# Treatment-Free Beekeeping without Small Cell



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I've been perusing BeeWeaver's site from time to time over the last couple days.
They claim not to have needed treatments for ten years now and I see no mention of small cell.
Far be it from me to approach the topic of small cell beekeeping with such orthodoxy that it would not be accepted in this forum. Small cell has certainly gotten its fair share of discussion lately.
At the same time, there have been a number of passing mentions of treatment-free beekeeping on conventional foundation. I know it can be done, one of my pastors at church has seven hives treatment-free on regular foundation last I heard. On the other hand, most if not all the cases I've heard of where conventional hives have gone cold turkey, there has been huge death.

So I don't want to reject this is a topic for discussion seeing all the small cell conversations. Who does this? Assuming BeeWeaver does it, there's our example for a commercial operation. And boy are they real proud of their stuff.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

In my experience the people who are doing treatment free on large cell are still having a lot of Varroa issues. Some seem to be splitting enough to overcome those losses, but they still seem obsessed by Varroa. I haven't worried about Varroa for many years now. I'm not saying they aren't succeeding. And their stock must be really well adapted to survive the levels they seem to have.


----------



## RiodeLobo (Oct 11, 2010)

Michael Bush said:


> In my experience the people who are doing treatment free on large cell are still having a lot of Varroa issues.


What is your take on foundationless as far as Varroa?


----------



## Grant (Jun 12, 2004)

I have a number of "treatment-free" hives. I use that term loosely as, in my personal opinion, many intentional, managerial manipulations are, in fact, treatments. But that's an argument for another day and I'm in the minority with this opinion so I don't want to make an issue of it. Suffice it to say, I don't treat specifically for Varroa in these treatment-free hives and random sticky board counts do not seem to warrant the need.

I don't use small cell foundation. In these hives, I use a fair amount of foundationless frames ("natural"-sized cells) and keep a lot of feral stock raising queens out of the survivors. My losses run between 15% to 25% in both treatment-free and treated hives (mostly with formic acid and nothing else).

One may make the case that my "natural" sized cells are "small." I've never measured and don't really feel the need.

I don't doubt the benefits of small cell, but I'm not sure if it's necessarily a key component to successful treatment-free beekeeping.

Grant
Jackson, MO


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>What is your take on foundationless as far as Varroa? 

I see the same results for, I believe, the same reasons. The cell size is smaller.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Beeweavers bees do perform well at varroa resistance, and in fact I've read where they have been introduced to hives with varroa issues, then after a time the hive clears up.

It's not stated on their web site far as I know but their queens include primorsky genetics. Hence you'll often hear people say they are "hot", and tend to swarm.

I have no idea if they use small cell, but I doubt it. Wouldn't that be a conundrum! The only successful commercial treatment free operation, does NOT use small cell.


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

This is not a conundrum at all, just a sign that the bees have natural tolerance mechanisms. As for weavers being a successful commercial treatment free operation, I have to point out that they are not migratory. My defining point of high tolerance is for a colony to be able to survive repeated moves say 3 to 5 times in a year. Exposure to other migratory operations that treat seems to be a deciding factor in survival for mite tolerant lines.

DarJones


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Not only are they non migratory, but they are also bee producers, not honey producers.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Yes, but the point is, it's a successful treatment free business model. Just not migratory, not honey, but still a treatment free business turning a liveable profit, from the actual business.


----------



## Steven Ogborn (Jun 3, 2011)

BeeWeavers just recently stopped being migratory. Laura has explained that it was too hard on thier young family.
Danny had/has an operation up in Montana. Beartooth Apiaries. I assume they were up there to collect honey.
Their bees already had the buckfast ,tracial mite resistance. Then added what Binford has called the "Harbos"(early
SMR/VSH) genetics. Reduced, then stopped treating, kept and bred from the survivors. viola! Beeweaver Breed
treatment free bees.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

This would be news, worthy of an article in one or both of the journals, if in fact they have been treatment free for years being migratory and producing honey. Surely there's more to the story? With commercial beekeepers having to replace queens on average twice a year, why wouldn't everyone be buying their treatment free bees?


----------



## Steven Ogborn (Jun 3, 2011)

They sell out every year, early. I found this out last winter when I was looking to get mine. They can't make them
fast enough. Then you have the Texas Africanized fear factor.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

There IS a lot more to that story. 

What's this about commercial beekeepers having to replace their queens an average of 3 times per year? The ones I know do it maybe once every two years, so to get the average up to 3 times a year, some of them must be requeening maybe, 7, 8 times a year. Wonder where they find the time?


----------



## Mr. C (Oct 27, 2011)

I tried out 4 packages from Beeweaver this last year. They are definately "hot", but I wouldn't say unmanageable by any means. It was a pretty big wakeup from the docile Italiens I was used to previous years where I often did simple manipulations in shorts and T-shirt. Once they got a little size to them I wouldn't crack the lid on a sunny day without my suit on. I did that a few times (I'm a slow learner) till I got stung in the eyebrow. They are also expensive, I paid the same for my packages as I did for singles for this coming season. (The other bummer would be that my wife used to come out to help me, but not nearly as often now, she really doesn't like bees bouncing off her veil for some reason)

It was also my first try with packages (used nucs before, or free bees that moved in on their own) and the worst spring I've kept bees in (not saying a whole lot since I don't remember much from when I was a kid helping my dad), nothing but cold and rain so the girls had a very rough start. Then we went straight to hot. All that being said I have seen no sign of mite problems, but have had any number of other problems, none I blame on the breed though. 

I had one abscond in the heat just as they were getting going (water less than 50yds away and they were still being fed at that point) and a new one for me I had one hive break camp and invade their next door neighbor. Balled the other queen killed her and dead bees everywhere. Let me tell you that was an interesting call from my wife. Anyway that hive probably won't make it through the winter, it never built up enough and the other hive didn't take off in time to help out. My last hive filled a deep and two mediums though and should be sitting pretty for winter. There was a good goldenrod flow late at my house they went nuts on and packed in some pounds of dirty socks 

First time I noticed, but is it just me or is goldenrod wax a different color? I'm used to new wax being white, but during goldenrod it was bright vibrant yellow. I thought it might be reworked wax, but it was nothing like the colors of wax in the rest of the hive. It was almost luminous.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Oldtimer said:


> What's this about commercial beekeepers having to replace their queens an average of 3 times per year?


Sorry, twice a year.

*New Standard*
The Gold Standard for re-queening used to be once a year. Now, it’s twice a year.
http://www.beesource.com/point-of-v...ewsletter/beekeeper-newsletter-august-1-2011/

"And, like many of you, Dave Mendes has found it necessary to re-queen twice a year."
http://www.beesource.com/point-of-v...ewsletter/beekeeper-newsletter-march-15-2011/


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Oh I see. So commercial beekeepers do NOT requeen an average of 3 times per year.

And as to twice a year, well, one guys name got mentioned who actually did that last season. Just for peoples info, my own hives get requeened every second, or occasionally third year. If they supersede, that's fine, no requeening needed till the supersedure gets past her best.

I've been wondering why I have so many arguments in the treatment free forum, when in fact, I have treatment free hives, 2 and expanding small cell hives which seems to be the rage in this forum, and am trying to advance my treatment free beekeeping. 

I think it's because I've seen both sides of the fence, and some of the stuff I hear here, for example, about commercial beekeepers, is well, exaggerated, at best. An honest approach is better. Not talking about you Barry because it's normally others, but I feel we could do better just by facing reality. There's a number of problems with small cell beekeeping or treatment free beekeeping in general, that need solving. To solve a problem it has to be first acknowledged. But around here there's no problems, nobody's hive EVER dies of mites.

This is not the kind of approach I or commercial beekeepers use, if they don't confront and deal with problems they won't be commercial much longer.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Oldtimer said:


> And as to twice a year, well, one guys name got mentioned who actually does that.


If Joe Traynor says "like many of you", I'll take his word to mean "many" as he is directly involved with a lot of commercial beekeepers here in this country.


----------



## Grant (Jun 12, 2004)

Steven Ogborn said:


> They can't make them
> fast enough. Then you have the Texas Africanized fear factor.


Now that's an interesting comment. As we debate the small cell factor in treatment-free beekeeping, is there now an africanized component to the mix that is being over looked? 

Grant
Jackson, MO


----------



## Grant (Jun 12, 2004)

Michael Bush said:


> >What is your take on foundationless as far as Varroa?
> 
> I see the same results for, I believe, the same reasons. The cell size is smaller.


I would tend to agree, MIchael, but as I "eye-ball" these foundationless frames of "natural"-sized cells, there is a great inconsistency with the cell size, especially with the drone cells mixed into the outer areas of the brood frames. One of these days I'm going to have to get off my lazy butt and measure. I like the comment that there is likely a natural component to this varroa resistance that is not strictly small cell...which is not to argue against small cell. Like so much of this human intervention, even regressing our bees back to smaller physiques, there's more here than we realize...and more that they can teach us.

Grant
Jackson, MO


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Barry I don't know what he means by "many". Let's say it's half. Of the particular group he is talking to. What about the others? Try a poll of commercial beeks here on beesource. Your origional 3 times a year average will be well out. But I hear this type of thing in the treatment free forum so much, that some people probably think it's true. Then I say something and get shouted down by a bunch of people who "know" I'm wrong.

Grant, weavers themselves have admitted to some african contamination but have taken steps and believe the risk is minimal. They make the offer that if someone gets a queen that is just too hot, they'll replace it. But most of the hotness comes from the primorsky genetics rather than african. However, the hive swarming into, and taking over, another hive, is an interesting one, that's an african behaviour.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

It really doesn't matter, even if it's once a year. The point is, if they have a bee that allows commercial beekeepers not to treat, why aren't all commercial beekeepers using their bees?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Prices must enter into it.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Barry said:


> It really doesn't matter, even if it's once a year. The point is, if they have a bee that allows commercial beekeepers not to treat, why aren't all commercial beekeepers using their bees?


My guess - same reason everybody is not using small cell.

The product does not always work quite as expected.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Sol, realistically, price is not an issue. These queens are mostly being sold to people who buy them in the belief they will not have to treat. The queens SAVE them money.


----------



## Mr. C (Oct 27, 2011)

Why are commercial beekeepers not doing it? I can only speculate because I am certainly not a commercial beekeeper, but there would be a very large initial investment in queens even if it reduces or eliminates treatments that does not mean it is economically viable because commercial beekeepers have different goals. For almonds they are far more interested in how big a colony they can have in time for pollination. Other commercial beeks are more interested in honey production etc. If you can average an extra 50lbs of honey you can more than pay for added treatments. I know there has been a lot of work since, but often times resistant bees are lower in qualities that some people are seeking. If you have a choice between going with what you know or gambling on a massive switch over, most people will keep doing what they are doing as long as they are getting by. My guess is that (again guessing) a lot of the commercial guys are slowly adding in resistance to reduce treatments.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Mr. C said:


> My guess is that (again guessing) a lot of the commercial guys are slowly adding in resistance to reduce treatments.


How do you suppose this is happening?


----------



## D Semple (Jun 18, 2010)

Fusion_power said:


> My defining point of high tolerance is for a colony to be able to survive repeated moves say 3 to 5 times in a year.
> 
> DarJones


A better bee is right around the corner, bee patient the genetic engineers are working on it.


----------



## Mr. C (Oct 27, 2011)

Hmm my last reply didn't post. I know there are some people, not sure how many, that are working on integrated pest management ala Randy Oliver, and testing, treating if needed and requeening for better genetics. Some of the major queen producers are also incorporating resistant lines in their queens despite the embargo on shipping bees in. I read this past year sometime that some of the Hawaiian producers imported eggs and/or spermatoplasm to incorporate some of the hygienic lines into their queens. Simply by requeening (once, twice, or however many times) will start to introduce some depending on where queens are purchased from so whether there are many making a conscious effort or not, there are certainly queen producers doing so, all you have to do is read an ad.


----------



## Riskybizz (Mar 12, 2010)

Oldtimer: "But most of the hotness comes from the primorsky genetics rather than african"..

Oldtimer that is a very interesting (and definitive) statement. It seems as if you must have some inside information regarding the BeeWeaver current genetic line of queens. I have used their bees for several years now. I'd like to know more about them, would you kindly share.


----------



## JD's Bees (Nov 25, 2011)

Alberta alone imports around 60000 queens a year. If we wanted treatment free queens would there be enough available? We already pay about $23 a queen but if we could stop treating I'm sure people would be willing to pay more.
Many commercial outfits here are producing their own queens and hygienic behavior and mite tolerence are as important as honey production. A sick or dead hive does not make a profit.


----------



## Mr. C (Oct 27, 2011)

True a sick or dead hive =no profit, but if you spend say 20 dollars on treatment (in bulk I know you can do miteaway for under 5bucks a treatment, say 2 treatments plus labor?), but the bees you are treating are bred strictly for honey production. How many pounds of honey do you need to produce to pay for the treatment? (That is over and above what the current hygenic bees produce on average) If you can average 20lbs more a colony with treated bees your coming out ahead, at least in the short term at bulk honey prices. Commercial beekeepers aren't any more braindead than the rest of us. If it was a huge financial incentive to switch over I'm sure more would have already.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

JD's Bees said:


> Alberta alone imports around 60000 queens a year. If we wanted treatment free queens would there be enough available? We already pay about $23 a queen....


That's almost $1.4 million. Is that $Canadian?

Not that this is a topic about commercial beeks, but what proportion of commercial beeks raise their own queens up there? How many queen producers are there up there?


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

We need StevenG to comment on the Weaver queens. I believe he has experience with them.

Barry wrote:

The point is, if they have a bee that allows commercial beekeepers not to treat, why aren't all commercial beekeepers using their bees?

My belief is that a mean bee is not worth the trouble. When you spend day after day in the bees, a gentle productive bee beats a mean less productive bee. 

We use some 4.9 , 5.1 and regular foundation and have found no conclusive evidence that cell size matters. The "Bee tree" that makes their own comb is not significantly different than the rest.

Crazy Roland


----------



## JD's Bees (Nov 25, 2011)

The commercial beekeepers that I know of that are raising some or all of their own queens have honey production as only one selection criteria. They all want a bee that is hygienic also.
It isn't only cost of treatment, we also need to worry about eventual resistance issues to miticides and possible honey contamination. Honey samples are checked for ppb of contaminants and nobody can afford to have a years production rejected.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Riskybizz said:


> Oldtimer: "But most of the hotness comes from the primorsky genetics rather than african"..
> 
> Oldtimer that is a very interesting (and definitive) statement. It seems as if you must have some inside information regarding the BeeWeaver current genetic line of queens. I have used their bees for several years now. I'd like to know more about them, would you kindly share.


Yes, inside information obviously. I was told it by someone who sold queens to them.
I don't think their genetics are that big of a secret, what's the point, the bees sell themselves. Ask around people who use their queens, most comments are pretty favorable. Build up into strong hives, store a good crop long as you can stop them swarming, No mite issues. So other than the sometimes "hotness", most people pretty happy, long as they don't mind wearing a suit.

As to why commercail beekeepers would buy a supposed varroa resistant queen, or not, some time ago I had a conversation on the commercial forum about this very question. Some of them had tried russians, but saw it as a bad experience because of the other issues that came with russians, would not do it again. Nobody stuck their hand up to say they had tried Weavers.


----------



## JD's Bees (Nov 25, 2011)

Sol, the five or so commercial guys that I know of average 2-3 thousand colonies each and I think make up about that many nucs each year for wintering. I don't know of any queen producers but many outfits will provide some cells if they have any extra. 
Oh and yes that is Canadian $.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Roland said:


> My belief is that a mean bee is not worth the trouble. When you spend day after day in the bees, a gentle productive bee beats a mean less productive bee.


Yes with you on that Roland. My number one criterion for bees is not honey, as everybody would have thought, it's gentleness.
When I worked in an area with a lot of AMM and AMM hybrids, end of the day you could be pretty sore, pretty worn out. Not fun, I found myself wondering if it was all worth it. 
First thing is if you are doing a job, it has to be pleasant.


----------



## Mr. C (Oct 27, 2011)

I have to agree with you on the gentleness factor, it is definately more fun to have gentle bees. I occassionally get annoyed that I have to suit up if I want to make close observations of entrance traffic etc to see what the girls are bringing in and you can forget about rototilling or weedwacking in front of the hives, (I keep them inside my deerfence in the garden, now if only it was bunny proof too). I miss my italians, but I'll be getting some more next year.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

What? You even have to suit up to watch entrance traffic?

That's way beyond what I would consider tolerable. Maybe there's your reason why Barry.


----------



## Riskybizz (Mar 12, 2010)

>Yes, inside information obviously. I was told it by someone who sold queens to them.
I was under the impression they raised all there own queens. Lets hope the "someone" is reliable. 
>I don't think their genetics are that big of a secret, what's the point, the bees sell themselves. 
No I don't think their genetics are a secret either as their breeding information and lineage is posted on their website. There is no mention of primorsky genetics anywhere though. They claim they are Brother Adam Buckfast for the most part. 
>Ask around people who use their queens, most comments are pretty favorable. Build up into strong hives, store a good crop long as you can stop them swarming, 
I don't have to ask around, I have used their queens for several years and have never worn a suit. Short sleeve shirt and a veil is all I have ever worn. Excessive swarming has never been an issue with their queens or the offspring queens. 
>No mite issues. So other than the sometimes "hotness", most people pretty happy, long as they don't mind wearing a suit.
I have seen mites with their bees. Mine have never been overly hot.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Riskybizz said:


> I was under the impression they raised all there own queens. Lets hope the "someone" is reliable.


 Oh yes, there was no suggestion they are selling other peoples queens, the queens he sold them were presumably to add to their breeding pool.

You said yours have never been hot? That's why I said "sometimes hot". Obviously, others have had the ones that are hot! . Some time ago, in my quest for a varroa resistant bee, I researched every bit of info I could on beeweaver, the methods stated on their web site, and further information from other commercial beeks including a commercial queen breeder, who have had dealings with them.
I'll admit this was an academic excersize, as I am overseas and my country will not allow bees to be imported. But I wanted to see what I could learn that might be useful to me.


----------



## Riskybizz (Mar 12, 2010)

Thanx Oldtimer for the info. I'll talk with Laura Weaver next time I call because I always like to know what genetics i'm introducing. I have not used their Taylor Made queens. I have always found them to be good bees and good people. Maybe some people just like wearing sweatty bee suits?


----------



## Steven Ogborn (Jun 3, 2011)

That's one thing I like about the Weavers. They have come through some huge challenges in the past 22 years, and they
don't have anything to hide. If you ask they'll tell you about it.


----------



## northbee (Apr 16, 2009)

I have not met this beekeeper but he claims he does not treat for mites or with Fumagilin. I believe he takes his bees to almonds, overwinters in TX and produces honey in SD. I would like to try his bees but TX is a longs ways to pick up some nucs. Maybe I can arrange a pickup in SD ( a little closer). Take a look at this website 

http://southbeekota.com/RussianBees.html

I don't know if he is on conventional foundation or SC. 

I have been experimenting with SC and Foundationless and monitoring for mites twice a year. Not finding much of s difference. Survival percentages have been pretty similar too. 

I tried two Beeweaver queens this summer and found them to be very sensitive to smoke. In fact I found that they were easier to work without smoke than with. When I discovered this they were not any more "hot" than my other hives. I found them to be a little runnier on the combs though. I need to work them a few more seasons to have a good opinion on them though. 

Regards, Yuuki


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I checked out this guy a while back. He doesn't ship anything and I don't feel like driving nearly to Houston to pick them up.

I could get a direct flight to Houston and back from here for $500.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

You had to suit up to get withing 100 yards of mine...


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Your Southbeedakotas?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Your Southbeedakotas? 

No. Buckfasts from Texas, the last time I had any in 2001...


----------



## Mr. C (Oct 27, 2011)

northbee said:


> I tried two Beeweaver queens this summer and found them to be very sensitive to smoke. In fact I found that they were easier to work without smoke than with. When I discovered this they were not any more "hot" than my other hives. I found them to be a little runnier on the combs though. I need to work them a few more seasons to have a good opinion on them though.
> 
> Regards, Yuuki


I find the smoke comment interesting, I didn't have as much luck with smoke as I did with my other bees, but I still think it at least helped. I know they never got "out of control", but smoke or no there were always a few bouncing off my veil whatever I did. The hives are a couple feet off the ground so it shouldn't have been from critters bothering them at night either.

What kind of smoke were you making? I use old bailer twine (undyed and untreated). Makes a good cool smoke and I have it all over the farm. Can be a pain to get lit though (Except when I sneak my wife's creme brule torch to light it).

And yes I had to suit up to watch entrance traffic, but when I say entrance traffic I mean a foot or two away just off to the side. I didn't have as much trouble as Michael, they ignored me if I was 10 feet back from the hive. Of course that's still pretty bad compared to how I used to manage my last ones.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Smoke has a different effect on African honey bees, than what it does on European honey bees. 

What we've seen described in the thread so far, are 3 seperate african bee behaviours. There's sending a swarm into an already occupied hive, killing the other queen and usurping the hive, there's the effect of smoke and the way the bees run around on the comb, and there's comments like "You had to suit up to get within 100 yards of mine".

I'm beginning to wonder if I was a little bit too trusing when I read on their web site that they had the african problem under control. 

Another thing, africans have a natural resistance to mites.


----------



## Baldursson (Nov 22, 2011)

Well I admit to being just a bit worried now. I have ordered a couple of packages of bees from Bee Weaver to be delivered next April. I am also a first time beek.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Well one guy said his Weavers were fine. Just try your luck. You can always requeen at some future time.

Must admit, it's a rare thing but I'm with Barry on this . - Wondering why it is, that bees that are treatment free and descibed as good honey producers, etc. have not been widely adopted by commercial beekeepers.


----------



## Riskybizz (Mar 12, 2010)

>Another thing, africans have a natural resistance to mites. 

Is this not a direct correlation to their excessive swarming tendencies, often times leaving the parent colonies' brood cycle interrupted. I'm not so sure that genetically, Africans are any less susceptible to varroa. As I recall this has been well documented.


----------



## Mr. C (Oct 27, 2011)

Good is a relative term I guess, have you ever seen someone advertise queens that are bad honey producers? I really don't have enough experience with enough different breeds to say how they stack up against others. I'd like to do a comparison on honey & mite counts between them and some others, but my weavers will be my only second year colonies so it's really not going to work out, plus I don't have enough hives (yet) to get a good sample size anyway.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Riskybizz said:


> >Another thing, africans have a natural resistance to mites.
> 
> Is this not a direct correlation to their excessive swarming tendencies, often times leaving the parent colonies' brood cycle interrupted. I'm not so sure that genetically, Africans are any less susceptible to varroa. As I recall this has been well documented.


The swarming thing has been well documented. However, there's more. If an african hive is deliberatly contaminated with mites, and a sticky board put in, a lot of the mites found on it will be damaged, or as the researchers sometimes call it, "chewed". That means, that the african bees are actually attacking the mites, and biting them.
Interesting Riskybizz, that you say the bees you've had from them have been gentle, ie, presumably not africanised, but that you've had mites on them.


----------



## Riskybizz (Mar 12, 2010)

I do see mites in a few yards, in some colonies, not all. The BeeWeaver queens were from packages 3 years ago. I have as mentioned made splits from several of them as they are good producers. The original hives were a little runny on the comb. I can distinguish them from some others (like Minn. Hygienic). In all honesty the BeeWeavers have always been ok to work. Are they gentle, no not really. Do I take stings working these hives? Well yes depending on the manipulation. If I'm doing brood checks and tearing the hives down, and the weather happens to be less than ideal, maybe a little too cold, windy, or if the nectar flow is not a good one, they can become a little nasty. I have however found that to also be the case with most of my colonies thought, and not a unique characteristic of the Beeweavers. Laura is sending me a few more queens this spring to make some splits. I'll keep you posted. I have never used any treatments of any kind on any of my colonies.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Well you've had a good experience, same as many.


----------



## Riskybizz (Mar 12, 2010)

I might relay an interesting incident that did happen 2 years ago to one colony of BeeWeavers. A previous 'normal" hive suddenly became quite aggressive. I was making up some splits in the yard and was run out. Now this had not previously happened before and I was naturally concerned. Why would a normal, non-aggressive colony suddenly turn very mean. Well we all know the answer to that is that it could be a result of many different factors. However, one theory is that when this queen mated at Beeweaver's she mated with many drones some of which were Africanized drones. Weavers readily admit this happens. One theory recognizes the fact that when different sperm is deposit within the queen, it is then stored in "layers" and that when these layers are subsequently reached, they produce more aggressive offspring. I spoke with Danny Weaver regarding this possibility and he agreed that it was possible. Sorry if i'm off topic here.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

The layering thing is correct, in my own experience. I have two strains, one black, one yellow. I had a marked black queen I was using as a breeder. For perhaps 18 months all she produced was black bees and black queens. Then, from out of nowhere, the hive started getting yellow hybrids in it. And some of the queens from her are now golden with a black tip.

She's an awesome queen so I still breed from it, just, the golden queens from her are sold as hybrids.


----------



## Rolande (Aug 23, 2010)

Solomon Parker said:


> there have been a number of passing mentions of treatment-free beekeeping on conventional foundation. I know it can be done, one of my pastors at church has seven hives treatment-free on regular foundation last I heard. On the other hand, most if not all the cases I've heard of where conventional hives have gone cold turkey, there has been huge death.
> 
> Who does this? Assuming BeeWeaver does it, there's our example for a commercial operation. And boy are they real proud of their stuff.


Not sure but I believe that John Kefuss is still on standard foundation and running an operation of comparable size to b weaver. Anyone here know for sure?


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

http://www.survivorstockqueens.org/John Kefuss Keeping Bees That Keep Themselves.pdf

Since you mention him.

DarJones


----------



## Rolande (Aug 23, 2010)

Thanks, a great article -I actually have it in an old magazine (abj?) somewhere but had pretty much forgotten the specifics.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

I read the article very interesting. But it does go back in time a bit, what has become of his operation now?

Can you get his queens in the US?


----------



## Rolande (Aug 23, 2010)

there's another link 

http://www.centerforhoneybeeresearc...-Queen-Rearing-Expert-in-Toulouse-France.aspx

which is a quite recent so it would seem that his business is still thriving.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

It's really too bad the 'Bond Method' has to be named after a fictional person. I have a method, if someone ever tries it, maybe I'll get a catchy title too. 

As all you know, I have been using the Bond Method since I started beekeeping. But I can certainly see the wisdom of the Soft Bond Method. ("Oh James!")

It would certainly be great to discuss in the switching over thread.


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

"Bond method" is just a catchy name. What it gets down to is let the susceptible bees die and what is left will be resistant. This is exactly what I have done with my bees, it is what Purvis did, it is what Kefuss did. The results are outstanding. I have not treated in 6 years and my bees are thriving. My method was a bit more abrupt than what he recommends. I didn't pick breeders or measure varroa loads. I just let the bees die. Once the suscpetible bees were gone, the resistant colonies have steadily improved. The best I can tell, even a very low level of varroa removal results in declining varroa populations. Honey production was poor in the 3rd and 4th year after I went treatment free, but it is now back to reasonably high levels. Please note that I also converted to small cell. While I can't quantify the effect of small cell, I have reason to suspect the bees now mature a day or so earlier.

DarJones


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Thanks for the link Rolande. 

Regarding naming something the Bond method, it's one of the things that stood out, when I first joined Beesource. Every method or manipulation seems to have a name. IE, checkerboarding, mountaincamp, etc. etc. All seemed rather mysterious at first, eventually i realised that a lot of these methods I've already been using, some even before they were officially "invented". But in my country, for some reason, we do them or similar things that achieve the same end, but don't tend to give the fancy name.

So. Go Bond, Soft Bond, Hard Bond, etc . Next time someone talks about that, I'll know what they mean!


----------



## BMartin (Jan 17, 2011)

This is exactly what I have done with my bees, it is what Purvis did, it is what Kefuss did.

I think Dee went through the same as well as Kirk Webster. They stopped treating and what didn't die they went from there. There does seem to be a genetic component as many queen producers now list mite resistant or VSH strains. The pioneers in the greater sense are Kefuus, Lusby, Webster and Chris Baldwin mentioned earlier as well as many smaller keepers that did the Bond Test and survived. Chris gave a talk at the Treatment Free Conference in Leominster this past summer. He's on LC and had brought in some Russian genetics alone the way. He runs 1800 hives and focuses mainly on honey production. I think he's story goes that he didn't get to treating a yard or two and half of them survived, so he breed from the survivors. Another interesting thing about many of these success stories is that they do there own queen rearing and at least for the commercial beeks they have a large mating, drone gene pool to influence the outcome. Then there's Dennis Murrell's work where the SC bee would handle any genetics and cope with the varroa pressure.
Byron


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>I think Dee went through the same as well as Kirk Webster. They stopped treating and what didn't die they went from there.

When Dee lost hers it was a decade before Varroa and it was mostly to AFB and such. Dennis has put commercial queens on small cell as have I and Barry with no period of losses for the new genetics. It's a nice theory and certainly breeding survivors is a good plan. But it doesn't explain small cell.

http://www.bushfarms.com/beessctheories.htm


----------

