# Noob Question: Genetics vs Adaptation



## FlowerPlanter (Aug 3, 2011)

Here's some studies that may answer some of your questions;

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

http://scientificbeekeeping.com/queens-for-pennies/

http://www.apidologie.org/articles/apido/pdf/2006/05/m6039.pdf

Here's a good post from MB

http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...-a-varroa-infested-hive&p=1322717#post1322717


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

hi john, and many thanks for your kind comment on the 2015 thread.

i think flowerplanter nailed it with those links as far as getting to the heart of your question.

i'm not an entomologist, but i don't think that individual bees acquire immunity via an antibody/antigen response in the same way humans do. i believe their ability to resist pathogens has more of a genetic basis, is likely mediated through nutritional factors, and may be dependent on a healthy balance of beneficial organisms. frankly there is a lot about this that is not well understood well at this time.


----------



## Tenbears (May 15, 2012)

I am not going to debate the virtues of treatment verses treatment free. There are as many studies showing treatment is the best way to go as there are showing the opposite, What ever route you take Do it whole heartedly Not half fast


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

Bees do not have a very effective immune system. Flies by comparison have 5 times as many immune system genes that are considered to be 30 times more effective than the honeybee immune system. For a rough comparison, Alligators and Crocodiles have an immune system that is far superior to the mammalian immune system we humans carry. The honeybee immune system is not antigen based as SquarePeg mentioned. There is however quite a bit of evidence of epigenetic adaptation in honeybees. Some mite tolerance traits seem to have a strong epigenetic source. So to give a partial answer to your question, these epigenetic adaptations can be encouraged to some extent by treating to help the colony get past the break even point. Unfortunately, epigenetics does not seem to have the answer to breeding a fully mite tolerant bee.

The average commercial bees today have zilch for mite tolerance. Even highly selected VSH strains are not entirely able to manage varroa. Here is a list of mite tolerance the best I can piece it together in ascending order. Please note that I can't prove this scientifically, it is just a summation of what I see happening in my bees. It really needs to be investigated thoroughly especially in regards to the minor traits that are associated with mite tolerance.

Unselected honeybees - have essentially no tolerance to varroa and are wiped out in 1 or 2 years

hygienic bees - Have a small amount of varroa tolerance, they usually live 2 or 3 years before death

VSH bees - are usually ultra-hygienic, usually can make it 3 seasons but tend to only produce a honey crop 1 of those 3 years

Ultra-VSH - These are ultra-hygienic and have other minor traits that enable long term colony survival though honey production is still problematic

Allogrooming bees - These can usually survive long term but may struggle to make a regular honey crop

Ultra-VSH + Allogrooming - My bees would qualify in this group, they can survive long term and make a honey crop 3 out of 4 years with heavy management. I have a lot more swarm initiation than I like which takes quite a bit of time to keep under control.

Ultra-VSH + Allogrooming plus minor traits - This is my next goal, to combine traits for VSH plus mite grooming plus entombment plus other minor effects plus honey production traits. With time, these bees should be feasible and capable of managing mites long term while also making a regular crop of honey.


----------



## FlowerPlanter (Aug 3, 2011)

forgot one;

Ferial survivor; these bees have done it by themselves through natural selection. They need no help to survive. Can tolerance mites indefinably as long as their not mixed with inferior genes. Quite possible one of the highest winter survival rates. Can also survive harsh conditions with no added syrup or protein supplement.


----------



## AR Beekeeper (Sep 25, 2008)

johngfoster: Not everyone subscribes to the live or let die "Bond" method. I started a Bond Yard because I had plenty of resources and I wanted to know how long 12 colonies would last without management of any kind. Started with 12 colonies in 2006, increased to 20 by natural swarming, then dwindled away with 2 of the original colonies remaining this year, but they are so weak they probably will not survive winter. If they do I will bring them to my home yard.

I see resistance to the viruses the mites carry in about 3 years after a new group of queens are introduced into my yard. The first two years there will be many crawling bees and bees with DWV, the third year the numbers will be smaller and in year 4 usually very few crawlers during summer. This is with IPM, mainly drone brood trapping and sugar dusting and making a nuc or two from the new queen's colony. It is usually queen failure that dooms a colony, probably brought on by heave virus loads.

If a colony shows severe mite damage I treat and usually requeen with a nuc from the group I keep on hand. I seldom have to use chemical treatments, probably only once every 3 or 4 years. I see a lot complaining about commercial queens, and I don't think the quality is as good as in years past, but all of my bees started as queens from commercial breeders. The traits are out there, the beekeeper just needs to select for them. This means work, and some people seem not to want to put that much effort into beekeeping. It is easier to do nothing, but if you can't afford to purchase bees to replace losses don't go treatment cold turkey. There is enough for a new beekeeper to learn without having the problems that come with treatment free.


----------



## johngfoster (Nov 2, 2015)

Fusion_power said:


> Even highly selected VSH strains are not entirely able to manage varroa.


Sorry for my ignorance, but what is VSH?


----------



## johngfoster (Nov 2, 2015)

So is it then possible to gradually "wean a colony off treatments" over the course of a few years, and would this work better than just buying a package of bees and going TF from the get go?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

johngfoster said:


> Sorry for my ignorance, but what is VSH?


Varroa Sensitive Hygenics


----------



## AR Beekeeper (Sep 25, 2008)

Johngfoster; That is the way I would go if I were starting over again. I would use powdered sugar, drone comb trapping, and if things look as though the varroa are getting the upper hand, the acids such as Hopguard, Formic or Oxalic. You don't have to kill all of the varroa, you just need to keep their population below the economic threshold. 

Make a nuc with the original queen and allow the parent colony to make a new queen to create breaks in the brood similar to natural swarming is a common technique by those trying to develop resistance in a colony, this doesn't kill the varroa, it reduces the % increase in growth. If this is combined with powdered sugar and drone comb trapping it is much more effective because you remove the adults that are ready to enter cells to lay eggs.

Don't waste your resources by allowing colonies to die from varroa. It solves nothing, treating and requeening does the same thing (removing genes from the gene pool) and you still have a colony to work with, not a bunch of empty boxes.


----------



## GBF (Dec 3, 2015)

Fusion_power said:


> Bees do not have a very effective immune system.


:no: Strange statment... Sure, Honeybees have enough effective immune system. They are living with it for thosunds years untill ppl took a care over them..


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Not against Varroa, GBF.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

IE, not living with varroa thousands of years. In my country it's been 14 years.

We keep seeing references to evolution, but people forget evolution takes a long time. Which is why after all the talk all these years about treatment free bees, average treatment free losses are still just under 50% annually, or in other words average TF hive lifespan is 2 years. So I don't think things have evolved much yet, more, the extremely susceptible breeds have lessened or pretty much gone.


----------



## GBF (Dec 3, 2015)

sqkcrk said:


> Not against Varroa, GBF.


we are trying to speak for all bees over the world as one grup or speaking for bees for each one's yard?....
Also, to go against varroa it needs much more than just immune system. But the immune system is the important part in the struggle against varroa and we have to do all things for keeping bees healthy. The modern beekeeping industry works against honey bee. I call it - I want more beekeeping. More honey, more hives - more money... It is not bad, but there is a red line of the bee ability. When you step over you loose it.. Now the bee world is stepping over. But there is nothing wrong with the honey bee immune system. It is all - I want more....


----------



## johngfoster (Nov 2, 2015)

AR Beekeeper said:


> Johngfoster; That is the way I would go if I were starting over again. I would use powdered sugar, drone comb trapping, and if things look as though the varroa are getting the upper hand, the acids such as Hopguard, Formic or Oxalic. You don't have to kill all of the varroa, you just need to keep their population below the economic threshold.
> 
> Make a nuc with the original queen and allow the parent colony to make a new queen to create breaks in the brood similar to natural swarming is a common technique by those trying to develop resistance in a colony, this doesn't kill the varroa, it reduces the % increase in growth. If this is combined with powdered sugar and drone comb trapping it is much more effective because you remove the adults that are ready to enter cells to lay eggs.
> 
> Don't waste your resources by allowing colonies to die from varroa. It solves nothing, treating and requeening does the same thing (removing genes from the gene pool) and you still have a colony to work with, not a bunch of empty boxes.


Thanks for the input. My next question would be at what threshold to initiate what treatments? Dusting with powdered sugar at first sign of mite? Drone comb removal at what mite level? Thanks again.


----------



## BeesFromPoland (Dec 27, 2014)

John, You should do whatever You believe - as Tenbears wrote. You should what will not make You regret it. I believe in TF although everybody says I would fail. Yet I do it since I believe this is a better way. 

I agree with GBF.
Honey bees almost all over the world showed they can do it. Still, people say they can't, because they don't give enough honey, and they die in more % that we would want.

Oldtimer, 
evolution works by eliminating. When the "enemy" is that powerfull the elimination would be fast and it would take most of the bees with it... In 5 - 10 years most of the bees would survive the parasite, and the population would grow annualy. Evolution takes longer time if the pressure is weak. If the pressure is strong it either kills all or leaves the adapted. And we KNOW FOR FACT, that there are bees that are adapted (...I konw they are in minority)
Evolution would work that out pretty quickly if we would let it. But we don't...


----------



## jwcarlson (Feb 14, 2014)

BeesFromPoland said:


> Oldtimer,
> evolution works by eliminating. When the "enemy" is that powerfull the elimination would be fast and it would take most of the bees with it... In 5 - 10 years most of the bees would survive the parasite, and the population would grow annualy. Evolution takes longer time if the pressure is weak. If the pressure is strong it either kills all or leaves the adapted. And we KNOW FOR FACT, that there are bees that are adapted (...I konw they are in minority)
> Evolution would work that out pretty quickly if we would let it. But we don't...


Do you have any clue what the impact would be like...? Come on now. This isn't your backyard where if 75-90% of your bees die you just buy new ones from someone who is a better beekeeper than you. We're talking about livelihoods, families, food sources, etc etc.


----------



## BeesFromPoland (Dec 27, 2014)

jwcarlson said:


> Do you have any clue what the impact would be like...? Come on now. This isn't your backyard where if 75-90% of your bees die you just buy new ones from someone who is a better beekeeper than you. We're talking about livelihoods, families, food sources, etc etc.


Do I tell everyone to stop treating? I don't.

I'm just saying that evolution would work that out quickly. And You can't say it is not true. 
I was not refering to economics. I was refering to ecosystem, and the future well being of the species. And still there are too many examples in Your country, not mine, that You can bring together the well being of the species with economics.


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

All varroa treatments are prophylactic, in other words, preventive instead of curative. Once a colony shows serious mite/disease symptoms, it is usually doomed to die either late in the fall or over winter. Effective methods involve treatment from early summer through fall. In other words, from July through October timed appropriately to your climate. My experience with drone brood removal is that it is most effective in July and early August. Sugar roll is effective only when mites are phoretic, in other words on the bees, not in sealed brood. Oxalic is similar in requiring mites not be sealed in cells to be effective.

This is the treatment free forum and the specific rules of this forum prohibit discussion of treatment methods, so I suggest asking questions about treating in the appropriate place. I feel that as a newbee, it is appropriate to answer your question here so you have an idea what to investigate as you prepare to start beekeeping. Drone removal is an acceptable method for discussion in this area but other methods such as oxalic sublimation are not.


----------



## jwcarlson (Feb 14, 2014)

BeesFromPoland said:


> I'm just saying that evolution would work that out quickly. And You can't say it is not true.


*Maybe*, it would work it out that quickly... and maybe not. But the idea that you can keep bees in far greater concentrations that they would be found in any natural circumstance and not have to worry about disease and pests is not realistic. Having five chickens "free range" in your backyard isn't an issue. Do that with 50,000 chickens and what does it look like? 500,000? So far as the system we are in is concerned... I don't have any answers for that. Can't speculate as to the long-term viability of the way we live... but I suspect the collapse of that system will correspond to the resultant collapse of human population that would be required for us to do it any other way.

It's all fantasy land otherwise. Species come and go from this planet and have been for a very very long time.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

BeesFromPoland said:


> If the pressure is strong it either kills all or leaves the adapted. And we KNOW FOR FACT, that there are bees that are adapted (...I konw they are in minority)
> Evolution would work that out pretty quickly if we would let it. But we don't...


How quickly do you think it would take? And what would you think the impact of everyone from going treatment free would be?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

BeesFromPoland said:


> I'm just saying that evolution would work that out quickly. And You can't say it is not true.


What is your definition of quickly? Your idea is not new. Dr. Steve Taber said, back in 1988 that if we didn't use miticides to treat Tracheal Mites and then Varroa that in 30 years the bees and the mites would figure things out. There wouldn't be any commercial beekeepers and there would be hardly any small scale beekeepers either. Is that much of a plan?


----------



## johngfoster (Nov 2, 2015)

Fusion_power said:


> All varroa treatments are prophylactic, in other words, preventive instead of curative. Once a colony shows serious mite/disease symptoms, it is usually doomed to die either late in the fall or over winter. Effective methods involve treatment from early summer through fall. In other words, from July through October timed appropriately to your climate. My experience with drone brood removal is that it is most effective in July and early August. Sugar roll is effective only when mites are phoretic, in other words on the bees, not in sealed brood. Oxalic is similar in requiring mites not be sealed in cells to be effective.
> 
> This is the treatment free forum and the specific rules of this forum prohibit discussion of treatment methods, so I suggest asking questions about treating in the appropriate place. I feel that as a newbee, it is appropriate to answer your question here so you have an idea what to investigate as you prepare to start beekeeping. Drone removal is an acceptable method for discussion in this area but other methods such as oxalic sublimation are not.


Thanks, FP for your consideration. As I understand it, drone brood removal is still considered "treatment free" by some, as is sugar dusting. I realize chemical vapors such as OA and MA are true "treatments" and discussion of timing and methods of using these is not within the scope of discussion in this forum. But if the other two are (albeit grey areas), I thank you for your response and welcome any other comments or suggestions. My big concern is starting with a package from a "treated" parent colony, I would think I would have better luck "easing" the bees into true "treatment free" bee-keeping. But then I may be wrong too.


----------



## BeesFromPoland (Dec 27, 2014)

sqkcrk said:


> How quickly do you think it would take? And what would you think the impact of everyone from going treatment free would be?





sqkcrk said:


> What is your definition of quickly? Your idea is not new. Dr. Steve Taber said, back in 1988 that if we didn't use miticides to treat Tracheal Mites and then Varroa that in 30 years the bees and the mites would figure things out. There wouldn't be any commercial beekeepers and there would be hardly any small scale beekeepers either. Is that much of a plan?



theoretically speaking.

I'm deeply sure that it would end up beekeeping as we know it for the last 100 years. Probably 99% of commercial beekeepers would loose all of their bees. 
And in my personal opinion it would be good for the future of apis mellifera species. 

How long would this evolution take? Taking examples of the ones who do that (even everybody in neighbourhood spoils the genetics) it takes 5 - 10 years to have sustainable beekeeping - IF (!!!) they manage somehow to better their surroundings (with genetics, ferals etc). 


Again: I'm not refering to global economy or home economy. 
Yet (again) there are many examples of commercial beekeepers who don't treat and they live off bees. So claiming total disaster would be overstatement. You could do the transfer wisely. People who did it, now have healty bees. 
And to tell the truth, I don't feel sorry for the beekeepers who allow pouring toxins on their bees, because they have to "make a <poor> living" with their 2000 hives or so... I'm not convinced by them saying that they have "families to feed" so they have to do that. They don't. But they want to, because it's easy money. 
Taking example of tracheal mite invasion in UK, probably large areas would be wiped out of bees. But now there are bees in UK, so the world hasn't ended. The British don't starve, their economy is quite ok, I'm sure


----------



## jwcarlson (Feb 14, 2014)

johngfoster said:


> I realize chemical vapors such as OA and MA are true "treatments"


What about chemical powders in the form of powdered sugar? And the removal of chemicals essential to the overall world of bees in the form of drone brood removal?


----------



## jwcarlson (Feb 14, 2014)

BeesFromPoland said:


> theoretically speaking.
> 
> I'm deeply sure that it would end up beekeeping as we know it for the last 100 years. Probably 99% of commercial beekeepers would loose all of their bees.
> And in my personal opinion it would be good for the future of apis mellifera species.
> ...


1) Do you feel the same way about cows, pigs, chickens? Cats? Dogs?

2) Please give us your list of examples of commercial beekeepers who don't treat and live off of bees. I'm sure there are many that would like to mimic what they are doing.


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

> 2) Please give us your list of examples of commercial beekeepers who don't treat and live off of bees. I'm sure there are many that would like to mimic what they are doing.


You could check out Chris Baldwin who is commercial and is treatment free for several years now. He runs a mixed operation producing honey and selling bees. http://southbeekota.com/


----------



## Clayton Huestis (Jan 6, 2013)

> 2) Please give us your list of examples of commercial beekeepers who don't treat and live off of bees. I'm sure there are many that would like to mimic what they are doing.


Umm the Lusby's come to mind. Might not agree with all there theories but they still are some of the first TF pioneers.


----------



## BeesFromPoland (Dec 27, 2014)

jwcarlson said:


> 1) Do you feel the same way about cows, pigs, chickens? Cats? Dogs?
> 
> 2) Please give us your list of examples of commercial beekeepers who don't treat and live off of bees. I'm sure there are many that would like to mimic what they are doing.


1. Depands what You mean. If You mean giving them hormons/antibiotics (what people do all the time) to have bigger profit -I feel exactly the same. E.g. I don't like the idea that the chicken I buy, grew in 3 months bigger than a "normal" chicken used to in one year time... 
If You mean treating them when they are sick - I feel differently, because they are sick "sometimes". And 100% Bees have varroa for 100% time. This means we have to pour toxins / antibiotics /acids on them all the time. My dog doesn't need that. If it is sick I give it medicine and it is healthy again. And the bee is not - it still has parasite on it. So I have to act like it is sick all the time, or ... as it is healthy. 

2. except for the mentioned I think Mr. Bush declared on his webpage that he is doing beekeeping full time (bushfarms.com). As far as I know Kirk Webster is too (http://kirkwebster.com/) . I think Sam Comfort is living off bees too (http://anarchyapiaries.org/). 
I'm sure there are many others. You may try to mimic what they are doing.


----------



## AstroBee (Jan 3, 2003)

Fusion_power said:


> VSH bees - are usually ultra-hygienic, usually can make it 3 seasons but tend to only produce a honey crop 1 of those 3 years
> 
> Ultra-VSH - These are ultra-hygienic and have other minor traits that enable long term colony survival though honey production is still problematic


Where did these definitions/descriptions come from? I'm sorry, but I definitely do not agree with these, particularly a crop 1 out of 3 years? If true, that would make VSH totally worthless - hardly the case. I make a good crop every season. Perhaps your source/experience is somewhat dated?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

BeesFromPoland said:


> Oldtimer,
> evolution works by eliminating. When the "enemy" is that powerfull the elimination would be fast and it would take most of the bees with it... In 5 - 10 years most of the bees would survive the parasite, and the population would grow annualy. Evolution takes longer time if the pressure is weak. If the pressure is strong it either kills all or leaves the adapted. And we KNOW FOR FACT, that there are bees that are adapted (...I konw they are in minority)
> Evolution would work that out pretty quickly if we would let it. But we don't...


If I'm still around in 5 to 10 years I'll come back and ask you if you still believe that. 

Just, I started lurking on Beesource in 2008 and saw exactly the same statements then. 8 years later we do not have the "adapted" bees, and worse, TF survival rates are as bad now as they were then, there has not even been an improvement. Plenty talk and theorising, no actual improvement.

Which should not be taken as an attack on the TF movement, I would like TF bees as much as anyone. But to survive myself, I have to be real.


----------



## BeesFromPoland (Dec 27, 2014)

Oldtimer said:


> If I'm still around in 5 to 10 years I'll come back and ask you if you still believe that.
> 
> Just, I started lurking on Beesource in 2008 and saw exactly the same statements then. 8 years later we do not have the "adapted" bees, and worse, TF survival rates are as bad now as they were then, there has not even been an improvement. Plenty talk and theorising, no actual improvement.
> 
> Which should not be taken as an attack on the TF movement, I would like TF bees as much as anyone. But to survive myself, I have to be real.


Will I believe it? Yes I will. These are obvious truths. Simple evolution. I don't think anyone or anything would make me think different.
If I will do it all the way is a complete differenet matter. For now I try to do it. But I know reality. I know what people did to bees genetics, I know the influence of neighbours etc.

What kind of improvement do You expect? TF movement is not very popular so only a few people do it - and mostly they have sustainable beeyards all these years (For me this means: "It can be done"). Some quit probably but others took over. And most just talk and teorise - what improvement would You like out of theorising? If the improvement is to be global at least 20 - 30 % bees should be kept TF. And the rate is probably more like 2 - 3 % in the US and 0.02 - 0.03 % in Europe. What we hear (for these conditions) for me is an enormous success. I would also assume feral bees probably died in big rates - I would guess 20 - 80% a year (depanding on different environmental variables). Eliminating of the least adapted makes the population healthy. Now if TF bees die in lets say 25 - 30% it is called "bad". Probably this rate was normal for the ferals before the varroa. But we need 100% survival. We need 100 kg of honey per hive. We need "stingless" bees etc etc.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

I take the points you are trying to make.

However some fact checking could be in order. All the numbers you quote are wrong, mostly by a large margin. When the numbers and facts backing a case look like guesswork and assumptions it makes it difficult to accept the conclusions.


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

> Perhaps your source/experience is somewhat dated?


Astrobee, I'm definitely a bit dated, perhaps a bit jaded, maybe even over the hill. But I can still kick as high or higher than any other 240 year old on the planet!

My definitions are my own and not necessarily relevant to yours. The first Russian bees exhibited VSH behaviour. This is what I described as VSH. The VSH bees you are describing fit the Ultra-VSH description given that they are the result of deliberately concentrating VSH traits. As noted, they still have problems with producing a consistent honey crop. I am comparing results today with 30 years ago when I could use a colony of Italians to produce 100+ pounds of excellent honey and they would make a crop year after year so long as I gave them appropriate management. I can't do that with any of the various VSH bees today.


----------



## AstroBee (Jan 3, 2003)

Fusion_power said:


> I am comparing results today with 30 years ago when I could use a colony of Italians to produce 100+ pounds of excellent honey and they would make a crop year after year so long as I gave them appropriate management. I can't do that with any of the various VSH bees today.


Yes, Italians are great for crops, but those of today have a VERY low tolerance to varroa. The Pol-line was a great blend of VSH and Italians, which could survive and produce great crops. I've been using Pol-line from the first time Glenn offered them. Commercial sources of "true" pol-lines are nearly impossible to get these days. I got an infusion of some true Pol-line genetics last season and have inseminated several VSH genetic strains with it. I am also working on a "Pol-Line" replicate that brings in some highly productive Italians crossed with pure VSH, then crossed with pure Pol-line. We'll see how their daughters perform next spring. 

Overall, I'd say its not terribly unusual to see 100 lb yields out of my VSH bees. 100 lb yields in VA is very difficult to achieve given our short flow conditions.


----------



## BeesFromPoland (Dec 27, 2014)

Oldtimer said:


> I take the points you are trying to make.
> 
> However some fact checking could be in order. All the numbers you quote are wrong, mostly by a large margin. When the numbers and facts backing a case look like guesswork and assumptions it makes it difficult to accept the conclusions.


These numbers were the assumptions, as You wrote. They are probably wrong, but I have no idea by what margin. If You know these numbers please give them, I would be interested in them. Yet I wouldn't say they change the conclusions much.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

BeesFromPoland said:


> Yet (again) there are many examples of commercial beekeepers who don't treat and they live off bees. So claiming total disaster would be overstatement.
> 
> But they want to, because it's easy money.


Maybe it's a difference in experience or what constitutes commercial in Poland and in the US, but I find the use of the words "many examples" and "easy money" overstatements. There are not many commercial TF beekeepers in the US. If one percent of the Commercial Beekeepers in the US are Treatment Free and viable they are keeping a low profile. The two that I am aware of are somewhat well known, but are not very successful at reproducing similar operations, as far as I know.

And to say that running a commercial beekeeping operation is easy money is laughable. People who run 2,000 colonies do so because they know how to and know how to work hard. Nothing easy about it. If it were easy more people would be doing it.


----------



## BeesFromPoland (Dec 27, 2014)

sqkcrk said:


> Maybe it's a difference in experience or what constitutes commercial in Poland and in the US, but I find the use of the words "many examples" and "easy money" overstatements. There are not many commercial TF beekeepers in the US. If one percent of the Commercial Beekeepers in the US are Treatment Free and viable they are keeping a low profile. The two that I am aware of are somewhat well known, but are not very successful at reproducing similar operations, as far as I know.
> 
> And to say that running a commercial beekeeping operation is easy money is laughable. People who run 2,000 colonies do so because they know how to and know how to work hard. Nothing easy about it. If it were easy more people would be doing it.


I'm not saying it is not hard work. I'm not saying the money is not earned.
I am just saying it is "easy concept" to take 2000 hives for pollination and let the bees be poured with toxins to get well paid. I'm not saying it is "easy operation". I'm not saying it is not hard work. I'm not saying it is easy to get contract like that, organize it etc. 
English is not my first language so I may be misunderstood.
But again: I'm not sorry for the loss of the commercial beekeepers who destroy the honey bee species to get well paid for the crop or for the pollination. "It is the sacrifice I'm willing to take" - of course, because it is not one's sacrifice, but the bees' and nature's...

If there are 1% TF commercial beekeepers who make living with that kind beekeeping I would say that we should take them as example, and not just say that they are low profile or not very successful with it. They do make living with it so I would say they are successful enough. They do not destroy the species. They are in more ballance with nature. For me it is an example.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

BeesFromPoland said:


> 2. except for the mentioned I think Mr. Bush declared on his webpage that he is doing beekeeping full time (bushfarms.com).


Michael Bush is not a full-time beekeeper. His 'day job' is in the computer field.


Michael Bush said:


> I was a carpenter when I started keeping bees. I've been a computer programmer for the last 30 years. I took 16 semester hours of college chemistry, 13 semester hours of biology, 5 semester hours of physics and 10 semester hours of math, just because I was interested in them.
> 
> http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...Bees&p=1059718&highlight=computer#post1059718


----------



## fieldsofnaturalhoney (Feb 29, 2012)

johngfoster said:


> So is it then possible to gradually "wean a colony off treatments" over the course of a few years, and would this work better than just buying a package of bees and going TF from the get go?


Anything is Possible, but as stated earlier why half fast it? Depending on the package your buying, & then trying TF with them, most likely will be an up hill battle.


----------



## AR Beekeeper (Sep 25, 2008)

Why half fast it? So that colony losses will be 10% or less.


----------



## fieldsofnaturalhoney (Feb 29, 2012)

AR Beekeeper said:


> Why half fast it? So that colony losses will be 10% or less.


Indeed..,Hopefully, but regardless, there will be losses. I still don't understand why some recommend "learning" how to keep bees on treatments first:scratch: that seems backwards fast to your goal


----------



## johngfoster (Nov 2, 2015)

fieldsofnaturalhoney said:


> Indeed..,Hopefully, but regardless, there will be losses. I still don't understand why some recommend "learning" how to keep bees on treatments first:scratch: that seems backwards fast to your goal


Because "treated" bee beekeeping seems to be the "standard" way to keep bees, at least around here. I would think if the bees don't exhibit strong enough genetics to survive our MT winters here, just letting them die is a waste of the bees. By treating "a little", and keeping the colony alive, maybe it would encourage some of those genetics to express themselves with each successive generation, allowing less need for treatments, until the genes are strong enough to survive TF without any meds. But what do I know?  I've never even kept bees before. Just wondering.


----------



## BeesFromPoland (Dec 27, 2014)

MB has on his page these words:
"I am transitioning to doing beekeeping and speaking full time, so I need to make a living at this. "

I have no more knowledge on this.


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

MB also is a sometimes musician and computer programmer. I'm not sure if he is retiring from those pursuits.


----------



## GBF (Dec 3, 2015)

From some sentences it is obvious that commercial beekeepers is holding the truth of beekeeping and the best thing that bees wish for... I don't care how many beekeepers go by the TF and how many of them are commercial. There is a right thing that I have to do.. I go the TF, I will go this way and I will die trying. Sure, the truth doesn't change depending on how many agreed with it. 

How many of you beekeepers tasted and sold out the real pure honey, collected by TF bees wich prepared it in clean hives placed at a clean area where is no any chemical acting and taken from a pure wax ?... Is it the right thing that we all as beekeepers have to go?...


----------



## 1102009 (Jul 31, 2015)

BeesFromPoland said:


> Do I tell everyone to stop treating? I don't.
> 
> I'm just saying that evolution would work that out quickly. And You can't say it is not true.
> I was not refering to economics. I was refering to ecosystem, and the future well being of the species. And still there are too many examples in Your country, not mine, that You can bring together the well being of the species with economics.




As to drone removing: wasn`t brother adam the one who let the bees decide?


----------



## ulimann (Feb 17, 2015)

GBF I agree wholeheartedly uli


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>"I am transitioning to doing beekeeping and speaking full time, so I need to make a living at this. "

Someday I hope to make that transition. But so far they pay me much better to program computers and I still have a mortgage to pay.


----------

