to post anymore :doh:'s


----------



## squarepeg

never mind, found it! :doh::doh:


----------



## xphoney

Honey-4-All said:


> "I am the first legally licensed beekeeper in Cross Plains"
> 
> Seriously... One needs to be licensed to keep bees?
> 
> Does one need a garden licence to raise other forms of your own food also?


Welcome to the People's Republic of Dane County. Communism and Socialism are popular here.

Keep in mind that we are talking urban areas for these restrictions.

And yes, natural lawns require a license, but gardens do not. Only one person is has a garden on all of their lot.


----------



## Oldtimer

It's good you are committed to working within the rules and building public good will, best approach in my opinion.

It will be hard though with the 5 cubic foot restriction. This will make it harder for you to run the hive sensibly, and control swarming. It is counter productive to not annoying the neighbours. While this restriction is in place you may have to just keep small hives and splits within the limits, and older more mature hives be moved elsewhere.

It is not possible to just mandate by law that a hive stay below a certain size. The bee population grows during the season and if not given the room they need the bees will take other measures.

Long term you do need to work on having this changed, especially if other people may start keeping bees, it is a recipe for trouble.


----------



## xphoney

Oldtimer said:


> It's good you are committed to working within the rules and building public good will, best approach in my opinion.
> 
> It will be hard though with the 5 cubic foot restriction. This will make it harder for you to run the hive sensibly, and control swarming. It is counter productive to not annoying the neighbours. While this restriction is in place you may have to just keep small hives and splits within the limits, and older more mature hives be moved elsewhere.
> 
> It is not possible to just mandate by law that a hive stay below a certain size. The bee population grows during the season and if not given the room they need the bees will take other measures.
> 
> Long term you do need to work on having this changed, especially if other people may start keeping bees, it is a recipe for trouble.


Fully agree. I will probably use my yard for mating nucs and out apiaries for all else. 

I don't anticipate having issues getting it changed in a few years but its a process and I need people to see that bees can be safe first.


----------



## Oldtimer

Something else, I think that where you are you may find that your bees collect a lot more honey in the residential suburbs than they will out of town, although you may have to experiment somewhat to discover if that is true and find your productive sites. If you can get a site outside of the legal restrictions but handy to the suburbs it will be very useful to you.

The things you are thinking may restrict your choices of site are correct, but, it's hard to find the perfect site. Try to avoid windy sites, but the other things you may be able to work around. Early morning sun directly on the hives is a good thing.

A good site can make up for a lot of bad beekeeping, and counter to that no matter how skilfully the bees are kept they will do poorly in a bad site.


----------



## Acebird

Oldtimer said:


> It will be hard though with the 5 cubic foot restriction.


Why? Isn't a deep about a cubic ft in volume? Five deeps should be fine and if you need to you can always pull honey to keep it below.


----------



## johno

You can get 6 eight frame mediums into 5 cubic feet, 3boxes for brood and 3 boxes for supers. Most of my hives will end up with 6 boxes a few with maybe 7.
Johno


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Acebird said:


> Five deeps should be fine and if you need to you can always pull honey to keep it below.


Here is the actual math ....
(1) 10 frame deep = 19.875*16.25*9.625/144/12= 1.8 cu ft
(3) deeps is 5.39 cu ft, and therefore not allowable. 



If we assume that an 8 frame box is 13.75" wide (some are wider) then
(1) 8 frame medium = 19.875*13.75*6.625/144/12 = 1.05 cu ft
(4) 8 frame mediums is 4.19 cu ft, so 5 of them would not be allowed.

:ws:

While we beekeepers might consider hive volume to be the _inside _dimensions, the Cross Plains Village ordinance says nothing like that. It will be a tough row to hoe to get the village to accept that their ordinance should be interpreted to measure the _inside _of the hive. I'm sure the code enforcement person will be just thrilled to do that. 

.


----------



## Tim Ives

Oldtimer said:


> If that's your best and only example it's not a good one.
> 
> The guy you mention has also been banned from other sites, including Solomon Parkers treatment free site. Don't think it was his treatment free practises that got him kicked off that one.


Really? How did Solomon ban me when I removed myself from group? 

Colony count this time last year 153, Currently 170 Sugar Free and Treatment free.How quickly do you think I'll increase with 500 Queen mating nucs currently working on?


----------



## sqkcrk

xphoney said:


> Careful, someone might take that personally.


If you don't believe it or especially have never seen it yourself I could see how someone might, but it's true. Isn't it? But it appears that in this case you quoted the regulation right. I think you have a problem before you have even started.


----------



## sqkcrk

Oldtimer said:


> It will be hard though with the 5 cubic foot restriction.


Why? Will someone be coming around with a measuring tape?


----------



## johno

Looking at hive dimensions why would they not be measured by inside dimensions most rooms and dwellings are they not measured by inside dimensions by municipalities.
Johno


----------



## Oldtimer

Tim Ives said:


> Really? How did Solomon ban me when I removed myself from group?


No idea of the actual mechanics, I based my statement on what Solomon said himself. Guess it's like the old saying, "I didn't get fired, I quit".




Tim Ives said:


> Colony count this time last year 153, Currently 170 Sugar Free and Treatment free.How quickly do you think I'll increase with 500 Queen mating nucs currently working on?


How would I know how quickly you would increase? Why talk in riddles?

You want my guess? Thousand by the end of the year.

If it's not that, say what it is instead of playing guessing games. It was the constant guessing games instead of actual figures that first made me sceptical of you Tim and you are still doing it.

As to your beekeeping, I think you are a fine beekeeper. As to your communication skills, no comment.

Here's a riddle for you. Why did Xphoney think you were banned from Beesource?


----------



## Michael Bush

>(1) 10 frame deep = 19.875*16.25*9.625/144/12= 1.8 cu ft

That is outside measurements. Inside would be the point. Inside they are 14.75 * 18.375 * 9.625/144/12 = 1.5 cu ft = 3.3333 boxes... so maybe you could add one extra shallow box on top of three deeps? Still not much of a hive.


----------



## jim lyon

Michael Bush said:


> >(1) 10 frame deep = 19.875*16.25*9.625/144/12= 1.8 cu ft
> 
> That is outside measurements. Inside would be the point.


Who knows what the point is of such a ridiculous rule. Perhaps it's visual aesthetics from the neighbors point of view. In the unlikely event someone shows up with a tape measure I kind of doubt that they are going to open up the hive to get a true inside measurement. I'm enough of a rebel that I would probably flaunt the rule, follow good beekeeping practices, pass a little honey around to the neighbors and see just how serious the local authorities enforcement policies really are.


----------



## deknow

...or the time for the urban Klein bottle hive has come. If someone asks for the dimensions, you can ask if they want ID or OD.

A Klein bottle is like a mobius strip in 3d....the inside and outside are the same side.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

A _visual aid _to go with Dean's suggestion ... 







Photo Credit


----------



## jim lyon

Ha, ha. Enforcement is going to require some math skills with that one. 
A number of years ago when in the midst of a bad drought I decided to defy the no burning ban the morning after a nice overnight rain storm and lit up an unsightly pile of broken combs that had been accumulating. A neighbor down the street apparently felt I needed to be reported. When the local deputy showed up to investigate I just shrugged and said it must have been a lightning strike last night and I decided my best option was to just let it burn and not bother the local fire department. He just smiled and winked and drove away.
Sorry, that I'm getting a bit t:


----------



## Acebird

jim lyon said:


> Who knows what the point is of such a ridiculous rule.


I suspect it was done to prevent a beekeeper from making a hive so big you need a step ladder. Certainly 5 cu ft is doable. Skeps are smaller than that. I think Jim is right. The law will not be enforced unless there is a neighbor issue and if there is a neighbor issue the hive will be gone no matter what size.


----------



## Michael Bush

>In the unlikely event someone shows up with a tape measure I kind of doubt that they are going to open up the hive to get a true inside measurement.

Yes, the simplest solution is probably to go pop the top on the hive and pull a box off for them to measure... if you can catch them before they leave...


----------



## shannonswyatt

I think they should have limited it based on the total number of bees in the hive.


----------



## deknow

That is a good one!

I one time had a city employee come because of a complaint about compost smell. He wanted to enforce the complaint but he had to admit he couldn't smell anything at all. I'd love to tell that guy that I'll help him measure the dimensions of the outside of a klein box and calculate the volume.


----------



## xphoney

Rader Sidetrack said:


> A _visual aid _to go with Dean's suggestion ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Photo Credit


I don't have the woodworking skills to build that..... Any volunteers?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

> I don't have the woodworking skills to build that..... Any volunteers?

Just massage the vector file to get it into STL file format and send it to your 3-D printer ....


----------



## TalonRedding

Rader Sidetrack said:


> > I don't have the woodworking skills to build that..... Any volunteers?
> 
> Just massage the vector file to get it into STL file format and send it to your 3-D printer ....


OR, just grow a gourd! 
And yes, I know there's a big difference between the two.....but they do look similar.


----------



## shinbone

If this thread goes any further off topic, we'll have done a full circle and be back on topic.


----------



## shannonswyatt

shinbone said:


> If this thread goes any further off topic, we'll have done a full circle and be back on topic.


:lpf:


----------



## sqkcrk

What were we talking about?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

... What goes around .... comes around again ... 








Photo Credit


----------



## aunt betty

This topic is real and has been well documented. Had a feeling that there was a name for the "bee havers" that quit. 
Churn is a perfect term because their false expectations get churned to bits. 
It burns me up how many there are out there who actually believe that you dump the bees in the box, come back in 3 months, and its full of honey and is easy. 

Just got lectured for 10 minutes yesterday by someone who "we don't eat honey because beekeepers torture the bees with smoke". I think they got that idea from the flow-hive ad.


----------



## sakhoney

Aunt Betty - you mean there's more to it than that?


----------



## Juhani Lunden

Are there any new statistics for 2015-2016 from the Marin Bees Association?


----------



## JWChesnut

No. One of the members at the last spring meeting was on the agenda to discuss the results of study of hives that express a naturally "broodless" period trait. The newsletter which would report that study has not appeared (a month or more overdue).


----------



## BadBeeKeeper

aunt betty said:


> Just got lectured for 10 minutes yesterday by someone who "we don't eat honey because beekeepers torture the bees with smoke". I think they got that idea from the flow-hive ad.


I have $100 for the first person that invents something that will cause all of the morons to run into the sea and drown. We can sneak it into the finished oil-refinery products (gasoline, diesel) by using injectors at the fuel racks where all the tank trucks fill up to transport fuel across the country. Within a few weeks nearly every vehicle will be pumping out anti-moronica and soon after the country will be nearly free of stupidity. (There will probably be a lot of job openings in Washington D.C., particularly in the Senate and Congress.)


----------

